D Cale Makar - UMass (Amherst), NCAA (2017, 4th, COL)

[XX]

Who is a better skater, Jalen Chatfield or Makar?

 

[sabresEH]

You kind of ignored most of what I wrote earlier... but I'll try one more time.

The AHL-NHL analogy is bad one. Junior A teams are not farm teams. Their players weren't all attending CHL camps and were then cut and sent down (I'll admit a few were). But in the case of the Penticton Vees, I don't know of one player on that team who had the intention of trying to make a CHL team but failed. They all came to prepare for NCAA.

But OK, the Vees are a little special. The other top BCHL teams have similar NCAA commits (never attended any CHL team camp) but also some who did try to make the CHL at ages 16 or 17 and didn't make it. And here's the thing: those players are now 19 or 20. They've gained two or three years experience. If they were currently playing in the CHL, they would undoubtedly be playing better than your run-of-the-mill CHL 17 year old, but CHL teams will keep 16 or 17 year olds up instead for development purposes. CHL teams will keep the 16/17 year old with potential over a currently superior 19 or 20 year old trying to go from Junior A any day. And some of these 16 and 17 year olds never really develop well -- resulting in bad CHL teams.

Bottom rung CHL teams are typically full of 17 year old draft eligible players who have no hope of getting drafted and 19 year olds who never fulfilled their potential. Good Junior A teams will be stocked up on NCAA commits plus a LOT of 19 and 20 year olds who gave up on the CHL at age 17 but have continued developing -- many of whom will enter NCAA or ECHL hockey next season. That age factor makes all the difference in the world when measuring level of competition (as opposed to using the number of future NHL prospects as the main criterion).

I tried to type out a response like this yesterday...couldn't figure out how to word it. Thank you!

My internet says Kootenay, Barrie and Moncton are the bottom 3 teams. Your proposal is invalid.

But on that note, this thread is about Cale Makar.

Thank you, this thread has gotten wayyyyy off topic. Anyone have any clarification as to the whether he can go straight to AHL or play 1 year and go to AHL?

Yound kids at age 17-18 should focus on playing different sports instead of hitting the GYM...

Devellop the ability, the brain etc...before the muscle...

Go to the GYM when you are 21-24...not before it's useless

I get what you're saying, but the timeline is off. Kids should be playing other sports instead of hockey year round. However they should start to focus on one sport around 15.

Soccer to devellop his vision, his footwork, different kind of cardio, his lower body strenght etc...
Tennis i won't suggest...Ping-Pong might be better, devellop reflex, hand-eye coordinnation etc...
Boxing would be a great training too


I have a different mind and opinion thant most on that subject... I find GYM session to be useless until 21-24

Tennis is probably one of the best sports for someone to play. It's one of the 3 best total body workouts(that are PG rated ). Hockey players should have very strong lower bodies, tennis will definitely promote that.

Also I don't think you can really put an age range on something like when to start strength training. I have read that strength training before 16 can stunt growth but I would say once the kid is on the downswing of puberty is when they can/should start strength training.

I'm not against gym, i'm against heavy lifting. No need for that at a young age.

Do jump rope, open weight training..ton of plyo.

I'm talking before age of 21.

Yes the guy should focus on hockey...but in the summer during his off-season for me he'll be better working out in a different sports than hockey. Take a 6-8 weeks brake and do something else.

I've seen 2-3 QHMJL prospects hit my Boxing Gym. I asked them about that and they ahd the same opinion as me.

One of them might be a 1st rounder this year..other 1 is prolly a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

It's a long debate and I understand both side of opinions.
My main point is that having a nice Campus Gym etc...should not be a priority to devellop. Good coaching is.

You're definitely not wrong. Playing year round isn't always beneficial and doing body weight exercises and plyometrics until a certain age is more beneficial than hitting the gym to pump up before your body is ready to do so.

Boxing/MMA is a great cardio exercise as well as helping improve hand eye and footwork.
Tennis as I mentioned before is a great full body workout and helps hand eye and footwork just like boxing.
Swimming is the other exercise that is a great full body workout and really anything that emphasizes core strength and lower body is something hockey players should do in the off season.
EDIT: All of which do not require a world class gym to do. Development is on the player and those surrounding him more than it is about the facilities.

 

[Daximus]

Who is a better skater, Jalen Chatfield or Makar?

I'd say Sean Day is a better skater than Chatfield. When he wants to be that is. But I'd give the nod to Makar.

 

[Hiishawk]

Since people are clicking on this thread to discuss Maker and not the relative virtues of CHL vs. Junior A, I'll end with this response.

their not, but its one step down.

One step down from NHL= AHL
for CHL one step down is Junior A.
.

Again, AHL teams are NHL farm teams for NHL teams so, no, it's not a valid analogy. A better analogy would be NHL vs. KHL/SEL/Liiga

Yes, almost all the top Russian, Swedish, and Finnish players are in the NHL but those leagues have a few older players, past their NHL 'entry' prime, who would be good enough to play in the NHL, a few hot prospects on the way up, and a handful of players who, for their own reasons, have not yet elected to come over to the NHL even though teams seek them. And on occasion those best KHL/SEL/Liiga teams could beat the weakest NHL teams. Perfect analogy.

The rest of your post was based on a misinterpretation (perhaps I was ambiguous) about my term 'run-of-the-mill 17 year olds' in the CHL. The players you cited (Ratcliffe, Merkley etc.) are clearly not run-of-the-mill, as are Junior A players Makar and Johnny Tychonick of Penticton - 2018 1st round likely. They are exceptional.

'Run-of-the-mill 17 year olds' refers those majority of 17 CHL year olds (about 75-80%) who don't get drafted or are very late picks at best, who end up as CIAU or ECHL players, which is no different from the most players on the top junior A teams (so, similar future projections but with junior A players currently being older). As I said, the weaker CHL teams' rosters have a large number of such players (Guelph is an anomaly, they are clearly on the way up for next season).

Moreover, if one or two exceptional 17 year olds are, on some weaker CHL teams, outplaying their senior teammates this further serves to prove the fact that those 19 or 20 year olds are unlikely to become AHL/NHL level pros. And they too were once 'run-of-the-mill' 17 year olds. The majority of CHL players fall into this category. That's no slight, that's just reality.

No one is saying that Junior A is equal to, or produces as many exceptional prospects as, the CHL -- that would be ludicrous. The claim is rather is that the top Junior A TEAMS could go toe-to-toe with the bottom CHL TEAMS. The gap is not as clearly tiered as many seem to think.

But this thread is about Cale Makar and I've made my point. So...

...that Makar, what a player eh?

 

[lawrence]

Since people are clicking on this thread to discuss Maker and not the relative virtues of CHL vs. Junior A, I'll end with this response.


Again, AHL teams are NHL farm teams for NHL teams so, no, it's not a valid analogy. A better analogy would be NHL vs. KHL/SEL/Liiga

Yes, almost all the top Russian, Swedish, and Finnish players are in the NHL but those leagues have a few older players, past their NHL 'entry' prime, who would be good enough to play in the NHL, a few hot prospects on the way up, and a handful of players who, for their own reasons, have not yet elected to come over to the NHL even though teams seek them. And on occasion those best KHL/SEL/Liiga teams could beat the weakest NHL teams. Perfect analogy.

The rest of your post was based on a misinterpretation (perhaps I was ambiguous) about my term 'run-of-the-mill 17 year olds' in the CHL. The players you cited (Ratcliffe, Merkley etc.) are clearly not run-of-the-mill, as are Junior A players Makar and Johnny Tychonick of Penticton - 2018 1st round likely. They are exceptional.

'Run-of-the-mill 17 year olds' refers those majority of 17 CHL year olds (about 75-80%) who don't get drafted or are very late picks at best, who end up as CIAU or ECHL players, which is no different from the most players on the top junior A teams (so, similar future projections but with junior A players currently being older). As I said, the weaker CHL teams' rosters have a large number of such players (Guelph is an anomaly, they are clearly on the way up for next season).

Moreover, if one or two exceptional 17 year olds are, on some weaker CHL teams, outplaying their senior teammates this further serves to prove the fact that those 19 or 20 year olds are unlikely to become AHL/NHL level pros. And they too were once 'run-of-the-mill' 17 year olds. The majority of CHL players fall into this category. That's no slight, that's just reality.

No one is saying that Junior A is equal to, or produces as many exceptional prospects as, the CHL -- that would be ludicrous. The claim is rather is that the top Junior A TEAMS could go toe-to-toe with the bottom CHL TEAMS. The gap is not as clearly tiered as many seem to think.

But this thread is about Cale Makar and I've made my point. So...

...that Makar, what a player eh?

hoping Vancouver can draft this kid.

 

[TML1967]

I always wonder with a guy who has confirmed to be going the NCAA route if it will change where he gets drafted. For such a high pick, it usually means at least 2 years before you see them playing in the NHL, and even longer for smaller guys who needs to physically get bigger/stronger.

Its not unheard of in college sports for a 'smaller' guy to take 2 years just working out and studying your system before they get significant playing time needed to develop on the field.

Any chance someone passes up on him out of the 1)time it may take to get to the NHL
2)possibility he stays to the end of college and becomes a Free Agent?

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

Oh yay another NCAA vs CHL pissing contest. Never seen this argument before

I will be thrilled if the Sabres get him at 8. Let him take his time to develop

Hahah ya so many threads turn into a NCAA/CHL pissing match and its irritating cause it ruins the thread. I used to like reading this thread but ofcourse its annoying now and i find i avoid clicking on the thread

People have tunnel vision as to what they feel is the better route and refuse to look at the pros and cons of each route and why its better for different players

 

[Paxon]

I always wonder with a guy who has confirmed to be going the NCAA route if it will change where he gets drafted. For such a high pick, it usually means at least 2 years before you see them playing in the NHL, and even longer for smaller guys who needs to physically get bigger/stronger.

Its not unheard of in college sports for a 'smaller' guy to take 2 years just working out and studying your system before they get significant playing time needed to develop on the field.

Any chance someone passes up on him out of the 1)time it may take to get to the NHL
2)possibility he stays to the end of college and becomes a Free Agent?

High-end NCAA players are more and more becoming one-and-done guys. That may not be the case with Makar specifically as I could see him taking two years to work on his game and body, but generally speaking we've seen it a lot the past few years, not to mention guys who play in the NCAA their draft seasons and then go to the NHL for their post-draft.

More importantly, I don't see how he'd be any closer to the NHL if he weren't going the NCAA route. If he played in the CHL next season, what difference would it make? He's 1-2 years out either way. We aren't talking about a 3rd rounder where he'd either be in the CHL for two years then maybe 1 or 2 in the AHL vs. 3-4 years in the NCAA, which is the same amount of time. Teams should be looking at how far the individual player's game and body are from being NHL-ready, not where he's going to be playing. Teams have the opportunity to convince a player to change his route as well. Girgensons, for example, was a NCAA commit coming out of the USHL. The Sabres wanted him to go pro instead, which he did, playing in the AHL his post-draft season. Might not have been the right decision, either.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

His college coach at UMass-Amherst has already said Makar is a 'one and done' - which is kind of weird for him. If he has a real good freshman season he probably does leave to try to make the NHL team or go to their AHL affiliate.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

It's too bad he's probably not actually eligible to play in the NCAA, but will anyways.

 

[Firecracker]

It's too bad he's probably not actually eligible to play in the NCAA, but will anyways.

Why wouldnt he be eligible?

 

[Paxon]

It's too bad he's probably not actually eligible to play in the NCAA, but will anyways.

Huh?

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Why wouldnt he be eligible?

It's pretty well known by those who follow the AJHL, that Brooks is one on a couple teams that pays players under the table. Whether Makar is one of them I'm not sure, but it is known quite a few are.

I'm sure if this came to light (which it won't) it would result in losing NCAA eligibility for those that are, as I believe are the rules.

 

[BondraTime]

It's pretty well known by those who follow the AJHL, that Brooks is one on a couple teams that pays players under the table. Whether Makar is one of them I'm not sure, but it is known quite a few are.

I'm sure if this came to light (which it won't) it would result in losing NCAA eligibility for those that are, as I believe are the rules.

Yeah, this has nothing to do with his NCAA eligibility at all. Junior A isn't considered pro hockey, like the CHL is. Every Junior A player in Canada gets a per diem.

You lose eligibility playing as much as an exhibition game in the CHL, without getting a cent in return.

 

[Daximus]

It's pretty well known by those who follow the AJHL, that Brooks is one on a couple teams that pays players under the table. Whether Makar is one of them I'm not sure, but it is known quite a few are.

I'm sure if this came to light (which it won't) it would result in losing NCAA eligibility for those that are, as I believe are the rules.

It's believed that a few teams in the BCHL are believed to do this as well. Not to mention the numerous teams that pay players and bribe them to play in the CHL. Teams like Portland and Windsor have been caught but Vancouver, Edmonton, Ottawa, Spokane, Seattle, Calgary, Mississauga, London, Halifax are some of the many to be accused. Some it's so blatantly obvious like the Knights.

 

[Breakers]

It's pretty well known by those who follow the AJHL, that Brooks is one on a couple teams that pays players under the table. Whether Makar is one of them I'm not sure, but it is known quite a few are.

I'm sure if this came to light (which it won't) it would result in losing NCAA eligibility for those that are, as I believe are the rules.

The NCAA doesn't concern itself with such trivial matters of a hockey player getting a few bucks.

Hockey isn't a "head count" sport in the NCAA. Only Basketball and Football are.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Yeah, this has nothing to do with his NCAA eligibility at all. Junior A isn't considered pro hockey, like the CHL is. Every Junior A player in Canada gets a per diem.

Firstly, billet and living expenses are paid directly to the billets to the best of my knowledge, travel is covered with team busses, so there really is no need for any "per diem". Based on some rumours, the money paid exceeds general living and travel expenses, which is where the issue stems.

You lose eligibility playing as much as an exhibition game in the CHL, without getting a cent in return.

There are really, many, many more potential hang ups than just that.

 

[Daximus]

Yeah, this has nothing to do with his NCAA eligibility at all. Junior A isn't considered pro hockey, like the CHL is. Every Junior A player in Canada gets a per diem.

You lose eligibility playing as much as an exhibition game in the CHL, without getting a cent in return.

He's talking about Junior A teams that bribe players to play for them with cash bonuses or other incentives that if the NCAA ever found out would likely make them ineligible to play there.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

The NCAA doesn't concern itself with such trivial matters of a hockey player getting a few bucks.

Hockey isn't a "head count" sport in the NCAA. Only Basketball and Football are.

May stem from more the CJHL turning a blind eye than the NCAA.

 

[Daximus]

The NCAA doesn't concern itself with such trivial matters of a hockey player getting a few bucks.

Hockey isn't a "head count" sport in the NCAA. Only Basketball and Football are.

Then why are they so ornery about the CHL where players get about $3000 per season in the WHL. It's a monthly stipend yet they seem to take the $3000 as them being professional athletes. It's like minimum wage. I'm sure they are aware of the bribery going on in Junior A but they turn a blind eye because it's a MASSIVE feeder system for them.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

It's believed that a few teams in the BCHL are believed to do this as well. Not to mention the numerous teams that pay players and bribe them to play in the CHL. Teams like Portland and Windsor have been caught but Vancouver, Edmonton, Ottawa, Spokane, Seattle, Calgary, Mississauga, London, Halifax are some of the many to be accused. Some it's so blatantly obvious like the Knights.

Yes, I'd be surprised if it weren't an issue in many CJHL leagues. AJHL is just the one I'm most familiar with (played there).

Though, I'm not as familiar with the CHL rules, I didn't think it was against the rules for them to pay guys.

 

[Breakers]

Then why are they so ornery about the CHL where players get about $3000 per season in the WHL. It's a monthly stipend yet they seem to take the $3000 as them being professional athletes.

I played in the NCAA under scholarship.

CHL players have to sign a contract. Their name is on a legal document.

I only paid a registration fee, which was refunded by the team to maintain my eligibility.

 

[BondraTime]

Firstly, billet and living expenses are paid directly to the billets to the best of my knowledge, travel is covered with team busses, so there really is no need for any "per diem". Based on some rumours, the money paid exceeds general living and travel expenses, which is where the issue stems.



There are really, many, many more potential hang ups than just that.

I have experiences in the MJAHL (MHL now) and SJHL, both leagues every player got a per diem, and it was not just a set stipend. There were different amounts based on who the player was. Not to mention all the free gear, and flights home, etc. This happens in every junior A league, it is never going to effect NCAA eligibility.

Billet families also got their weekly stipend. But to think that the players themselves don't get money is foolish.

 

[Daximus]

Yes, I'd be surprised if it weren't an issue in many CJHL leagues. AJHL is just the one I'm most familiar with (played there).

Though, I'm not as familiar with the CHL rules, I didn't think it was against the rules for them to pay guys.

I know a tonne of guys that played in the BCHL for Victoria, Trail, Chilliwack, Langley, Vernon and Salmon Arm among others and there were a lot of them that would talk about bribes being offered to a lot of kids. There is no draft in the BCHL so guys can just sign anywhere (highest bidder) although I think they tried a draft once. But I've always thought they should be doing a Bantam Draft of their own to limit the bribes that happen. Some teams would obviously bribe guys to play but at least it wouldn't be a bidding war.

 

[Daximus]

I played in the NCAA under scholarship.

CHL players have to sign a contract. Their name is on a legal document.

I only paid a registration fee, which was refunded by the team to maintain my eligibility.

You'd be surprised to know how many kids and their parents knowingly take bribes to play for BCHL teams. There is no draft so it often becomes a bidding war for some higher profile guys. I'd be reeeaaallly surprised if Jost and Fabbro weren't offered something under the table to play for the Vee's. Those same players sign those legal NCAA documents without a single thought. And I bet the NCAA knows it too.