D Matt Schaefer - Erie Otters, OHL (2025 Draft)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Canadians can't take NIL money.

Edit: and contrary to popular belief, there is no substantive NIL $ in college hockey.

They can earn passive income and they can set up licensing deals within Canada.....but of course it is very difficult to generate the amount of money that would equal an ELC so......

And you are correct NIL money is not a substantial amount in college hockey
 
Why would Schaefer go to the NCAA lol?

He hasn’t even dominated junior hockey yet. He’s great don’t get me wrong but he has had troubles staying healthy this season and last season struggled. Would be more beneficial to play again in OHL or NHL.

Also there was a but article about Zach Edey not getting lots of NIL money despite being the best college player 2 years in a row. No point in Schaefer going to college unless there’s a big change to that NIL
 
This would mean he cannot sign his ELC. No reason why he wouldn't. 0% chance 1OA doesn't sign his ELC right away
Owen Power literally did this very recently lol.

Why would Schaefer go to the NCAA lol?

He hasn’t even dominated junior hockey yet. He’s great don’t get me wrong but he has had troubles staying healthy this season and last season struggled. Would be more beneficial to play again in OHL or NHL.

Also there was a but article about Zach Edey not getting lots of NIL money despite being the best college player 2 years in a row. No point in Schaefer going to college unless there’s a big change to that NIL
NCAA hockey has more structured play, older competition, and can allow for more strength training due to the schedule.

I think it’s a great option for Schaefer.
 
From Chicago's POV as I understand it, they have a pretty deep D pool but they are seriously lacking help for Bedard up front. Sure, Schaefer has been the clear-cut #1, but Misa has been coming on strong and who knows by June. Also, D takes longer and Schaefer is young. It feels like CHI could consider any F alongside Schaefer and it wouldn't be that surprising.

Most people here are going to say "BPA" but just because Bob's list in Jan says Schaefer is BPA doesn't mean everyone thinks so (I know you know this, just saying). Even Mike Grier who has been quite honest with his public comments was asked about Schaefer and said something to the effect of "well, this year there's no obvious #1 right, no Celebrini or Bedard, but they're all exciting and we'll do our homework." He didn't have to say that and he hasn't been one to try to manipulate through comments, so who knows where teams have "BPA"?
Maybe so but like I have stated upthread they could have ended up with Demidov and Schaefer which I think is going to better than Levshunov and Misa IMO but they have already crossed that bridge so you might right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shello
Maybe so but like I have stated upthread they could have ended up with Demidov and Schaefer which I think is going to better than Levshunov and Misa IMO but they have already crossed that bridge so you might right.
Levshunov is RHD which Schaefer isn’t. So that’s not real a one for one when the question is if they are too crowded with LHD as is (note that doesn’t mean you don’t pick Schaefer if you think he’s the best player but I think you’re mixing up discussion points here by bringing in Levshunov fruitlessly)
 
Levshunov is RHD which Schaefer isn’t. So that’s not real a one for one when the question is if they are too crowded with LHD as is (note that doesn’t mean you don’t pick Schaefer if you think he’s the best player but I think you’re mixing up discussion points here by bringing in Levshunov fruitlessly)
Teams usually only have one #1 dman and that was the point I was responding to from the previous post.

Also team makeup probably does have some impact in some teams decisions.

But the bottom line is what each teams list is and how big the gap they have between players, that's what should be driving their decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forlan
Why would Schaefer go to the NCAA lol?

He hasn’t even dominated junior hockey yet. He’s great don’t get me wrong but he has had troubles staying healthy this season and last season struggled. Would be more beneficial to play again in OHL or NHL.
Because he's too good for junior hockey (and yes, he has dominated junior hockey) but needs another year before going to the NHL IMO.

His two big "injury" issues were mono and a freak incident running into a goal. Neither of these are long-term concerns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mattb124
Because he's too good for junior hockey (and yes, he has dominated junior hockey) but needs another year before going to the NHL IMO.

His two big "injury" issues were mono and a freak incident running into a goal. Neither of these are long-term concerns.
That's not a thing.

You can say that Schaefer would benefit from a new coach/system, or that he can physically handle the NCAA, which are both true and valid reasons why he might go to the NCAA. But no one is too good for major junior if they are junior aged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wetcoast
Because he's too good for junior hockey (and yes, he has dominated junior hockey) but needs another year before going to the NHL IMO.

His two big "injury" issues were mono and a freak incident running into a goal. Neither of these are long-term concerns.
How the heck has a D-man with 39 pts in 73 OHL games shown to be too good for the OHL?

He hasnt dominated anything yet at the OHL/CHL level.

He needs to play a season and the best D in the league and top 3/5 player to show domination.

His talent, skating and size will get him drafted top 3-4 this year but his actual on ice accomplishments and play are not there since he has been injured this year and last year he wasnt anything extraordinary as a D-1 player (as is expected from a non franchise/generational level prospect)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel Buchnevich
How the heck has a D-man with 39 pts in 73 OHL games shown to be too good for the OHL?

He hasnt dominated anything yet at the OHL/CHL level.

He needs to play a season and the best D in the league and top 3/5 player to show domination.

His talent, skating and size will get him drafted top 3-4 this year but his actual on ice accomplishments and play are not there since he has been injured this year and last year he wasnt anything extraordinary as a D-1 player (as is expected from a non franchise/generational level prospect)
Last year is not relevant to this year
 
Last year is not relevant to this year
Sure that is true

However he doesnt have a history of being an elite player in the CHL

22 pts in 17 games is nice start but not a dominant and decorated season whatsoever

Misa is having an elite year in the OHL in his Draft year

Hagens is having a very good season in his draft year.

I don't get how so many people have them both behind Schaefer.

Schaefer should go back to OHL and be a dominant player for the full year

Win best dman in OHL/CHL award
Have a great U-20 WJC
Have a dominant playoff run

He has a lot he can still show in Juniors
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jtechkid
Sure that is true

However he doesnt have a history of being an elite player in the CHL

22 pts in 17 games is nice start but not a dominant and decorated season whatsoever

Misa is having an elite year in the OHL in his Draft year

Hagens is having a very good season in his draft year.

I don't get how so many people have them both behind Schaefer.

Schaefer should go back to OHL and be a dominant player for the full year

Win best dman in OHL/CHL award
Have a great U-20 WJC
Have a dominant playoff run

He has a lot he can still show in Juniors
I understand what you’re saying but you are also ignoring major pieces of the puzzle. He was awesome as a U17 at the U18 tournament last year. Then followed it up with an excellent Hlinka. And then his short but sweet U20 stint as a U18.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wetcoast
That's not a thing.

You can say that Schaefer would benefit from a new coach/system, or that he can physically handle the NCAA, which are both true and valid reasons why he might go to the NCAA. But no one is too good for major junior if they are junior aged.
While I agree this is definitely not the case with Schaefer, I feel it is a conversation with merit as he is a potential #1 pick, and therefore can be compared against other #1 draft picks. There are definitely cases where players are absolutely too good for major JR while being junior aged, especially when it comes to players who are high end first round picks. At the very least Crosby, still junior aged at 18 and 19 scoring 102 and 120 points, respectively was too good for the Q. Same for McDavid his D1+D+2 seasons where he was putting up 100 point seasons in his 19-year old season in the NHL. Tavares was treading water his draft year in the OHL. Mario Lemieux, after scoring 282 points with 2 years left of Junior hockey eligibility, was too good for junior hockey.

I'd argue Bedard after 140-some points in his draft year, probably was too good for junior his D+1 & D+2 year, just like I assume McKenna will be in 2 years.

I guess it falls on what "too good for junior hockey" is by definition to someone. Obviously, not too good in the way that they shouldn't be allowed to play in the league, but definitely too good in the way that they will gain absolutely nothing, and potentially stagnate by being there.
 
Sure that is true

However he doesnt have a history of being an elite player in the CHL

22 pts in 17 games is nice start but not a dominant and decorated season whatsoever

Misa is having an elite year in the OHL in his Draft year

Hagens is having a very good season in his draft year.

I don't get how so many people have them both behind Schaefer.

Schaefer should go back to OHL and be a dominant player for the full year

Win best dman in OHL/CHL award
Have a great U-20 WJC
Have a dominant playoff run

He has a lot he can still show in Juniors
You are just flat out wrong here as he is considered the best Dman in the OHL when playing as he literally tilts the ice when he is out there.

Just because he had mono and now an injury doesn't change how elite he is when playing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Star Platinum
You are just flat out wrong here as he is considered the best Dman in the OHL when playing as he literally tilts the ice when he is out there.

Just because he had mono and now an injury doesn't change how elite he is when playing.
17 games does not justify him being in the NHL next season.

The person I was responding to said he has nothing to prove in Juniors. That is a terrible take.

Mitch marner/Dylan strome end prospects still had stuff to proof in juniors and played their D+1 there after draft seasons where both could go 1st overall in this draft.

Schaefer can benefit from playing a full season in the OHL. He isnt a franchise D prospect who is ready to be a good NHL player as a 18 year old like Dahlin was
 
While I agree this is definitely not the case with Schaefer, I feel it is a conversation with merit as he is a potential #1 pick, and therefore can be compared against other #1 draft picks. There are definitely cases where players are absolutely too good for major JR while being junior aged, especially when it comes to players who are high end first round picks. At the very least Crosby, still junior aged at 18 and 19 scoring 102 and 120 points, respectively was too good for the Q. Same for McDavid his D1+D+2 seasons where he was putting up 100 point seasons in his 19-year old season in the NHL. Tavares was treading water his draft year in the OHL. Mario Lemieux, after scoring 282 points with 2 years left of Junior hockey eligibility, was too good for junior hockey.

I'd argue Bedard after 140-some points in his draft year, probably was too good for junior his D+1 & D+2 year, just like I assume McKenna will be in 2 years.


I guess it falls on what "too good for junior hockey" is by definition to someone. Obviously, not too good in the way that they shouldn't be allowed to play in the league, but definitely too good in the way that they will gain absolutely nothing, and potentially stagnate by being there.
I never understand this argument in that we don't see superstar stagnate in the NHL but somehow we are supposed to believe that they do in junior?

I get that he might be more challenged in the NCAA, which is an option, or the OHL where it isn't but traditionally players were drafted in their age 19 years and there is literally zero proof that they stagnated.

Most of the time this argument "too good for the CHL" is made prematurely based on stats.

Remember Jordan Dumas before the 23-24 season "too good for junior" and here we are a year later and he still isn't even a .5 PPG guy in the AHL, sure it's coming off an injury and layoff but still it was misplaced.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dempsey

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad