I had a quick look and most of the Stonehill players weren't exactly top players in those lesser junior leagues even as overagers.
Agree and for the 50th time at least, I still don't understand why they didn't take Demidov with that pick.
These are their last years in Junior A
The NCAA isn't just older, it's a much better level. I still don't see you admitting that. Using the term "older" as opposed to "better" makes me think you are reticent to admit this.
That's fair but I read your post here,
Which is quite different than top players from their teams.
I think that it's "better" because the players are older, lots of University sports teams would do quite well because they are older as well.
No one thinks that. Some people are acting like top talent from the CHL can't adapt to the NCAA. We'll get a clearer idea of the talent gap next year when CHL players start playing.
I don’t want to get into semantics of what a top player means. I personally have no clue about if any of those players were good and if so exactly how good comparatively to their junior A teams, but I think we can generalize that these were top of the lineup junior A players. And that’s my point. Their age doesn’t really matter either. I’m just saying that top of the lineup junior A players are comparable to bottom of the lineup major junior players, roughly speaking. The idea these Stonehill players are all hacks and couldn’t play in major junior isn’t something I think the evidence supports.
Sure those Stonehill players could play on CHL teams, if they allowed 22,23,24 year olds but most of them were never talented enough to really have played there.
Even as 19 or 20 year olds. Check those seasons they put up those stats. Those junior A leagues pretty much have the same age limits as major junior.
I went back and looked at them and for the guys in the BCJHL and AJHL I have a better handle on as I follow the WHL more closely and they were at best fringe WHL guys in their 20 year old seasons (but not even then really as the wHL has a 3 player limit and none of those guys were ever in the top 100 of their age group in the WHL area of hockey, probably not even top 200 really.
Not sure you are quoting me on the Stonehill players, they played in lower junior leagues and simply aren't that great.
That's great but my back and forth with the other poster for the last 6 or so posts was specifically about Stonehill.
You're not impressing anybody with "these guys used to play in the USHL!" when this entire rabbithole we've gone down started with a poster shitting on the quality of the OHL.
I don't. In the same way that i don't argue with my neighbour who has data proving the earth is flat.
Yeah you're right. Only the top Ohl teams would destroy every team in the ushl. The top Ushl teams might give the bottom teams in the Ohl a good game, maybe. I doubt they'd win, but it's possible. Excuse my hyperbole.
I don't know why you think it's like claiming the earth is flat.
.3 of a year average of age difference when comparing 2 leagues with thousands of players between them is literally just noise. It's like saying the two leagues are exactly the same age.
I have no idea about the mhl, so you're guess is better than mine. That said, I wouldn't put any stock whatsoever in wins and losses at the U17 Challenge. If Canada really cared about placement at that tournament they wouldn't send 2 teams obviously. Right?
