Snapshot85 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Greetings, I'm a fan of hockey, I love the game! I play the game! I go to the games and watch the games, I buy your merchandise and make sure I do my part to ensure all of you get paid so I can see you Play the Greatest Game On Earth, In the most talented league ever created! As I fan I believe the more talent in the league, the more goals scored and more amazing out of the world saves the better it is for the sport. Over the last decade in particular I have seen a trend by ownership and coaching that does not put your new players best intrests at heart. From reasons like there desperate to sell tickets to searching for that hail Mary play to generate some offense, I have seen countless young stars rushed into the league long before they are ready. This decision should impart belong to the players and NHLPA. Rushing young rookies into the league does countless damage...From the extreame jump in strength and aggression from Jr hockey... To the raw talent in the nhl, where even the lowest players are more talented than they have ever faced, if the season isn't a sucess for injury or lack of points it can damage a players confidence and make him slowly disappear . For every Connor Mcdavud who was ready.We have seen many more star draft picks rushed into the league at 18 years old with 0 years of pro hockey.... and before you know it thier ruined...and struggling to be a fringe nhler at best. Pro hockey as you know is just a diffrent beast than JR. So I porpose all first year players should have to spend 4 months ( until after christmas) in the AHL. I would suggest a full season but I do not believe that would ever happen. These 4 months does a few things.... allows these prospective star players to adjust to professional hockey skill, intensity, and physicality. It takes alot of media off them so they can focus on hockey. It also gives a proper sample size for coaching to gauge if the player is really ready for the nhl and if they would be better served developing for the rest of the season. I think if you were to do this.... it would have a overall positive benefit to your young players. Looking forward to watching all of you this season Think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Just to throw a wrench in your proposal... What about players like Podkolzin? He's playing pro hockey now. What about US college players? If they stay and play out their college eligibility, they will be well older than 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapshot85 Posted October 18, 2019 Author Share Posted October 18, 2019 26 minutes ago, goalie13 said: Just to throw a wrench in your proposal... What about players like Podkolzin? He's playing pro hockey now. What about US college players? If they stay and play out their college eligibility, they will be well older than You make a good point.... but players coming from ncaa arnt the issue What I have noticed is its players under 20... usually could use a bit of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, Snapshot85 said: You make a good point.... but players coming from ncaa arnt the issue What I have noticed is its players under 20... usually could use a bit of time. The way you worded it was a blanket proposal. I hear where you are coming from but there would have to be so many exceptions to your rule. Personally, I think a better solution would be to raise the draft age by one year, but that will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 The only team that makes a habit of this are the Oilers, who aren't an NHL team to begin with. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Players under 20 cannot play in the AHL unless they are European in which case it is 19 (exceptions are rare). They only examples I can think of under what you stated are Yakupov and Puljujarvi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 32 minutes ago, Baer. said: Players under 20 cannot play in the AHL unless they are European in which case it is 19 (exceptions are rare). They only examples I can think of under what you stated are Yakupov and Puljujarvi. Those 2 got to play for an AHL team still though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Those 2 got to play for an AHL team still though. Yes cause they are european. I just used them as examples of marquee prospects that got rushed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 9 minutes ago, Baer. said: Yes cause they are european. I just used them as examples of marquee prospects that got rushed. No, because they got drafted by Edmonton. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostsOf1994 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 So, young players work their butts off to get drafted into NHL from junior leagues, work their tales off to make an NHL roster, are good enough to last in the NHL until christmas, then are forced down to the AHL, with AHL pay, AHL coaches, AHL goons, riding the buses? It's more Likely a 18 year old gets smashed by a goon in the AHL over the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostsOf1994 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 6 hours ago, goalie13 said: The way you worded it was a blanket proposal. I hear where you are coming from but there would have to be so many exceptions to your rule. Personally, I think a better solution would be to raise the draft age by one year, but that will never happen. When hockey starts getting to the levels of NCAA football and basketball, you will see an age restriction like the NFL. To summarize if a player is drafted at 17, they need to play 3 years before being able to enter the NHL at age 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 I think this rule is way too generalized for situations where, each individual team's reasons for playing a first year rookie may differ. Sure Jack Hughes is probably not ready, but can you really fault New Jersey for playing him? He's an extremely talented, highly touted 1st overall pick on a bad team struggling for offense, in a market where they compete against the Rangers, the Islanders, the Knicks, the Nets, the Giants, and the Jets for ticket sales and viewership. So damn right I'm playing Hughes to start the season, I do have a business to run afterall. Other reasons to play 1st year players; injuries. Due to injuries to Murphy and Forsling, Jokiharu started his rookie season in the NHL because he was the best option. He handled it fine and once the other players were healthy, Joker was sent down. Why should the Hawks be forced to play a lesser talented player like Brandon Manning when they feel the younger option is better? In cases of players like Saad and Debrincat, who went right from juniors to the NHL, it was determined by the coaches that after the prospect camp, the prospect tournament, and the Hawks camp that both players were NHL ready. Obviously, management was right and both were ready....so where the hell would the NHLPA, who wasn't at any of these camps, get off saying they're not ready based simply on their age. The NHLPA isn't at the camps, they don't see the players competing....if the coaches feel a player is ready then it should be their own decision. I understand your presumption to protect the prospects, but specifically, I would say Edmonton is the only organization that consistently rushes rookies into the league before they're ready. 31 other teams shouldn't be punished or have decisions forced upon them for the Oilers piss poor management of prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 What union would push for a policy that takes money out of its members pockets? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
on the cycle Posted October 20, 2019 Share Posted October 20, 2019 How about ending the CHL-NHL agreement that prevents players from playing in the AHL until they are either 20 or have played 4 CHL seasons. If a player is NHL ready he shouldn't be prevented from playing by an arbitrary agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyCanuck Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 On October 19, 2019 at 8:13 PM, on the cycle said: How about ending the CHL-NHL agreement that prevents players from playing in the AHL until they are either 20 or have played 4 CHL seasons. If a player is NHL ready he shouldn't be prevented from playing by an arbitrary agreement. That's when a nhl team should be able to buy out the contract out. it would have done wonders for Virtanen cause he was to good for the whl but wasn't ready for the nhl. It would make the chl better cause owners would spend more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) The NHLPA would never agree to this. Before the WHA forced their hands by poaching at the time underagers and playing them young, 20 was the age they could start in the NHL - it’s also a big part of the reason guys came in and did so well like Potvin - they were men not boys. Linesman also challenged the NHL in court and won, he was good enough to play at 18, at its what ultimately changed the rules on when they could start. I agree that the league is using younger players to balance the books - but it’s not often we see an 18 year old on the team, usually they are at or near the top of the draft. Hughes and EP both got another year, Horvat only won a spot because he could win faceoffs AND because our team sucked at the time. Another year would have probably helped him but he managed - and worked hard on his skating which was definitely not up to par. JV well yes that was a mistake which was corrected. It’s the way things are under the cap. Don’t see it changing anytime soon. edit: What the league should do is get the AHL to change their agreement with the CHL and lower it a year. One extra year in juniors never hurt anyone, and the NCAA is an option as is playing in an elite men’s league like Mathews did... Edited October 22, 2019 by IBatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VancouverIteinSanDiego Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 1 hour ago, IBatch said: The NHLPA would never agree to this. Before the WHA forced their hands by poaching at the time underagers and playing them young, 20 was the age they could start in the NHL - it’s also a big part of the reason guys came in and did so well like Potvin - they were men not boys. Linesman also challenged the NHL in court and won, he was good enough to play at 18, at its what ultimately changed the rules on when they could start. I agree that the league is using younger players to balance the books - but it’s not often we see an 18 year old on the team, usually they are at or near the top of the draft. Hughes and EP both got another year, Horvat only won a spot because he could win faceoffs AND because our team sucked at the time. Another year would have probably helped him but he managed - and worked hard on his skating which was definitely not up to par. JV well yes that was a mistake which was corrected. It’s the way things are under the cap. Don’t see it changing anytime soon. edit: What the league should do is get the AHL to change their agreement with the CHL and lower it a year. One extra year in juniors never hurt anyone, and the NCAA is an option as is playing in an elite men’s league like Mathews did... I'm gonna disagree and say NHLPA would be for it as they are there to help their base, and a players making $60000+ plus in salary vs what in CHL. To get the CHL to change their agreement is money, and that's NHL vs CHL, A NHL team wants full control over their draft picks it's what European soccer clubs have, they decide if the players is called up on first squad, second or loanded out. Since they "own" the player. I would want my draft picks to play where beat development, if I think that's CHL, SHL, or CHL should be managements job 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now