OHL - Defected Players

[h10*]

I see the same thing. I call them
I wholeheartedly support the notion that these kids deserve to be paid better than they are for what is expected of them.

Yes agree on that too. Considering they are in many cases many miles from home and subject to being traded over night to a new and unexpected team. They also are expected to, subject to what ohl tries to say about importance of school, put hockey first. School is second and jobs aren't an option- hockey is your job as travel times- especially for teams way up north and Erie, are long distances.

Not sure what they exactly get paid now. 100$ a week? Something in that range. Not sure. But many teams couldn't afford to pay let's say even double that. The league would have to pay the players or better yet.. Like many have said.. Create better parity by not allowing such dictation of the draft. You create better parity the teams like Sudbury, Owen sound, Erie, etc can be more consistent and bring in more fans/revenue.

 

[Torts]

You just never learn when egos are in the way. You become a "me me me me" player and it can cloud things. Not going to name names but certain players have gone through this league as me players and as a result jeopardized their career. They don't know how to lose and honestly are sore losers. Yes NHL is different than ohl largely due to money but there is certain patience and adversity you must go through on bad teams. It's a mental thing and some can't handle it when all they have done is have everything handed to them, including wins. You go to London and win.. Cool. You are just another pawn in a scheme that wins all the time. You get a chance to go to other teams you can be apart of the building process and idk that seems just as special if not more to me. To go through ups and mostly downs and potentially be rewarded at the end.. It's the journey that these kids sometimes fail to realize. Losing sucks but you learn more about yourself and teammates and can build a bond. It's why Erie has such a close locker room.

There will always be preferences but don't see how kids hate so much about the team they land on. That team wants you because they NEED you. They want to win and they want you to be apart of it. It's not the best scenario you maybe pictured but it can be just as good of an experience if you keep it positive

Absolutely, I've seen selfish players go on to nothing at the next level. I've seen players good enough to play pro not make it for some reason. Paint it with whatever brush you want but this is the one time probably int heir hockey career they (player, agent & parents) can pick a certain spot. Is it the best way no, am I pissed when players don't wanna come to my team yes. In retrospect it's a two way street and what goes around comes around.

A lot of it too has to do with off ice stuff, being the centerfold of STH packages and billboards isn't the be all end all for JR hockey players. Making sure there's a good school there, great billet opportunities and ability to still see your family strikes me as more important stuff.

As for London always winning, check there 2010-2011, wasn't there greatest and lost int he 1st round if I'm not mistaken.

Glad to hear it. It actually arose on the London thread but when it was competing for airtime with the suspension talks - it was time to bring it out here.




I see the same thing. I call them the generation of the eighth-place trophy winners (nobody loses, you are all the best, you all get a trophy). I had an interesting discussion with a third round draft pick in Niagara. He was convinced he was the best player on the ice and couldn't understand why the coach was holding him down to fourth line (or lower) minutes. No amount of talking could convince this lad that he just wasn't that good and that his play would dictate his time. Talking with the parents they believed if their little darling was put on the first line his play would improve. Entitlement!



I wholeheartedly support the notion that these kids deserve to be paid better than they are for what is expected of them.

In a perfect world yes I would love every player to report to whatever team drafted them. That's just not the reality now, it hasn't been for some time. As fans of the league we learn to deal with it and move on.

 

[h10*]

I love the Erie story, they had a season where they couldn't find a win with both hands and a flashlight. They were so down and out they didn't even bring a back-up goalie to a contest and had to dress a skater as a netminder. Comic relief and then they drafted high. It changed their franchise and made Erie a force to contend with. The championship list gains a new name.

Now imagine Erie's fate if McDavid (and others) said, "no thank you, I want to play closer to home or for this winning team over here". Take that right out of the equation and see what happens. Yes, a few players may opt to choose their own NCAA team but I think the quality of the OHL will shine through and most who were coming here, still will.

Haha the old Connor Crisp story vs Niagara in net. I think a lot of people bash erie on that for not having a backup. But if I remember correctly, their backup got sick or hurt in warmups or day of/day before game? I don't remember exact details but that's I heard something to that story. Their "3rd goalie" in junior b I think couldn't make it because of late notice so they had just 1 guy and sadikov got hurt. Funny story looking back and really summed up what was the rough years in Erie.

But you know what: one guy changed it. (Well 2 .. I give Knoblauch tons of credit too). Mcdavid made them go on the map. And combine that with now an actual legit facility. Then during conference finals, sportsnet televised the Erie home games and people finally realized this is a hockey town and has top tier fans. Now kids want to come here. But Erie was always like that.. Back to 2002 when they won it last.. But nobody realized it. It was a hidden gem with nobody reporting. Erie was forced to draft Late first/early second round talent in the first 10 picks every year because nobody would come here. Thus the trend of losing kept up

That's what kids don't realize. Teams don't lose for a decade because they just aren't capable. Often it's because kids won't report and so they are forced to draft from a smaller pool of players- players they know will or are willing to show up. It just takes 1-2 guys to change it.

 

[knowescape]

In a perfect world yes I would love every player to report to whatever team drafted them. That's just not the reality now, it hasn't been for some time. As fans of the league we learn to deal with it and move on.

Or we learn to discuss it in forums like these because the league elite have come to realize they can sometimes find free solutions here... just sayin'

 

[Tigers1992]

Or we learn to discuss it in forums like these because the league elite have come to realize they can sometimes find free solutions here... just sayin'

SO just assuming that you get your way and every player, regardless of personal situation, must play for the team that drafts him, are you then willing to make teams make equal commitments to players, much like an NCAA program. No trades, full commitment.

If where asking players for a full, no questions asked commitment, shouldn't the teams be forced to do the same?

 

[NTDP]

SO just assuming that you get your way and every player, regardless of personal situation, must play for the team that drafts him, are you then willing to make teams make equal commitments to players, much like an NCAA program. No trades, full commitment.

If where asking players for a full, no questions asked commitment, shouldn't the teams be forced to do the same?

I see what you're saying, but that might be an extreme example. The players shouldn't have to commit to their respective OHL team for their full 4 year junior career (if they are in junior hockey that long). I think what he is getting at is the player has to at least commit to the team that takes them, play for at least 1 year (if it's a 16 year old that can't be traded in their first year) or for a certain duration of the season until the GM can work a trade. This issue has worked for both teams in the past though. Nathan McKinnon didn't want to go to the Drakkar and forced a trade to Halifax. The Drakkar made out well in the return and ended up facing Halifax in the league final in 2013. Then went back to the final the following year while Halifax did not.

I know it hasn't been a huge issue in the past but the more kids start to do it, then the ones that follow will be more prone to do the same if they feel they are special enough. As for London's 2010-2011 season, yeah they went through a brief rebuild but the general consensus is the following year they won the league, in 2013 won the league, the next year hosted the mem cup, still made the 2nd round last year, and looks like they could win it all again this year. I actually like watching London and have seen some of the Americans on that team play for a few years now so I'm not hating on London. Like the New York Yankees, they aren't cheating by any means, it's just easier for them to attract good talent. Love em or hate em type relationships happen with franchises like that.

 

[knowescape]

SO just assuming that you get your way and every player, regardless of personal situation, must play for the team that drafts him, are you then willing to make teams make equal commitments to players, much like an NCAA program. No trades, full commitment.

If where asking players for a full, no questions asked commitment, shouldn't the teams be forced to do the same?

Just like the NHL, you play for the team that drafts you or for the team you are traded to.

 

[knowescape]

I see what you're saying, but that might be an extreme example. The players shouldn't have to commit to their respective OHL team for their full 4 year junior career (if they are in junior hockey that long). I think what he is getting at is the player has to at least commit to the team that takes them, play for at least 1 year (if it's a 16 year old that can't be traded in their first year) or for a certain duration of the season until the GM can work a trade.

^^^^ What he said

I know it hasn't been a huge issue in the past but the more kids start to do it, then the ones that follow will be more prone to do the same if they feel they are special enough. As for London's 2010-2011 season, yeah they went through a brief rebuild but the general consensus is the following year they won the league, in 2013 won the league, the next year hosted the mem cup, still made the 2nd round last year, and looks like they could win it all again this year. I actually like watching London and have seen some of the Americans on that team play for a few years now so I'm not hating on London. Like the New York Yankees, they aren't cheating by any means, it's just easier for them to attract good talent. Love em or hate em type relationships happen with franchises like that.

I love watching London as well, and they are a prime example of what other clubs could aspire to be (given the same population and fan base). I definitely don't hate 'em but I like the rags to riches story of Erie much more.

 

[Tigers1992]

Just like the NHL, you play for the team that drafts you or for the team you are traded to.

Completely different thou, NHL players are compansated millions of dollars.

So not only do you want your cake, you want to eat it too. You're fine with taking a player out of school, moving him into a new school and perhaps having a negative effect on his marks/future?

Why is that the player has to 100 percent commit, yet the team doesn't? It should be a two way street.

Your completely ok with taking a player, who may have personal issues, and placing him in a situation that detracts from that. I used the example in the past (again, one that you didn't want to touch) that a family with a dying parent needed to stay close to them. In your world, he should be forced to move away and not have the opportunity to support that parent while also playing in the OHL?

That seems incredibly cold.

 

[Tigers1992]

I see what you're saying, but that might be an extreme example. The players shouldn't have to commit to their respective OHL team for their full 4 year junior career (if they are in junior hockey that long). I think what he is getting at is the player has to at least commit to the team that takes them, play for at least 1 year (if it's a 16 year old that can't be traded in their first year) or for a certain duration of the season until the GM can work a trade. This issue has worked for both teams in the past though. Nathan McKinnon didn't want to go to the Drakkar and forced a trade to Halifax. The Drakkar made out well in the return and ended up facing Halifax in the league final in 2013. Then went back to the final the following year while Halifax did not.

My only point being is that if you're asking for a player to commit to a program, enroll in school and move in with a billet family, where he was drafted, then the same commitment should be made to the player. If this is a 'development' league, one that puts focus on building student athletes, then that should be the primary focus. Many teams have minimum grade requirements, but some dont (they are fine with playing a player who is failing out of school), if im a parent I should be forced to send my kid to that program? Really?

Why can't we make all the teams up their game?

I know it hasn't been a huge issue in the past but the more kids start to do it, then the ones that follow will be more prone to do the same if they feel they are special enough.

Confusing. People continue to say this. The 2009 OHL draft was the worst draft in history regarding players 'playing the game'. So much so that it required the OHL to instill a 'defective player rule. There where more game that year in all the following years combined. Its becoming less of an issue because team are being forced to 'up their game'. Every year there is 1 or 2 who are selective, versus 5/6 that where selective in 2009. Its less and less of an issue (but no one wants to actually acknowledge this)

 

[knowescape]

Completely different thou, NHL players are compansated millions of dollars.

I don't believe the entry level contract is millions, and by then they are a proven entity. On a scale though I do believe OHL players should receive more than they do.

You're fine with taking a player out of school, moving him into a new school and perhaps having a negative effect on his marks/future? Why is that the player has to 100 percent commit, yet the team doesn't? It should be a two way street.

Hell no! I can't imagine doing that at 16 or having my kid agree to it either (fortunately for us neither were that good :p). But every year, thousands of kids are competing for the right to do just that. The OHL is a great league to develop NHL style players, with the schedule, the presence of imports, and playing internationally. The rules and the "feel" of the league are very similar (yes, the pay sucks and this needs to be improved for the future of the league as well). NCAA is always an option for players yet year after year you see more of the top talent in Canada choosing CHL leagues.

 

[Tigers1992]

I don't believe the entry level contract is millions, and by then they are a proven entity. On a scale though I do believe OHL players should receive more than they do.

Entry level contracts usually start at 925k with the ability to make up to 2.85 extra in additional bonus money (most get some, few get all). Not including the outside sponsorship (Reebok, Nike, etc) that most get.

Hell no! I can't imagine doing that at 16 or having my kid agree to it either (fortunately for us neither were that good :p). But every year, thousands of kids are competing for the right to do just that. The OHL is a great league to develop NHL style players, with the schedule, the presence of imports, and playing internationally. The rules and the "feel" of the league are very similar (yes, the pay sucks and this needs to be improved for the future of the league as well). NCAA is always an option for players yet year after year you see more of the top talent in Canada choosing CHL leagues.

The OHL develops many, many more CIS players then they do NHL players. It plays an NHL style of play, but that's not the end goal for many. And to an extent you just made my point. As a parent, you wouldn't want to commit to a program that didn't put your son's marks first. If you had the opportunity to commit to a program that had higher minimum off ice standards (don't get kids in trouble off ice), you wouldn't want your son going there?

Ill ask again, (maybe the 4th time), whats so wrong with forcing teams to up their minimum standards, instead of asking players to lower theirs?

 

[knowescape]

My only point being is that if you're asking for a player to commit to a program, enroll in school and move in with a billet family, where he was drafted, then the same commitment should be made to the player. If this is a 'development' league, one that puts focus on building student athletes, then that should be the primary focus. Many teams have minimum grade requirements, but some dont (they are fine with playing a player who is failing out of school), if im a parent I should be forced to send my kid to that program? Really?

The reality Tiger is that not every "student athlete" is that great of a student. In Ontario you can still actually leave school at age 16 with no repercussions. I know people who were horrible students at age 16 but amazing hockey players. The educational package allowed them to return to post-secondary education when they were mature enough to do so and had the OHL not been an option for them, they wouldn't have been half as successful in life. Education is not the answer for everyone all the time.

Why can't we make all the teams up their game?

Money, geography, populaton/fan base.

Confusing. People continue to say this. The 2009 OHL draft was the worst draft in history regarding players 'playing the game'. So much so that it required the OHL to instill a 'defective player rule. There where more game that year in all the following years combined. Its becoming less of an issue because team are being forced to 'up their game'. Every year there is 1 or 2 who are selective, versus 5/6 that where selective in 2009. Its less and less of an issue (but no one wants to actually acknowledge this)

It is still going on. Some players are doing the soft-sell to avoid the "defected" label.

 

[Tigers1992]

It is still going on. Some players are doing the soft-sell to avoid the "defected" label.

Not really. Again, this is my business, I am involved in the day to day of player management, and its not nearly as bad as it once was, not even close....

With all due respect Im not sure how you know this more then me?

The reality Tiger is that not every "student athlete" is that great of a student. In Ontario you can still actually leave school at age 16 with no repercussions. I know people who were horrible students at age 16 but amazing hockey players. The educational package allowed them to return to post-secondary education when they were mature enough to do so and had the OHL not been an option for them, they wouldn't have been half as successful in life. Education is not the answer for everyone all the time.

So instead of bringing players in and supporting their schooling, your happy to just let them fail? Really? Lets put players in a position to succeed, not fail....

Money, geography, populaton/fan base.

Minimum grade requirements (no pass no play), billet support and off ice player development and management costs $0. But not every team puts the same focus on it, not even close

Again, we're asking players to make sacrifices without even looking at teams that aernt willing to do the same.

 

[knowescape]

Entry level contracts usually start at 925k with the ability to make up to 2.85 extra in additional bonus money (most get some, few get all). Not including the outside sponsorship (Reebok, Nike, etc) that most get.

The OHL would argue that successful completion of their program leads to those lucrative contracts in the NHL/AHL/etc. It is a cop-out, pay 'em better while they learn.

Ill ask again, (maybe the 4th time), whats so wrong with forcing teams to up their minimum standards, instead of asking players to lower theirs?

Sorry takes time to type, doing the best I can. What's wrong - it takes a team to build a team. Again, imagine Erie Otters without McDavid? One player can make a difference, and the corresponding lack of one player can also have an impact.

 

[Tigers1992]

The OHL would argue that successful completion of their program leads to those lucrative contracts in the NHL/AHL/etc. It is a cop-out, pay 'em better while they learn.

No they don't. They very much realize that CIS is the destination for a significant percentage of their players. Branch as been quoted on this multiple times (ask him yourself, he coaches minor hockey and is quite approachable).

The cop out comes in the fact that they allow certain teams to ignore the schooling aspects, off ice discipline, etc. Again, why cant we ask teams to raise their game....

 

[sfan]

Logan Brown's dad was named the new coach of the 67s a couple of weeks before Logan was drafted.

I suspect the real issue in Logan wanting a western conference team was so that the number of times father and son were on opposing benches would be minimized. Before Jeff Brown was publicly announced as the 67s coach any conversations Logan had with interested teams would have had to be circumspect about why he would report to a western team but not an eastern team.

Similarly the real reason wasn't 'Windsor because it would be closer to Logan's home in St Louis' is because they knew the family home would soon be in Ottawa (Jeff Brown's original home town).

I think it is inconceivable the Niagara GM and scouting organization wouldn't have known all this when they decided to draft Logan.

 

[Tigers1992]

I think it is inconceivable the Niagara GM and scouting organization wouldn't have known all this when they decided to draft Logan.

They did. As myself and many others have said in the past, Windsor and Niagara had an understanding pre-draft. Niagara made an attempt to sign him, as they have too, but they knew what they where doing.

More teams would love to do what Niagara did, the issue is that there are fewer and fewer opportunities.

 

[knowescape]

Not really. Again, this is my business, I am involved in the day to day of player management, and its not nearly as bad as it once was, not even close....

With all due respect Im not sure how you know this more then me?

Never claimed to know more than you or asked to put our resumés side by each. As far as I am concerned we are two hockey fans having a nice discussion based upon our own experiences and opinions, let's keep it this way

So instead of bringing players in and supporting their schooling, your happy to just let them fail? Really? Lets put players in a position to succeed, not fail....
Minimum grade requirements (no pass no play), billet support and off ice player development and management costs $0. But not every team puts the same focus on it, not even close.

I can assure you that billet support is not free, ask the hundreds of billet families what they get and what they donate for their players. Having minimum educational standards for all players is unrealistic, some are just hockey players not students (and what's wrong with that). I have seen circumstances where players had others do their school work for them to avoid the minimum grade requirements. That is the usual outcome for assuming everyone is an academic.

 

[knowescape]

I think it is inconceivable the Niagara GM and scouting organization wouldn't have known all this when they decided to draft Logan.

Of course Niagara knew it, but having a good program locally the thought was that they could convince him to stay.

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2014/05/05/icedogs-hopeful-of-signing-brown

 

[Tigers1992]

Never claimed to know more than you or asked to put our resumés side by each. As far as I am concerned we are two hockey fans having a nice discussion based upon our own experiences and opinions, let's keep it this way

I've worked within the league, I now work on the player development side. My job is to know and understand the politics of the draft, it's my full time job. I can tell you first hand, it's not even close to what it use to be. Teams want to do what Niagara did and take advantage of the defective player rule to their benefit, but there isn't many options, players games have been eliminated.

With all due respect, that's why I question how you'd have more knowledge of this then me....

Having minimum educational standards for all players is unrealistic, some are just hockey players not students (and what's wrong with that). I have seen circumstances where players had others do their school work for them to avoid the minimum grade requirements. That is the usual outcome for assuming everyone is an academic.

If you're more then happy to allow players to fail then to acknowledge that there are very simple, easy, free standards that teams need to upgrade, then I think we are done here. No kid should be encouraged to fail school...

 

[knowescape]

With all due respect, that's why I question how you'd have more knowledge of this then me....

Have never and will never claim to have more knowledge than anyone else. I have a different outlook sometimes being an outsider rather than an insider. We are here to discuss and share opinions right?

If you're more then happy to allow players to fail then to acknowledge that there are very simple, easy, free standards that teams need to upgrade, then I think we are done here. No kid should be encouraged to fail school...

Show me where I encouraged any kid to fail school? I recognize (even outside of the hockey world) that not every kid is destined for post-secondary education and that some are not academically inclined at all, that's life! You want to take away the thing they are best at because they don't fit a different mold? All that will happen is someone else will do the work to ensure they "pass".

 

[dirty12]

Of course Niagara knew it, but having a good program locally the thought was that they could convince him to stay.

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2014/05/05/icedogs-hopeful-of-signing-brown

Teams have to make an 'attempt'. Niagara GM has used the defected player rule a few times and will continue to use it because he believes it benefits his team.

 

[Otto]

I see what you're saying, but that might be an extreme example. The players shouldn't have to commit to their respective OHL team for their full 4 year junior career (if they are in junior hockey that long). I think what he is getting at is the player has to at least commit to the team that takes them, play for at least 1 year (if it's a 16 year old that can't be traded in their first year) or for a certain duration of the season until the GM can work a trade. This issue has worked for both teams in the past though. Nathan McKinnon didn't want to go to the Drakkar and forced a trade to Halifax. The Drakkar made out well in the return and ended up facing Halifax in the league final in 2013. Then went back to the final the following year while Halifax did not.

I know it hasn't been a huge issue in the past but the more kids start to do it, then the ones that follow will be more prone to do the same if they feel they are special enough. As for London's 2010-2011 season, yeah they went through a brief rebuild but the general consensus is the following year they won the league, in 2013 won the league, the next year hosted the mem cup, still made the 2nd round last year, and looks like they could win it all again this year. I actually like watching London and have seen some of the Americans on that team play for a few years now so I'm not hating on London. Like the New York Yankees, they aren't cheating by any means, it's just easier for them to attract good talent. Love em or hate em type relationships happen with franchises like that.

Do you really want a player playing for your team if he isn't interested in being there? What would that do to your dressing room?

As for London winning all the time, they have been out before the conference finals 5 times in the last 10 years. They don't win as much as you want to believe.

 

[Tigers1992]

Show me where I encouraged any kid to fail school? I recognize (even outside of the hockey world) that not every kid is destined for post-secondary education and that some are not academically inclined at all, that's life! You want to take away the thing they are best at because they don't fit a different mold? All that will happen is someone else will do the work to ensure they "pass".

Let me put it this way...

Your son is an honour role student who wants to play in the OHL, one team has a history of supporting education and building people who grow off I've and on. The other has no interest in helping players in school. Where do you want your son going and why can't building people off I've, in addition to winning, be a priority? Even small market teams can and do out a focus on building well rounded players and supporting them, not just supporting winning. Where do you want to go? Why do you have to pick? Why can't both put an effort into building better players and people?

I'm not sure how you can argue with that thought?