We need to remember that he was a 22nd overall pick not a Top 10 or Top 15. Unless you get a bit lucky, guys in that range usually need some time to develop.
He was top 10 on a lot of lists. Ninth on the THN list, which is usually the most accurate gage of where a player will be drafted. (Invariably, one or two players slip each year, and Schroeder was the guy who slipped in 2009).
He slipped because of his size. He's 5'8". The only way he gets bigger is if his listing gets bigger. He'll play at 5'8" in the show. (Teams tend to exaggerate the listed heights of players. If you believe Marty St. Louis is 5'9", you'll love the ocean front property here in Saskatchewan that I have for you).
Most of the guys in the 13-21 range who were picked ahead of Schroeder are guys who were rated below Schroeder. David Rundblad is probably the last guy picked ahead of Schroeder who was ahead of Schroeder on most lists.
Now, there is something to be said about guys who slip on draft day. In most cases, there's a reason that guys drop considerably. And we've learned that the hard way in a couple of cases. Jason Herter was expected to be a top 3 pick in 89. We got him at 8. Josh Holden was supposed to be a top 5 pick in 96. We got him at 12. That's not to say that Schroeder is the next Josh Holden. I don't think he is. But when a guy slips about 10 spots on Draft Day, there usually is a reason. I think Schroeder will play. And he'll score in The Show.
But just because he was taken 22nd, doesn't mean he was in the 21-30 range on most scouts lists.
He was top 10 on a lot of lists. Ninth on the THN list, which is usually the most accurate gage of where a player will be drafted. (Invariably, one or two players slip each year, and Schroeder was the guy who slipped in 2009).
He slipped because of his size. He's 5'8". The only way he gets bigger is if his listing gets bigger. He'll play at 5'8" in the show. (Teams tend to exaggerate the listed heights of players. If you believe Marty St. Louis is 5'9", you'll love the ocean front property here in Saskatchewan that I have for you).
Most of the guys in the 13-21 range who were picked ahead of Schroeder are guys who were rated below Schroeder. David Rundblad is probably the last guy picked ahead of Schroeder who was ahead of Schroeder on most lists.
Now, there is something to be said about guys who slip on draft day. In most cases, there's a reason that guys drop considerably. And we've learned that the hard way in a couple of cases. Jason Herter was expected to be a top 3 pick in 89. We got him at 8. Josh Holden was supposed to be a top 5 pick in 96. We got him at 12. That's not to say that Schroeder is the next Josh Holden. I don't think he is. But when a guy slips about 10 spots on Draft Day, there usually is a reason. I think Schroeder will play. And he'll score in The Show.
But just because he was taken 22nd, doesn't mean he was in the 21-30 range on most scouts lists.
The size argument doesn't really work anymore, Ryan Ellis 5'9 D man was taken early, NHL teams aren't really scared of taking small players these days.
The reason why Schroeder fell was because of his perceived attitude problems.
The size argument doesn't really work anymore, Ryan Ellis 5'9 D man was taken early, NHL teams aren't really scared of taking small players these days.
The reason why Schroeder fell was because of his perceived attitude problems.
You've actually shown that size does matter with you're example. If Ryan Ellis was even 6' he would have probably gone top 3. This year is a perfect example. Mikael Granlund is a top 5 talent but is probably going to slip into the late first round because of his size. Likewise Jordan Weal isn't even ranked in the first round by most scouting services even though he has put up 100 points in the whl as a draft eligible player on a terrible team, because he's Schroeder's size but not as built.
Tell that to all of the European players who come over from the bigger ice with very well developed skills.
Forwards yes, defensemen, not necessarily.
The obstruction / interference penalties now in the NHL mean that the forecheckers are on top of defensemen much quicker than prior to the lockout. On a big ice surface, with a more lenient interference standard, defensemen have more time and space to either make the first pass or carry the puck out of the zone.
In the NHL now, with the post 2004 standard of enforcement on interference, defensemen have to move the puck much quicker.
If you want to see an example of this, get a tape of the Canada - Russia game from the Olympics.
"But he had a great world junior tournament with eight points in seven games, including a goal in Team USA's 6-5 overtime win against Canada, and is the U.S.'s all-time leading scorer in junior international play with 27 points, including 20 goals, over three tournaments."
Sounds like he might've regretted going back to college this year, especially with the way he lacked proper teammates the first half of the season.
He wanted things to turn out differently but oh well.
When Mason Raymond was at UMD. They sucked. Finished 9th both years he was there. With anual bottom feeders Anchorage and Tech thats a tough one to manage.
Raymond battled every night. Worked hard. was asked to do things he was maybe not ready for. Log lots of ice time. First PKer and PPer. He had to have known they were going to terrible again after his first year. But he stayed and worked even harder.
I am sure you guys are happy with that product. Schroeder same thing. Better he learn you cannot win them all on some one elses time than in VAN.
I will be shocked if Schroeder does not wow people for the Moose. He gets a new start in the same season. He will take advantage.
The obstruction / interference penalties now in the NHL mean that the forecheckers are on top of defensemen much quicker than prior to the lockout. On a big ice surface, with a more lenient interference standard, defensemen have more time and space to either make the first pass or carry the puck out of the zone.
In the NHL now, with the post 2004 standard of enforcement on interference, defensemen have to move the puck much quicker.
If you want to see an example of this, get a tape of the Canada - Russia game from the Olympics.
I never said that they maybe still have to adjust a bit to a more physical game, and one with less time, their skills are still there though, they just have to learn how to do them quicker.
You've actually shown that size does matter with you're example. If Ryan Ellis was even 6' he would have probably gone top 3. This year is a perfect example. Mikael Granlund is a top 5 talent but is probably going to slip into the late first round because of his size. Likewise Jordan Weal isn't even ranked in the first round by most scouting services even though he has put up 100 points in the whl as a draft eligible player on a terrible team, because he's Schroeder's size but not as built.
How do you know if Ellis was taller he would have gone top 3, I somehow doubt that was a factor, yes Ellis is very good offensivley, but he still needs work on his defense, take a bigger similar D man from a couple of drafts prior, Kevin Shattenkirk a very offensively gifted D man with leadership qualities, yet he wen't even lower than Ellis.
Granlund and Weal are the same size, both are similar players, yet Weal is a better skater than Granlund, yet it's Granlund who is getting all the hype, doesn't really make sense, the only advantages I can see Granlund having are he maybe has better hands than Weal, and is a better competitor, but you would think that Weal's skating would make up for that. Anyhow I digress, if Granlund really is as good as advertised, he won't fall because of his size, it's because of his skating and his recent play as he has seemed to have been playing more on the perimiter.
"But he had a great world junior tournament with eight points in seven games, including a goal in Team USA's 6-5 overtime win against Canada, and is the U.S.'s all-time leading scorer in junior international play with 27 points, including 20 goals, over three tournaments."
If a player is 18 or 19 and plays ten NHL games (regular season and play-offs) then he burns a year off his ELC. It does not apply to AHL games.
If he is 20 years of age it relates to years of "professional experience" which includes the NHL and AHL.
As Schroeder's birthdate is 29 Sept 1990 (he is currently 19) then it appears that since he will turn 20 between September 16 and December 31 of the year in which he signed his first SPC, if he plays 10 or more games with the Moose (or the Canucks) he will burn a year off his ELC and year off his arbitration ineligibility.
Okay, so I've been browsing the CBA and found this section.
Quote:
In the event that an 18 year old or 19 year old Player signs an SPC with a Club but does not play at least ten (10) NHL Games in the first season under that SPC, the term of his SPC and his number of years in the Entry Level System shall be extended for a period of one (1) year, except that this automatic extension will not apply to a Player who is 19 according to Section 9.2 by virtue of turning 20 between September 16 and December 31 in the year in which he first signs an SPC. Unless a Player and Club expressly agree to the contrary, in the event a Player's SPC is extended an additional year in accordance with this subsection, all terms of the SPC, with the exception of Signing Bonuses, but including Paragraph 1 Salary, games played bonuses and Exhibit 5 bonuses, shall be extended; provided, however, that the Player's Paragraph 1 Salary shall be extended in all circumstances.
I just want to clarify since it's confusing. The CBA doesn't mention anything about playing in the AHL as counting as a year off his ELC. It just mentions that the 10 NHL game limit isn't included for players who turn 20 from Sept to December. I can't imagine MG would sign him and let him burn a year off by playing this last little bit of the season. Schroeder hasn't formally been assigned to the Moose so can he still sign a PTO or something?
Also, maybe I'm just tired but the rule I quoted above refers to section 9.2.
Quote:
9.2 Age of Players. As used in this Article, "age," including "First SPC Signing Age," means a Player's age on September 15 of the calendar year in which he signs an SPC, regardless of his actual age on the date he signs such SPC.
If I'm reading this right, here it says the players age on September 15th is the age that matters. But the section above says if they turn 20 between Sept 16th and Dec 31st. Doesn't that contradict? Schroeder will still be 19 on September 15th but turns 20 on September 29th.
Edit: Never mind found the section...
Quote:
For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a), a Player aged 18 or 19
earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more
NHL Games in a given NHL Season, and a Player aged 20 or older
(or who turns 20 between September 16 and December 31 of the
year in which he signs his first SPC) earns a year of professional
experience by playing ten (10) or more Professional Games under
an SPC in a given League Year.
So unless they sit Schroeder to prevent him from playing 10 games with Manitoba, he loses a year off his ELC.
Okay, so I've been browsing the CBA and found this section.
I just want to clarify since it's confusing. The CBA doesn't mention anything about playing in the AHL as counting as a year off his ELC. It just mentions that the 10 NHL game limit isn't included for players who turn 20 from Sept to December. I can't imagine MG would sign him and let him burn a year off by playing this last little bit of the season. Schroeder hasn't formally been assigned to the Moose so can he still sign a PTO or something?
Also, maybe I'm just tired but the rule I quoted above refers to section 9.2.
If I'm reading this right, here it says the players age on September 15th is the age that matters. But the section above says if they turn 20 between Sept 16th and Dec 31st. Doesn't that contradict? Schroeder will still be 19 on September 15th but turns 20 on September 29th.
Edit: Never mind found the section...
So unless they sit Schroeder to prevent him from playing 10 games with Manitoba, he loses a year off his ELC.
Given that the hockey season generally starts in September (or camp does), I'm curious if signing now applies to next September 16th, or September 16th in 2009. Because the first "year" of his ELC is in fact this season (09/10). It doesn't run from March of '10 until March of '11. It runs until the end of this season, meaning that for the purposes of the first year of this contract, he is 19.
I have no idea if that's true, but it makes intuitive sense to me.
So unless they sit Schroeder to prevent him from playing 10 games with Manitoba, he loses a year off his ELC.
I don't believe that's correct. The first year of Schroeder's contract is for this current season and he will not be 20 at any point in the 1st year. If the first year of Schroeder's ELC was the 10-11 season, then the September 16th to December 31st clause would apply to him. He would be 19 when he signed the contract (likely in the summer) but he would turn 20 before the end of the year so playing 10 professional (as opposed to strictly NHL) games would burn a year of his deal. Since the 1st year of his deal expires before he turns 20, I believe he's still considered a 19 year old for this season.
I think if they meant calendar year (i.e. 2010) they would have referred to it as such as they did in the 2nd excerpt you provided.
Given that the hockey season generally starts in September (or camp does), I'm curious if signing now applies to next September 16th, or September 16th in 2009. Because the first "year" of his ELC is in fact this season (09/10). It doesn't run from March of '10 until March of '11. It runs until the end of this season, meaning that for the purposes of the first year of this contract, he is 19.
I have no idea if that's true, but it makes intuitive sense to me.
You are correct as far as I understand it. He is counted as 19 for the year of this contract.
Hopefully that's right that the contract is for next year. As I said, I don't think MG would screw up and burn a year of ELC just for 11 regular season Moose games + playoffs. It's just confusing how the CBA is worded. Either way, it doesn't look like Schroeder has been formally assigned to Manitoba yet, nor has he signed a PTO. But I'm pretty sure that's just a formality and there's a good chance he plays tomorrow, or at latest Tuesday.
Hopefully that's right that the contract is for next year. As I said, I don't think MG would screw up and burn a year of ELC just for 11 regular season Moose games + playoffs. It's just confusing how the CBA is worded. Either way, it doesn't look like Schroeder has been formally assigned to Manitoba yet, nor has he signed a PTO. But I'm pretty sure that's just a formality and there's a good chance he plays tomorrow, or at latest Tuesday.
Burning one year of ELC is just as much a benefit as it is a harm. People REALLY need to let this one go.
If he was Sidney Crosby and he's destined to be at least 4+ million dollar guy RIGHT out of his next contract then it's another story but so few guys are like this.
You are correct as far as I understand it. He is counted as 19 for the year of this contract.
Not according to the wording of the CBA as I read it.
Quote:
For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a) (my note Group 2 RFA status), a Player aged 18 or 19 earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more NHL Games in a given NHL Season, and a Player aged 20 or older (or who turns 20 between September 16 and December 31 of the year in which he signs his first SPC) earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more Professional Games under an SPC in a given League Year.
Essentially for these two purposes he is deemed a 20 year old by turning twenty on 29 September 2010.
It gets more than a little confusing because there are differing age calculations for other purposes - the key here are the words "For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a)".
Last edited by Wetcoaster: 03-20-2010 at 05:24 PM.
Hopefully that's right that the contract is for next year. As I said, I don't think MG would screw up and burn a year of ELC just for 11 regular season Moose games + playoffs. It's just confusing how the CBA is worded. Either way, it doesn't look like Schroeder has been formally assigned to Manitoba yet, nor has he signed a PTO. But I'm pretty sure that's just a formality and there's a good chance he plays tomorrow, or at latest Tuesday.
I dont think it works that way, that would be like saying Hodgson has burned a year of his ELC because he played 11 Moose game last year.
Essentially for these two purposes he is deemed a 20 year old by turning twenty on 29 September 2010.
It gets more than a little confusing because there are differing age calculations for other purposes - the key here are the words "For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a)".
Yes, but the question as I see it is whether "the year" refers to a standard calendar year or the year pertinent to the season he signs. For example, would it make sense, legally, to differentiate between a contract signed on December 29th 2009 and January 3rd 2010? Both contracts are signed for the same season/year: the 2009/2010 season. It seems to me counter intuitive that one would burn a year off of his ELC and the other would not, since for all intents and purposes they are the same contract.
I would be curious to know if in practice this is interpreted by the NHL and the NHLPA to mean the year of the season the contract applies to. If you know any current agents, I would certainly like to know the answer to that question.
All that said, in the end I don't think it much matters. That one extra year would be nice, but if JS plays well enough to require a raise after one or two seasons, I'm sure MG will happily pay him.
I dont think it works that way, that would be like saying Hodgson has burned a year of his ELC because he played 11 Moose game last year.
It is all about birthdates - if Schroeder was born 14 days earlier it would not be an issue but his birthday is September 29.
However by turning 20 between Sept 16 and Dec 31 in the year he signs his first ELC, he is deemed to be 20 years of age for the purposes of calculating years professional experience (which includes the NHL and AHL) for his ELC and salary arbitration eligibility.
