HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Which is better for development, OHL vs AHL?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2011, 12:54 PM
  #1
Gman094
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Billyburg, NY
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Gman094
Which is better for development, OHL vs AHL?

With the Bruins having several prospects in various stages of development, I'm curious to see what people think of in terms of the differences of developing a player in the OHL vs the AHL. People talk about Hamilton going back to the OHL for a year, do you think he will go to providence after that?


Had Seguin not stayed on the Bruins roster this past year, do you think his development would have been better served by going back to the OHL or getting more minutes in providence?


It seems to me that the AHL more closely resembles the NHL in terms of how they game is played and the disparity between the players. In the OHL you have people like Hall and Seguin who were lighting it up without too much concerns on the defensive side of things.


On a side note, how important of a role do you think Bruce Cassidy will have in Providence in continuing to foster and develop the talent currently on the team? With several UFA's coming up next year, the Bruins really need some AHL's to step up their game this year.

Gman094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 12:58 PM
  #2
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 14,976
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
As a way to stay in business, the CHL made an agreement with the NHL to make the minimum age of the AHL 20.

Kind of BS.. but again I am not from Canada and dont get to enjoy junior hockey.

So basically.. Seguin, Hamilton, etc. cant play in Providence until the junior season is over.

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 01:00 PM
  #3
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 18,687
vCash: 500
Well, it's kind of difficult to compare them because players eligible for the AHL can't play in junior, and junior players under the age of 20 can't play in the AHL.

Hypothetically, IF, for example, Seguin had been eligible to play in the AHL, it certainly would have been better for him than going back to junior, as he'd be playing against men rather than boys, not to mention getting used to the travel and longer schedule.

Artemis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 01:18 PM
  #4
Gman094
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Billyburg, NY
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Gman094
I was unaware of the 20year old age requirement for the AHL. Seems kinda bs that a player can just bypass that and go straight to the NHL. It seems to me like baseball is the only sports where the top prospects consistently play in the minors before coming to the major league.


Is there an age limit for the OHL? Lets say Seguin had gone back to his old team, do you think it would have been better for him to stay with his team and develop chemistry for a bit or jump to the AHL as soon as possible?

Gman094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 01:46 PM
  #5
Fire Julien
Registered User
 
Fire Julien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bergen
Country: Norway
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
The Canadian Hockey League is by far the best development league in the world. It provides more than half of the NHL's players. The age rule allows better competition and better attendance, and that's fine with the NHL as long as the CHL will be the key supplier of talent. Its survival is necessary.

Fire Julien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 01:47 PM
  #6
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 14,976
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman094 View Post
I was unaware of the 20year old age requirement for the AHL. Seems kinda bs that a player can just bypass that and go straight to the NHL. It seems to me like baseball is the only sports where the top prospects consistently play in the minors before coming to the major league.


Is there an age limit for the OHL? Lets say Seguin had gone back to his old team, do you think it would have been better for him to stay with his team and develop chemistry for a bit or jump to the AHL as soon as possible?
Well when comparing it to baseball... Juniors is like A or AA

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 01:56 PM
  #7
Bizarro Bandwagoner
Registered User
 
Bizarro Bandwagoner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 3,325
vCash: 500
Every team should be able to place one junior aged played on their AHL roster. Losing 30 players across the entire CHL isn't going to have a big impact on any of those leagues.

Bobby Ryan wasted at least one season playing in the OHL when he really should have been developing in the AHL.

Seguin could have used some time in Providence this past season. There are many examples of careers being needlessly delayed because of this dumb rule.

Bizarro Bandwagoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 02:06 PM
  #8
Gonzothe7thDman
Registered User
 
Gonzothe7thDman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bridgewater, Ma
Country: United States
Posts: 5,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizarro Bandwagoner View Post
Every team should be able to place one junior aged played on their AHL roster. Losing 30 players across the entire CHL isn't going to have a big impact on any of those leagues.

Bobby Ryan wasted at least one season playing in the OHL when he really should have been developing in the AHL.

Seguin could have used some time in Providence this past season. There are many examples of careers being needlessly delayed because of this dumb rule.
Name me one highly touted prospect that was possibly ruined by spending too much time in juniors.

Gonzothe7thDman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 02:08 PM
  #9
seemlessglass
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: a town called malice
Country: United States
Posts: 1,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman094 View Post
With the Bruins having several prospects in various stages of development, I'm curious to see what people think of in terms of the differences of developing a player in the OHL vs the AHL. People talk about Hamilton going back to the OHL for a year, do you think he will go to providence after that?


Had Seguin not stayed on the Bruins roster this past year, do you think his development would have been better served by going back to the OHL or getting more minutes in providence?


It seems to me that the AHL more closely resembles the NHL in terms of how they game is played and the disparity between the players. In the OHL you have people like Hall and Seguin who were lighting it up without too much concerns on the defensive side of things.


On a side note, how important of a role do you think Bruce Cassidy will have in Providence in continuing to foster and develop the talent currently on the team? With several UFA's coming up next year, the Bruins really need some AHL's to step up their game this year.
Being from Central MA it's hard to get a read on the Canadian Junior System vs the AHL where NE has a bunch of teams. I would think that the Junior system would be decimated if teams were allowed to take kids at 18 from the junior team and place them directly in the AHL. The problem is the kid that has gotten all he can out of the junior system but can't make the NHL directly. He basically wastes a year and picks up bad habits in a league that maybe too easy for him. Allowing the kid 10 games in the NHL in theory gives them a chance but really what do you find out about the kid in such a short span of time. Usally that the kid's not ready. I'm all for keeping the junior system alive in Canada maybe they should just make it so the kid can't play in the NHL until after they turn 19. I'm sure some lawyer would love that.

seemlessglass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 02:15 PM
  #10
Bizarro Bandwagoner
Registered User
 
Bizarro Bandwagoner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 3,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzothe7thDman View Post
Name me one highly touted prospect that was possibly ruined by spending too much time in juniors.
Needlessly delayed = ruined?

I'm not saying it's hurting anyone in the long term, I'm saying it's a waste of time for the elite.

Bizarro Bandwagoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 03:12 PM
  #11
Turk 16
Registered User
 
Turk 16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: South Shore, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
I knew about the AHL-CHL agreement re. age requirements. But I was puzzled as to why Bergeron was allowed to play in the AHL during the lockout year at age 19. Did he get a waiver or something because he'd already spent a season in the NHL? Just curious.







WAY TO GO BRUINS!!!

Turk 16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 03:16 PM
  #12
Dom - OHL
http://ohlwriters.co
 
Dom - OHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stratford, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,225
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Dom - OHL
I'd say it's more coaching than the CHL vs AHL for development. There are coaches in the OHL that are superior to most AHL coaches in terms of developing prospects, Steve Spott and Mark Hunter just to name two.

I would argue that Jared Knight was better served playing another year under Hunter last year to better develop his all around game (which he did from beginning to end) than he would have been playing in what was sometimes a disaster in Providence.

I could say the same about Tyler Randell who is older than Spooner or Knight, that he was better served in becoming a more complete player playing under Spott in Kitchener for one more year than he would have been in Providence.

There's a reason why NHL teams want their European draft picks to come over and play in the CHL as opposed to staying in Europe and in some cases playing against men: Yes, in part to become acclimatized to the North American game but the other reason is the CHL is loaded with coaches that are perfect for developing prospects.

Dom - OHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 03:41 PM
  #13
SpitfireIX
Registered User
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Grenville, Qc.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman094 View Post
With the Bruins having several prospects in various stages of development, I'm curious to see what people think of in terms of the differences of developing a player in the OHL vs the AHL. People talk about Hamilton going back to the OHL for a year, do you think he will go to providence after that?


Had Seguin not stayed on the Bruins roster this past year, do you think his development would have been better served by going back to the OHL or getting more minutes in providence?


It seems to me that the AHL more closely resembles the NHL in terms of how they game is played and the disparity between the players. In the OHL you have people like Hall and Seguin who were lighting it up without too much concerns on the defensive side of things.


On a side note, how important of a role do you think Bruce Cassidy will have in Providence in continuing to foster and develop the talent currently on the team? With several UFA's coming up next year, the Bruins really need some AHL's to step up their game this year.
Depends on the prospects age. A player needs to dominate wherever he is and if he isin't he needs to be pushed to. For a teenager the OHL or CHL is better, unless they have already dominated the league.

SpitfireIX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 04:53 PM
  #14
UConn126
Bass Player.
 
UConn126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: West Hartford, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 3,678
vCash: 500
I think it would be cool if NHL teams had a CHL affiliate, like say the Bruins could have a relationship not only with Providence in the AHL, but also a team like Saint John in the QMJHL (just picked a random team). That way, a team's junior prospects could play together and develop together in the same system. Of course, like the AHL, not every player on the affiliated roster would be property of the NHL team, as that would close spaces for under 18 kids on those teams. I doubt this will ever happen, too, but I just think it would be cool if guys like Knight, Spooner, Hamilton, Koko, Cunningham, etc could all play on the same team in the CHL.

UConn126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2011, 04:57 PM
  #15
BNHL
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 12,520
vCash: 500
Something like 84% of NHL players do AHL time.

BNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 11:59 AM
  #16
5 minutes a Knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mendon/Greenfield NH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,167
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 5 minutes a Knight
Both

5 minutes a Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 04:22 PM
  #17
PlayMakers
Hockey's Future Staff
 
PlayMakers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellesley, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,356
vCash: 500
I always thought the best solution here would be to move the draft age to 19.

It would actually raise the level of play in Jr's because the handful of Halls, Seguins, Skinners and Fowlers of the world would remain in the league for another year.

It would allow teams to take their prospects and move them right into their own system, AHL, ECHL or NHL.

It would take some of the random luck out of the draft, with an extra year of evaluation time.

You'd probably get a dozen players out of the 1st round each year that could jump right to the NHL, as opposed to just 2 or 3. And that would provide a much quicker turnaround for teams finishing at the bottom of the standings, giving them viable NHL players, potential impact players, right away. Heck, that would even make the draft more of a must-see event, much like the NFL draft.

__________________
PlayMakers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 05:37 PM
  #18
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,242
vCash: 500
I am thoroughly convinced that the best course of action is completely dependant on the individual player themselves and the team they would be returned to in Junior. If they were to return to a less than stellar Junior team, with little to no chance to compete for the League Championship or the Memorial Cup, I have to wonder if that, in fact is a year where a player can develop and grow outside of physically.

Either way, each player is different, and I am not nearly schooled enough at the art of player development to make this call 100%. I was totally on board with Seguin remaining a Bruin, I didn`t EVER envision him as a guy who`d be getting 15-18 mins a night. Outside of 2nd unit PP time which I think would have been good for him, he got pretty much what I had thought he would.

I was hoping for 30-40pts as a great year 1, he didn`t get that but I, in no way consider year 1, on a Cup winning team will hinder his growth that`s for sure.

ODAAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 05:38 PM
  #19
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ladd View Post
I always thought the best solution here would be to move the draft age to 19.

It would actually raise the level of play in Jr's because the handful of Halls, Seguins, Skinners and Fowlers of the world would remain in the league for another year.

It would allow teams to take their prospects and move them right into their own system, AHL, ECHL or NHL.

It would take some of the random luck out of the draft, with an extra year of evaluation time.

You'd probably get a dozen players out of the 1st round each year that could jump right to the NHL, as opposed to just 2 or 3. And that would provide a much quicker turnaround for teams finishing at the bottom of the standings, giving them viable NHL players, potential impact players, right away. Heck, that would even make the draft more of a must-see event, much like the NFL draft.

Junior A club Owner`s would love ya Bill, keep the kids who are bound for the NHL in their uniforms in a local rink for one more year, as you well know, it`s one heck of a tough business in Junior hockey to make money or even break even.

Although I would love to see NHL teams be permitted to keep up to 2 "tweeners" guys who could play Junior but who are put in the AHL, sort of like the overage rule in the OHL (not sure if it`s CHL wide) regarding each team being permitted I think 2??

ODAAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 05:44 PM
  #20
Looch
B's, C's & Sox
 
Looch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Gilford, NH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ladd View Post
I always thought the best solution here would be to move the draft age to 19.

It would actually raise the level of play in Jr's because the handful of Halls, Seguins, Skinners and Fowlers of the world would remain in the league for another year.

It would allow teams to take their prospects and move them right into their own system, AHL, ECHL or NHL.

It would take some of the random luck out of the draft, with an extra year of evaluation time.

You'd probably get a dozen players out of the 1st round each year that could jump right to the NHL, as opposed to just 2 or 3. And that would provide a much quicker turnaround for teams finishing at the bottom of the standings, giving them viable NHL players, potential impact players, right away. Heck, that would even make the draft more of a must-see event, much like the NFL draft.

Was about to post the same thing (in my long winded way) prior to reader your reply.

This is spot on.

__________________
BuddysTickets@gmail.com
Looch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 06:00 PM
  #21
Rocko604
Registered User
 
Rocko604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ladd View Post
I always thought the best solution here would be to move the draft age to 19.

It would actually raise the level of play in Jr's because the handful of Halls, Seguins, Skinners and Fowlers of the world would remain in the league for another year.

It would allow teams to take their prospects and move them right into their own system, AHL, ECHL or NHL.

It would take some of the random luck out of the draft, with an extra year of evaluation time.

You'd probably get a dozen players out of the 1st round each year that could jump right to the NHL, as opposed to just 2 or 3. And that would provide a much quicker turnaround for teams finishing at the bottom of the standings, giving them viable NHL players, potential impact players, right away. Heck, that would even make the draft more of a must-see event, much like the NFL draft.
I've been wanting to see them move up the draft age to 19 for a while now, pretty much for all the reasons you mentioned.

Rocko604 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 06:03 PM
  #22
Rookie Chargers
Registered User
 
Rookie Chargers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Azores
Posts: 7,751
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Rookie Chargers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman094 View Post
With the Bruins having several prospects in various stages of development, I'm curious to see what people think of in terms of the differences of developing a player in the OHL vs the AHL. People talk about Hamilton going back to the OHL for a year, do you think he will go to providence after that?


Had Seguin not stayed on the Bruins roster this past year, do you think his development would have been better served by going back to the OHL or getting more minutes in providence?


It seems to me that the AHL more closely resembles the NHL in terms of how they game is played and the disparity between the players. In the OHL you have people like Hall and Seguin who were lighting it up without too much concerns on the defensive side of things.


On a side note, how important of a role do you think Bruce Cassidy will have in Providence in continuing to foster and develop the talent currently on the team? With several UFA's coming up next year, the Bruins really need some AHL's to step up their game this year.
I am not sure without his 2 game scoring spree we win the Cup.

Rookie Chargers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 06:05 PM
  #23
dredeye
BJ Elitist/Hipster
 
dredeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizarro Bandwagoner View Post
Every team should be able to place one junior aged played on their AHL roster. Losing 30 players across the entire CHL isn't going to have a big impact on any of those leagues.

Bobby Ryan wasted at least one season playing in the OHL when he really should have been developing in the AHL.

Seguin could have used some time in Providence this past season. There are many examples of careers being needlessly delayed because of this dumb rule.
You say this as though Bobby Ryan is a bust. Maybe that extra year helped him develop his game before playing against men. IMO they should have done the same with Seguin.

dredeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 06:06 PM
  #24
Rookie Chargers
Registered User
 
Rookie Chargers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Azores
Posts: 7,751
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Rookie Chargers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko604 View Post
I've been wanting to see them move up the draft age to 19 for a while now, pretty much for all the reasons you mentioned.
Before this CBA wasn't there talk of pushing back the draft age by months at a time until 19?

The right to earn a living comes into play here but hockey to me is not a regular job.

Rookie Chargers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2011, 06:12 PM
  #25
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rookie Chargers View Post
Before this CBA wasn't there talk of pushing back the draft age by months at a time until 19?

The right to earn a living comes into play here but hockey to me is not a regular job.
The right to earn a living for "regular" folks doesn`t begin until one has completed 4 years of University.

I won`t shed any tears if a young man of 18 is forced to wait 365 days to become a near millionaire.

ODAAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.