Reply To: Articles

[hockeygod]

Getting better with age: Under Nicholson's proposal, the top players in the draft will need an exemption or they will have to wait a year.

Patrick King | October 20, 2011

Bob Nicholson doesn't have to look too far to find support for his proposal to move the draft age back a year.

The president of Hockey Canada presented a nine-page document to the National Hockey League Players' Association outlining reasons it would be beneficial to change the eligible age of the draft on the weekend. As the biggest feeder league to the NHL, the response from teams in the Canadian Hockey League appears in favour of the new proposal, even if it does open itself up to new conversations.

"I think there's merit to what Bob's talking about," said Bob Tory, general manager of the Tri-City Americans. "He's looking at the big picture on the process of development and making sure that maybe we can develop better players not only for world junior teams, but for the NHL as well."

The new proposal would indicate junior teams would have a tighter grasp on their players and obtain three years of service, as opposed to just two under the current rules. The outlined proposal, however, also includes an opportunity for the very best players to achieve "exceptional player" status, similarly to how the Ontario Hockey League instituted such status in 2005 to allow John Tavares to play in the league at 15.

In many cases, 18-year-olds are not making the jump straight into the NHL with the exception of players drafted first-overall. Many of those players end up playing immediately, which would not be excluded under the new proposal. In that sense, nothing would really change for the few junior franchises that are already losing 18-year-olds to the NHL.

"If you're drafting early and you're drafting a kid in the top of your junior draft, in many cases you're planning that he's not going to be with you in his 19-year-old year," explained George Burnett, head coach and general manager of the Belleville Bulls. "It's certainly a big adjustment and a hole to fill when you lose them at 18."

"It's a tremendous blow to a junior team when you lose an underage (18-year-old) player because you can't replace them," Tory added. "Those guys are your best player and they sell tickets for you."

The possibility of having three years of service from a top player will always be embraced by a junior team. But it's also practically a moot point for a junior team in most cases, since most of the players that leave junior for pro early are 19 and not 18. Only the very best make the jump at 18, and those players would fall under the exceptional player status anyways.

By moving the draft back a year, even then the change wouldn't be dramatic for junior teams that are consistently losing players at 19. The Windsor Spitfires, for example, lost two last season with Taylor Hall and Cam Fowler. Three years earlier, Josh Bailey left at 19.

"If you move it all the way to three years, you might as well move it to four and we'd have Hall and Fowler last year," Spitfires general manager Warren Rychel said. "If it was a four-year draft, then you wouldn't lose anybody."

Saying that, Rychel isn't suggesting adding another year to the one proposed by Nicholson. Although his team could benefit from the new proposal, he didn't feel a change was necessary to the current system. As a former scout with the Phoenix Coyotes, he doesn't believe much changes in evaluating talent for the NHL in that year.

"One extra year doesn't matter," he said. "Two does for sure."

And that, of course, may be one of the main reasons in changing the draft age. It's easy to look back on the draft's mistakes. Every team has at least one they'd love to take a mulligan on.

"It will be good for NHL teams because I think that will increase the value of their draft," explained Andre Tourigny, head coach and general manager of the Rouyn-Noranda Huskies. "They will make less mistakes. I think it could be good for everybody."

Many of those mistakes come in the form of rushing players. Nicholson mentioned how this new proposal could slow the process down and give players a better chance at making an impact once they do become regular NHLers.

"I'd like to see a study of how many 19-year-olds played in the NHL and then were in the American league at 20 or 21," Tory said.

Bailey would fall into that group after spending 11 games in Bridgeport last season. As would James Wright, who made the jump to Tampa Bay in 2009, only to find his way back to junior. Now he's a regular AHLer.

Besides the obvious advantages for junior teams, another advantage would be for the players, who are not yet old enough to drink in most provinces, let alone the United States, at the time they're drafted.

"What will help is to keep the player on the edge for an extra year," Tourigny said. "We might keep the motivation for the player higher."

"Hockey's a very difficult game," Tory added. "It's very difficult to make a living at and that's why they make a very good living because they need to learn how to deal with adversity in hockey and it's constant.

"They want to get there so quickly they don't realize that there's steps involved in the process that would allow them to get there as a better player and a more complete player. We seem to be fast-tracking everything we do in society now and I don't know if that's the best situation."

A more concrete, three-year window in junior will never be shooed away by those in the CHL. Hall repeatedly talked about his late birth-date, which enabled him to play three years in Windsor, as an advantage for him.

Would Hall have been in the NHL at 18 if he was born two months earlier? Without a doubt.

"Selfishly from the junior side, it's a tremendous opportunity for stabilizing your franchise when you have elite players that you know are going to be there at 18, but plan for them not to be there at 19," Burnett said.

"If you've proven all you can in junior hockey after three years and an NHL team steps up and drafts you in the top 10, you're all set," Rychel said.

As much as losing a player like Steven Stamkos or Ryan Nugent-Hopkins can be devastating for a junior franchise — two examples of players that made the jump at 18 — it's clear they're the exception to the rule.

"There's always going to be those elite players that I don't think should be denied that opportunity if in fact they're ready," Tory said. "You can also make just as many arguments of guys who went on at 19 and ended up in the American league at 20 or 21 that probably weren't ready and probably went too early."

It's far from a perfect system, but the new proposal appears to be well-received by most in the junior world.

Dean
M.Ed (Coaching)
Ch.P.C. (Chartered Professional Coach)
Game Intelligence Training
"Great education depends on great teaching."