HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Prospects
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Prospects Discuss hockey prospects from all over the world and the NHL Draft.

League ranking?? WHL/OHL/AHL/QMJHL/NCAA

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-17-2007, 05:51 PM
  #51
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaLaLaprise View Post
VOB...how does Team Canada U20 not represent the best of the league??? Its the best players in the CHL aged 16-19...yes, you cant include euro's, US players and 20 year olds but I still think thats an accurate measure.

Also the point I was trying to make on that was how big of a factor age is.
First off, it is common knowledge that many of the "shoe in" players for Team Canada (ie the absolute best) usually sit out the exhibition games against the CIS allstars and that the CIS teams heavily rely on their CHL goalies to make the games competative.

Secondly there are many Americans and Europeans who certainly would be considered amoung the best in the CHL. How good would Team Canada have been with players like Mueller, Kane, Hanzal and Ryan to name a few?

Every year the CHL has any where from 40 to 50 players represented in the WJC tourney, far far more than any other league or system.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 06:24 PM
  #52
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 9,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
B.C.'s average age is less than 21, similiar to that of Minnesota. Last year they were even younger (youngest in the NCAA) with an average age of 20 yet they made it to the finals both years.
You're missing the point.

The younger teams in the NCAA (BC, UND, MN, UM) have the talent to overcome the age difference b/c their stocked full with draft picks. You ignore the fact that no singe CHL squad has the talent those young NCAA squads have either......the talent in the CHL is more spread out.
The better players in the CHL could easily play in the NCAA, however your 'average' CHLer does not possess the talent to overcome the age difference. Notice that only the quality 1987/88 born players are good enough to make an impact in the NCAA. Your average '87/'88 is not.

That's the difference and that's where CHL teams would really run into problems if they played an NCAA squad.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 06:29 PM
  #53
RUSqueelin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
You're missing the point.

The younger teams in the NCAA (BC, UND, MN, UM) have the talent to overcome the age difference b/c their stocked full with draft picks. You ignore the fact that no singe CHL squad has the talent those young NCAA squads have either......the talent in the CHL is more spread out.
The better players in the CHL could easily play in the NCAA, however your 'average' CHLer does not possess the talent to overcome the age difference. Notice that only the quality 1987/88 born players are good enough to make an impact in the NCAA. Your average '87/'88 is not.

That's the difference and that's where CHL teams would really run into problems if they played an NCAA squad.
Isn't that what pro CHL people say? - better talent in CHL overcomes slight age difference in NCAA. But you and others have disagreed with that argument.

RUSqueelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 07:19 PM
  #54
Maineiac11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lewiston, ME
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
Age is the huge factor between the NCAA and CHL.

The fact that the CHL players are even near to the level of the NCAA players is pretty amazing.

Like stated before, the average age of NCAA players is prob 21 after playing H.S. prep and redshirting a year.

The average age of the CHL player is 18.

The CHL player is at a far higher level (on average) than the players in the NCAA were at that same age (18) three years prior. With the style of play in the NHL being an alot faster paced, skating/ finesse game, you will start to see players retiring alot earlier than the past 20 years. The 30-40 yr old players will be a thing of the past. By the time an NCAA player graduates (at 23 or 24) hones his skills in the AHL (with the exception of the rare few), for a couple years, they now enter the NHL at 25 or 26.

On the other hand, the CHL player can be drafted at 18, the NHL team can decide whether to let him mature more in the CHL until 20, give them a NHL tryout, or send them to the ECHL (AA below the AHL if you will). I see a tremendous upside to this.
(I'm pretty sure you have to be 20 or older to play AHL)

To me the CHL player has a much better upside, since they still have more years to develop and mature, as well as give the team GM's more options on what direction to give the player.

Go Maineiacs..

Maineiac11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 07:36 PM
  #55
LaLaLaprise
lalalaprise -twitter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
First off, it is common knowledge that many of the "shoe in" players for Team Canada (ie the absolute best) usually sit out the exhibition games against the CIS allstars and that the CIS teams heavily rely on their CHL goalies to make the games competative.

Secondly there are many Americans and Europeans who certainly would be considered amoung the best in the CHL. How good would Team Canada have been with players like Mueller, Kane, Hanzal and Ryan to name a few?

Every year the CHL has any where from 40 to 50 players represented in the WJC tourney, far far more than any other league or system.
Mostly because the NCAA has older players...if a leagues average age is older than the World Junior age limit than I dont think its fair to compare NCAA vs CHL players at the World Juniors.

All I am saying is that age does make a difference. Even a 2-3 year age gap does. A 23 year old playing CIS is no where near as talented as a top 19 year old that is on Team Canada U20...but when they go head to head the older players dont get dominated, despite less talent and long term potential.

LaLaLaprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 07:52 PM
  #56
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
You're missing the point.

The younger teams in the NCAA (BC, UND, MN, UM) have the talent to overcome the age difference b/c their stocked full with draft picks. You ignore the fact that no singe CHL squad has the talent those young NCAA squads have either......the talent in the CHL is more spread out.
The better players in the CHL could easily play in the NCAA, however your 'average' CHLer does not possess the talent to overcome the age difference. Notice that only the quality 1987/88 born players are good enough to make an impact in the NCAA. Your average '87/'88 is not.

That's the difference and that's where CHL teams would really run into problems if they played an NCAA squad.
The average CHLer can play in the NCAA.

The Vancouver Giants currently have 8 players drafted and will further have another 6 drafted this June. That will be a total of 14 drafted players. The Plymouth Whalers currently have 8 drafted players and will have at least 2 more come draft day.

The current NCAA champions, MSU (who by the way I was very happy to see win it),are a measly 1.5 years older than the Plymouth Whalers and feature less draft picks.

I have seen both MSU and UofM play more than 1/2 a dozen times this year (live). I have seen both London and Plymouth several times and I can tell you with 100% certainty that either one of those two clubs could easily compete with MSU or Michigan.

Ask other posters like Juan, who actually see both CHL and NCAA games on a regular basis (unlike so many other posters here) their opinions on the matter.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 07:58 PM
  #57
toastman344*
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,354
vCash: 500
There have been plenty of years that CIS/CIS all star teams have been absolutely rocked by those trying out for our U20 Nats to the tune of like 8-1, 7-1 etc

in some of the close games our U20 goalies often played net for both teams

split squads from the Q, OHL and WHL have also been quite dominant verse Russian Select Juniors...those Russians have never beaten either the OHL or the WHL All Stars

Why is it so many more NHL stars come from the CHL than from the NCAA ???

toastman344* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:27 PM
  #58
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
The average CHLer can play in the NCAA.

The Vancouver Giants currently have 8 players drafted and will further have another 6 drafted this June. That will be a total of 14 drafted players. The Plymouth Whalers currently have 8 drafted players and will have at least 2 more come draft day.

The current NCAA champions, MSU (who by the way I was very happy to see win it),are a measly 1.5 years older than the Plymouth Whalers and feature less draft picks.

I have seen both MSU and UofM play more than 1/2 a dozen times this year (live). I have seen both London and Plymouth several times and I can tell you with 100% certainty that either one of those two clubs could easily compete with MSU or Michigan.

Ask other posters like Juan, who actually see both CHL and NCAA games on a regular basis (unlike so many other posters here) their opinions on the matter.
You argue 1.5 and 2 years difference. I started at defensive tackle in HS over two players currently in the NFL. I was 2 years older. That was the difference between DIII for me and a full ride scholarship for them. Just 2 years of devolpment. I was stronger and smarter with better technique.

Eight players drafted. NoDaK last year had Lee, Chourney, Zajac, Smaby, Stafford, Oshie, Finley, and later that year Towes. All first and second rounders. Plus 4 other drafted players. For a total of 12. Or the gophers this year. EJ, Wheeler, Frazee, Okposo, Goligoski, Fischer, Stoa, soon to be O'Brien. Again just 1-2 rounders. Plus 6 more draft picks. Thats 13 drafted plus O'Brien. So the numbers of drafted players are simular. The number picked has to favor the NCAA teams. And one team is older. If they are = in picks. Wouldn't the older team then be better on numbers alone?

As far as watching. The gophers 5 years ago looked better than the Wild if you saw both teams live. A friend of mine(foreign exchange student) thought the gophers were better. I had to tell him the game would not even be close.

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:32 PM
  #59
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLS View Post
Why is it so many more NHL stars come from the CHL than from the NCAA ???

Shattucks Saint Marys has produced first rounders Parise, Stafford, Crosby, J. Johnson, Okposo, Toews to name a few and soon Esposito. So is Shatuucks better than any team that cannot boast a history like that in the last few years?

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:44 PM
  #60
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
You argue 1.5 and 2 years difference. I started at defensive tackle in HS over two players currently in the NFL. I was 2 years older. That was the difference between DIII for me and a full ride scholarship for them. Just 2 years of devolpment. I was stronger and smarter with better technique.

Eight players drafted. NoDaK last year had Lee, Chourney, Zajac, Smaby, Stafford, Oshie, Finley, and later that year Towes. All first and second rounders. Plus 4 other drafted players. For a total of 12. Or the gophers this year. EJ, Wheeler, Frazee, Okposo, Goligoski, Fischer, Stoa, soon to be O'Brien. Again just 1-2 rounders. Plus 6 more draft picks. Thats 13 drafted plus O'Brien. So the numbers of drafted players are simular. The number picked has to favor the NCAA teams. And one team is older. If they are = in picks. Wouldn't the older team then be better on numbers alone?

As far as watching. The gophers 5 years ago looked better than the Wild if you saw both teams live. A friend of mine(foreign exchange student) thought the gophers were better. I had to tell him the game would not even be close.
I would expect a foreign exchange student to not know the difference but I know two sports very well Goph...boxing and hockey and I can tell the difference between how teams and players perform and I am telling you Plymouth would have no problem with the Spartans.

So NoDak has twelve players drafted while the Giants will have 14 at the end of the year...point is that there isn't a whole whack of difference in talent level.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:45 PM
  #61
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maineiac11 View Post
Age is the huge factor between the NCAA and CHL.

The fact that the CHL players are even near to the level of the NCAA players is pretty amazing.

Like stated before, the average age of NCAA players is prob 21 after playing H.S. prep and redshirting a year.

The average age of the CHL player is 18.

The CHL player is at a far higher level (on average) than the players in the NCAA were at that same age (18) three years prior. With the style of play in the NHL being an alot faster paced, skating/ finesse game, you will start to see players retiring alot earlier than the past 20 years. The 30-40 yr old players will be a thing of the past. By the time an NCAA player graduates (at 23 or 24) hones his skills in the AHL (with the exception of the rare few), for a couple years, they now enter the NHL at 25 or 26.

On the other hand, the CHL player can be drafted at 18, the NHL team can decide whether to let him mature more in the CHL until 20, give them a NHL tryout, or send them to the ECHL (AA below the AHL if you will). I see a tremendous upside to this.
(I'm pretty sure you have to be 20 or older to play AHL)

To me the CHL player has a much better upside, since they still have more years to develop and mature, as well as give the team GM's more options on what direction to give the player.

Go Maineiacs..
Why do teams then leave NCAA players there and take CHL players out early. If the NCAA so so inferior they would make sure they could sign players on draft day so they do not loose years of devolpment.

In about 5 years when EJ, JJ, Kessel, Wheeler, Towes, Oshie, Chourney, Fischer, Parise, Vanek, Bochenski, Eaves, Stuart, Suter, Carle, Backes, Montoya, Stafford, Schneider, Zajac, Skille, Cogliano, Niskanen, Stastny, Pavelski, Okposo and many many more. All 2003 drafted and later. Then we can look back and have our answers.

Nigel Williams could not break into the WI line up, was not good enough. Puts up 36 points in 46 games in the OHL. Yet the OHL is a tougher league. I guess Eaves knows nothing about talent.

The NCAA has blown up since the year 2000.

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:46 PM
  #62
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
So NoDak has twelve players drafted while the Giants will have 14 at the end of the year...point is that there isn't a whole whack of difference in talent level.

Add in the 2 years difference or do and there is still no difference then? I do math and it does not add up.

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 08:54 PM
  #63
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Why do teams then leave NCAA players there and take CHL players out early. If the NCAA so so inferior they would make sure they could sign players on draft day so they do not loose years of devolpment.

In about 5 years when EJ, JJ, Kessel, Wheeler, Towes, Oshie, Chourney, Fischer, Parise, Vanek, Bochenski, Eaves, Stuart, Suter, Carle, Backes, Montoya, Stafford, Schneider, Zajac, Skille, Cogliano, Niskanen, Stastny, Pavelski, Okposo and many many more. All 2003 drafted and later. Then we can look back and have our answers.

Nigel Williams could not break into the WI line up, was not good enough. Puts up 36 points in 46 games in the OHL. Yet the OHL is a tougher league. I guess Eaves knows nothing about talent.

The NCAA has blown up since the year 2000.

Teams take CHL players out early because they are ready to play pro hockey not because there is anything wrong with the way they develop in the CHL.

Why did the Kings want to sign T. Lewis and then have him play in the OHL as opposed to letting him to go to Michigan for one year????

Take a look at the draft since 2003...far more CHL players drafted than those from the NCAA. Take a look at this year's up coming draft...most of the high end talent will be from the CHL. Take a peek into the future....yup you guesed it, the CHL will lead the way.


Williams was not given much of a chance at Wisconsin and he butted heads with Eaves. There is no doubt in my mind that other WCHA teams like St CLoud, Tech, Duluth ect would have loved to have him but NCAA transfer rules prohibited such a scenerio.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 09:02 PM
  #64
RUSqueelin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Why do teams then leave NCAA players there and take CHL players out early. If the NCAA so so inferior they would make sure they could sign players on draft day so they do not loose years of devolpment.

.
Talk about twisting some facts just for the sake of it. So maybe I'll do the same.

If a CHL player leaves to play in the NHL = equals negative?

Teams can leave NCAA players and don't have to sign them until they finish compared to CHL having a 2 year limit. But I bet if you asked any GM, they say they would much rather that player play in a league that is better prepared to prepare them for the NHL - in terms of games played, style etc. I've heard a few hockey people suggest that Jack Johnson has slowed his development by staying in College. Most of the players that stay in for 4 years of NCAA are the ones who don't make in show anyways.

RUSqueelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 09:21 PM
  #65
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
I know two sports very well Goph...boxing and hockey and I can tell the difference between how teams and players perform and I am telling you Plymouth would have no problem with the Spartans.
Yes i know you know your talent. Thats why when we bet who was going to be better in 4 years. You had Jeff Carter and i had one of Thomas Vanek, Keith Ballrd or Paul Martin. Think your talent crystal ball is starting to blurr on you.

How were you going to pay me any how? I think i won.

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 09:42 PM
  #66
SPORTSMANIAC
Registered User
 
SPORTSMANIAC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lewiston, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,588
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SPORTSMANIAC
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Shattucks Saint Marys has produced first rounders Parise, Stafford, Crosby, J. Johnson, Okposo, Toews to name a few and soon Esposito. So is Shatuucks better than any team that cannot boast a history like that in the last few years?
I know Shattuck produced more talent but the Lewiston Maineiacs is the only organization to produce three 1st rounders in 3 consective years. But on the other hand Shattuck is the unofficial leader if all their talent stayed until their draft year.

SPORTSMANIAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 10:58 PM
  #67
Maineiac11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lewiston, ME
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
The NCAA has blown up since the year 2000.

The NCAA has definately put out some tremendous talent in the past ten years, i agree.

Another thing to consider is the fact that there are about 60 CHL teams that all have equal chances at getting good prospects through thier midget drafts.

On the other hand.. there are maybe 10 top notch NCAA teams each year that siphon all the top recruits away from all the other schools in the US.

So all these great american stars get put with one another among 10 teams while all the Canadien talent is pretty evenly spread among 60 teams.

Am I making sense?

Maineiac11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2007, 11:50 PM
  #68
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 9,240
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Shattucks Saint Marys has produced first rounders Parise, Stafford, Crosby, J. Johnson, Okposo, Toews to name a few and soon Esposito. So is Shatuucks better than any team that cannot boast a history like that in the last few years?
Canadians like Crosby & Toews mainly choose Shattucks for the opportunity to play age advanced high school hockey, & to keep his options open in Toews case'. Both were elite level players when they arrived there. To claim Crosby as some sort of a local Minnesota success story is pretty far fetched when you consider that he only parked there for a short stint prior to joining the QMJHL. Canada produced Crosby, not Shattucks.

Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 04:02 AM
  #69
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Yes i know you know your talent. Thats why when we bet who was going to be better in 4 years. You had Jeff Carter and i had one of Thomas Vanek, Keith Ballrd or Paul Martin. Think your talent crystal ball is starting to blurr on you.

How were you going to pay me any how? I think i won.
Carter has only been in the NHL for two years and has been plagued by injuries. Yes Vanek had a great year but I believe the bet was posted two years ago and I said that we will see who is the better player between the two after five years.

If Carter flops next year, even due to injuries/sickness, and Vanek has another great year then yes you win.

As for judging talent, well sorry Goph but the CHL as far more of it in the NHL compared to college hockey and that is just a fact.

As for Plymouth vs Michigan State...well how many times have you seen either play???? Yeah thats what I thought!

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 08:45 AM
  #70
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
Carter has only been in the NHL for two years and has been plagued by injuries. Yes Vanek had a great year but I believe the bet was posted two years ago and I said that we will see who is the better player between the two after five years.

If Carter flops next year, even due to injuries/sickness, and Vanek has another great year then yes you win.

As for judging talent, well sorry Goph but the CHL as far more of it in the NHL compared to college hockey and that is just a fact.

As for Plymouth vs Michigan State...well how many times have you seen either play???? Yeah thats what I thought!
Shattuck Saint Marys has put more players in the NHL than Alaska Anchorage and has more higher draft picks. But if AA played Shattucks. Who wins?

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 09:22 AM
  #71
nags
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
Canadians like Crosby & Toews mainly choose Shattucks for the opportunity to play age advanced high school hockey, & to keep his options open in Toews case'. Both were elite level players when they arrived there. To claim Crosby as some sort of a local Minnesota success story is pretty far fetched when you consider that he only parked there for a short stint prior to joining the QMJHL. Canada produced Crosby, not Shattucks.
I can assure you that Minnesota had very little to do with Toews' development prior to getting to Shattuck unless you count those summer tournaments where he destroyed Mueller, Okposo et al. I think the GM's on draft day had a giant brain fart when they picked EJ over Toews and Staal.

nags is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 04:00 PM
  #72
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Shattuck Saint Marys has put more players in the NHL than Alaska Anchorage and has more higher draft picks. But if AA played Shattucks. Who wins?
Shattucks usually has zero draft picks playing for them and those who are eventually selected are at least a year removed from the program....very poor example in trying to compare a prep highschool team to a CHL club.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 04:16 PM
  #73
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
Shattucks usually has zero draft picks playing for them and those who are eventually selected are at least a year removed from the program....very poor example in trying to compare a prep highschool team to a CHL club.
Its an age thing. You bring up the NHL. Those same NHLers were not always better than the rest of the world. Crosby in the 1990 season was not even in pre-school. Cam Stewart was playing for Michagen. Who was better? And who was better the next year. At some point Crosby over took him. My question is at what age then? At 14 would Crosby have dominated the AHL or NHL like he is now. Or would he have gotten hurt. SSM will have a better NHL squad than AA will. But who wins in that year that they played, AA would. The u20 do not feature the best the NCAA has to offer. It does feature the best the CHL has to offer for the most part. Better future talent does not insure superior talent every year when dealing with ages across the board.


Teen hockey players are not as good as 20 year old hockey players of comprable skill. If you dispute genetics your an idiot.

MN_Gopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 04:24 PM
  #74
RUSqueelin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,061
vCash: 500
why the heck is anyone comparing a group of 15 year old kids to a college team?

RUSqueelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2007, 05:14 PM
  #75
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher View Post
Its an age thing. You bring up the NHL. Those same NHLers were not always better than the rest of the world. Crosby in the 1990 season was not even in pre-school. Cam Stewart was playing for Michagen. Who was better? And who was better the next year. At some point Crosby over took him. My question is at what age then? At 14 would Crosby have dominated the AHL or NHL like he is now. Or would he have gotten hurt. SSM will have a better NHL squad than AA will. But who wins in that year that they played, AA would. The u20 do not feature the best the NCAA has to offer. It does feature the best the CHL has to offer for the most part. Better future talent does not insure superior talent every year when dealing with ages across the board.


Teen hockey players are not as good as 20 year old hockey players of comprable skill. If you dispute genetics your an idiot.

Idiot?

I am not comapring 15 year old prep players (Toews and Esposito were) to college kids....you are

Crosby at 16 could have easily played in the NCAA against 24 year old slugs from AA and done well.

The problem is that you do not have comparable talent in the NCAA to the CHL. You have a few stacked teams in maybe three conferences and then a huge drop off in depth.

The Soo Greyhounds this year could have easily played against LSSU, Ferris, B.G. Tech and even Northern Michigan....but then again you wouldn't know because you probably only saw one of those teams I mentioned.

Plymouth can easily play with MSU....again you wouldn't know because you have never seen Plymouth play and only saw MSU on T.V.

Go back to reading your glossy magazines in the bathroom and watch who you call an idiot goofer fan!

VOB 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 03:14 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.