Why not take the Blake Wheeler/ Justin Schultz NCAA route? | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Why not take the Blake Wheeler/ Justin Schultz NCAA route?

Stonewall

Stonewall

Registered User
Jan 14, 2013
2,398
51
Assuming you're a star prospect.

- Get a free college education and play in a quality league (NCAA)
- Pick whatever team you want when you go to the NHL at 22
- 5 years later, get your big payday assuming you live up to your status
- Have less wear and tear on your body, so there's a decent chance you'll be a good player for longer and make more money over your career than the average player

What is the downside to this?
 
Making money ASAP in the pros > going to school for 4 years. Whether you agree with it or not that is the thought process of most drafted players.
 
Stonewall said:
Assuming you're a star prospect.

- Get a free college education and play in a quality league (NCAA)
- Pick whatever team you want when you go to the NHL at 22
- 5 years later, get your big payday assuming you live up to your status
- Have less wear and tear on your body, so there's a decent chance you'll be a good player for longer and make more money over your career than the average player

What is the downside to this?
Click to expand...

You lose out on 2-3 years of salary (potentially NHL salary).

If you get hurt you make 0. If your play dips your senior year you get 0.
 
Why would you leave those years of money on the table if you're a "star prospect". It makes no sense to me.
 
Why not just go to college at 18? That way you get your full 4 years plus you become a free agent. Wheeler went to the USHL for a year then played 3 years at college, so his education likely isn't done. There's no magic here.
 
Stonewall said:
Assuming you're a star prospect.

- Get a free college education and play in a quality league (NCAA)
- Pick whatever team you want when you go to the NHL at 22
- 5 years later, get your big payday assuming you live up to your status
- Have less wear and tear on your body, so there's a decent chance you'll be a good player for longer and make more money over your career than the average player

What is the downside to this?
Click to expand...

Just IMO:

1) You lose 3-4 years of NHL earning potential, with 1-2 of those being UFA years.
2) You pick whatever team will take you (which is primarily based on which team give you the best likelyhood of making the NHL roster).
3) Disagree on the "wear and tear" on your body. Everybody is different, and I think that factors like conditioning, diet, and luck with injuries will play a MUCH larger factor on career length than just NHL games played.

You also don't mention the risk that the player doesn't develop as expected. If you go to college and pull a Jessiman or AJ Thelen, you never get paid. If you go the junior/NHL route, you likely get paid until they figure out that you're not going to make it at the NHL level. Also, you have to add in risk of major injury in college.
 
The fact that the majority of college players don't go the Schultz/Wheeler route should give you the answer. The younger and faster you start earning big coin, the better.
 
Career-ending injury in the first few years of the NHL can happen too and is probably more likely... then you'll just make a few million.

Which is great of course but what will you do after that? Going to college, you can actually get the qualifications for a career.

As long as you get an entry-level contract out of college you'll make a few million no matter what.

But once again, you guys are all talking unlikely stuff as if it is likely to happen.
 
Plus you are still held to the entry level contract rules. You get to pick your team, but not your contract. Wheeler actually took less money on his ELC to sign with Boston than he could have had in Phoenix due to being grandfathered in on the previous CBA's more friendly ELC stipulations.
 
LVDucks238 said:
Making money ASAP in the pros > going to school for 4 years. Whether you agree with it or not that is the thought process of most drafted players.
Click to expand...

Taze em said:
You lose out on 2-3 years of salary (potentially NHL salary).

If you get hurt you make 0. If your play dips your senior year you get 0.
Click to expand...

Seedling said:
Why would you leave those years of money on the table if you're a "star prospect". It makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

GIN ANTONIC said:
Career ending injury in your 3rd year of college.
Click to expand...

Yep. That is A LOT of money that could be lost.
 
Stonewall said:
Career-ending injury in the first few years of the NHL can happen too and is probably more likely... then you'll just make a few million.

Which is great of course but what will you do after that? Going to college, you can actually get the qualifications for a career.

As long as you get an entry-level contract out of college you'll make a few million no matter what.

But once again, you guys are all talking unlikely stuff as if it is likely to happen.
Click to expand...

College is expensive. If you have a few million bucks in the bank as an out of work 23 year old, it's just a drop in the friggen bucket. Chump change.
 
Lose 3-4 years of income - and potentially even more when you think of their first contract coming later and not getting the potential payday.
 
rt said:
College is expensive. If you have a few million bucks in the bank as an out of work 23 year old, it's just a drop in the friggen bucket. Chump change.
Click to expand...

If you have a full scholarship for hockey it's no longer expensive.
 
Few colleges give out free rides for hockey scholarships.

Also, the CHL is firmly entrenched in Canadian hockey development. There's a strong pull (especially for young Canadian players) to play in the CHL. Growing up as a promising hockey player, it's likely that many of your friends and/or relatives will have been in the CHL.

There was an interesting discussion regarding Ryan Johansen who was strongly considering the college route but was persuaded by the Portland Winterhawks that he was good enough for the CHL and could better translate that into an NHL career.
 
How about play in the chl, enter the NHL right after you're drafted (star prospect) and start making money right away. If it doesn't work out or you get injured, you have your free university tuition thanks to the chl. If it does work out, keep making money playing at the highest level. Seems better than giving away four years of potential earnings to go the ncaa route.
 
If you're a star prospect with the potential to enter the league right after your draft you can be a UFA at 25 and get your second contract way earlier.

Crosby's salary was 9M in 2009, just 3 years after being drafted. He wouldn't have been done his college career.
 
Be easier as a future Star, to play in the CHL for 2 years.
Get drafted and refuse to sign, forcing the team to trade you within 2 years.
Most likely the team trades you after your first year hold out. At the very worst you get traded after 2 years.
 
ozzie said:
Be easier as a future Star, to play in the CHL for 2 years.
Get drafted and refuse to sign, forcing the team to trade you within 2 years.
Most likely the team trades you after your first year hold out. At the very worst you get traded after 2 years.
Click to expand...

And then karma hits you and you end up Tim Erixon playing for Toronto after being claimed off waivers Or Eric Lindros
 
Money, money, money, money.

If you could sign an ELC at the age of 20 and you are that star prospect you will be making approx 800k a year. If you play NCAA hockey you will not be making anything. Now this is assuming today you are a star prospect and can make the immediate jump in to the NHL.

Fast forward three years now. You have been a really good player in the NHL and you sign a two year bridge contract at three million dollars a year. Now if you went the NCAA route you will sign a two year entry level contract lets say at a million a year.

So now you are five years into you NHL career and one option had paid you 8.4 million dollars and the other has paid you two million with an education. Now call me crazy but by the age of 25 if I could chose option one and have made 6.4 million dollars more than option two with an education I would.
 
The main advantage isn't money, but being able to choose which team you play for. Being a UFA gives you power.

But it's not NCAA specific. If a CHL player wanted he could be a UFA at the same time by just refusing to sign with the team(s) drafting him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom