Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Pat Lafontaine: There is consensus to move to a 19 year old draft


Toews

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Jägermeister said:

It's not a case of "because you are 18 and from Canada you can't play in the AHL" though.

It's a case of "because you are 18 and made the personal choice to play in this specific Junior league that has an agreement (that you were fully aware of) that bars you from playing in the AHL you can't play in the AHL".

Canadian junior players are still more than welcome to play in other leagues than the CHL (such as Jr. A, USHL, NCAA) which allow them to move to the AHL at 18.

Most certainly not discriminatory in any way.

Jager  is that a legal opinion or a CDC opinion....just wondering

 

Thanks for answering in either case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elvis15 said:

Yeah, I'm generally in favour of it even with the increased certainty of picks, but of course it would just be the Canucks luck that it'd keep us from getting a top pick. I'd think there would be something in the transition year that top 18 year olds would be allowed to still participate.

Maybe limit the number of 18 yr olds picked per team to maybe 2 or 3 for a couple yrs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jager  is that a legal opinion or a CDC opinion....just wondering

 

Thanks for answering in either case

It's a legal opinion based of off what I know about the Charter, although I'm certainly not an expert.

Junior players either being allowed to play or not being allowed to play in the AHL doesn't really have to do with either age or nationality.  Rather it depends on what junior league players choose to play in.  In Canada legal discrimination can only occur when the discrimination occurs as a result of protected grounds, and playing in the CHL isn't a protected ground under the Charter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jägermeister said:

It's a legal opinion based of off what I know about the Charter, although I'm certainly not an expert.

Junior players either being allowed to play or not being allowed to play in the AHL doesn't really have to do with either age or nationality.  Rather it depends on what junior league players choose to play in.  In Canada legal discrimination can only occur when the discrimination occurs as a result of protected grounds, and playing in the CHL isn't a protected ground under the Charter.

no, but they may have a case on the grounds of unfair commercial practices. If the AHL e.g, allows 18 year olds from one league but not another and the CHL or AHL is gaining a benefit from that, there might be a case there. Its hard to justify allowing 18 year olds from a European league to play in the AHL while CHL kids cannot.

 

Virtanen vs. Nylander, it could be a ground breaking case.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think Bettman may be keeping this in his back pocket should we ever get lucky and get the top pick...He can pass by the newly introduced  "NHL Executive Order" and ensure that we never draft a franchise player.

 

 

This change should never happen...if an 18 yr old is good enough, they shouldn't be denied the right to earn a living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not being denied to earn a living. It just means there would be an influx of talent into all the European Leagues. It might also mean more 18-19 year olds in the CHL, and a lot more going the college route. 

 

It's one of those ideas that sounds good, but it would have a lot of ramifications and logistical issues that would probably make it unworkable. 

 

Sort of like expanding the size of NHL rinks to be closer to Olympic Size. Great idea, but the owners would never let it go ahead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

How do you raise the draft age?  Think about it.  You'd have to have a year with no draft.  Like that's going to happen.

There would still be players to draft, just ones that were passed over in their first eligible year.   I think the more accurate thing to say is that the first year of doing this, if it were done, is that the quality of the players in the draft would be diluted but there would still be a draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always liked the idea of a 19 year old draft.

 

this would have to wait until new cba negotiations, and in order to convince the nhlpa it would likely have to be combined with an increase in entry level contract valuations and a renegotiated chl-nhl agreement allowing 19 year olds to play in the ahl.

 

this would also help to close the loophole for college draftees playing out their college careers and becoming ufas, assuming teams still hold their rights for 4 years after being drafted, as that would force them to sit out a year after they were done college if they were determined not to sign with the team that drafted them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

How do you raise the draft age?  Think about it.  You'd have to have a year with no draft.  Like that's going to happen.

Year 1 - no draft

Year 2 - Have two sets of drafts? One for the one born earlier, and the other a year after?

 

Draft position is based on the draft lottery results of the represented season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too agree with a 19 year old draft.  Only the most exceptional players ever make it as 18 year olds anyways.  Why not wait one more year and be more sure of the talent that you are drafting?

 

 I also think that this would be done in conjunction with changing the rules about AHL eligibility.  I think once you are drafted, you will be able to play in the AHL.  But as @tas pointed out, this would have to be done in conjunction with a new CBA.  

 

I'm starting to get the feeling that the next CBA might be a nasty battle.  It's just a hunch, but as evidence, take a look at Horvat's contract.  It's work stoppage friendly, in that he is paid far less in the year that there could possibly be a lockout or strike.  Why do that if you were sure CBA negotiations were going to go smoothly?  If a stoppage was to happen, it would be the ideal time to skip the draft for a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Year 1 - no draft

Year 2 - Have two sets of drafts? One for the one born earlier, and the other a year after?

 

Draft position is based on the draft lottery results of the represented season?

Maybe bring it in gradually. 18 year olds available only in rounds 1 and 2 in year 1 and only in round 1 in year 2. Year 3 the new age limit is 19.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2017 at 0:51 PM, Baer. said:

I think it's fine the way it is. Not to mention the league would have to basically skip a draft, which could anger some rebuilding GMs. Ina hockey world where the league is getting younger and younger, this seems like a "country club" move so the older players can keep their jobs.

 

Imagine if McDavid was forced to play another year of junior at 18. Or Matthews not putting up 40 at 18. Sorry Pat, it's a young man's game now.

Yup... this. 

 

As long as there's 18 year olds good enough to crack their NHL teams, there's absolutely no reason to move this to 19. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎09‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 1:14 PM, -AJ- said:

I like the idea. It would make the draft much less of a crapshoot, which I'd be a fan of.

Wouldn't the opposite happen?  You are now scouting a player that's another year older and stronger than majority of the competition he'll face.  The Dane Foxes of the hockey world would go higher than before, which means a lot more draft busts making it more of a crapshoot. 

 

That's just my take, I like the rules they way they are.  If anything, they need to get rid of the rule about CHL players going to the AHL.  The CHL has to face the music of either paying these kids to play for them or allow them to bolt for development leagues a year earlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2017 at 8:24 AM, nickels said:

Think Bettman may be keeping this in his back pocket should we ever get lucky and get the top pick...He can pass by the newly introduced  "NHL Executive Order" and ensure that we never draft a franchise player.

 

 

This change should never happen...if an 18 yr old is good enough, they shouldn't be denied the right to earn a living.

It'll probably be a year where the Canucks somehow miraculously wins the #1 overall... then Bettman suddenly says there's some new rule about moving the draft a year back... and that a new lottery draft will have to take place to "make it fair".  

In that lottery, somehow the Penguins, Hawks, Edmonton or Toronto wins the #1 pick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...