Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brawndo

Changes to the Upcoming CHL-NHL Agreement?

Recommended Posts

Frank Servalli is reporting that there is growing support amongst NHL Clubs to lower the age of CHL Players being able to play in the AHL to 19. The current agreement expires 6/30/20. 

Quote

Could we see more 19-year-olds in the AHL?

The NHL’s seven-year agreement with the Canadian Hockey League expires on June 30. The two sides haven’t begun formal negotiations yet, but one item that seems to be gaining momentum behind the scenes is the idea of allowing 19-year-old prospects to be assigned to the AHL.

In the current agreement, players drafted from European clubs are the only prospects permitted to play in the AHL as teenagers. This has been a hot-button topic for years in major junior circles, because taking away 19-year-olds means taking away star players. 

But some NHL GMs would like to find a more suitable landing spot for players who are stuck in between – those with not much left to accomplish in the CHL, but not quite ready for the bright lights of the NHL.

Players like Barrett Hayton (Arizona), who is still recovering from his injury at the World Juniors, and Noah Dobson (N.Y. Islanders) come to mind. Dobson is playing regularly now, but both players have sat for stretches this season as NHL healthy scratches. They couldn’t be sent to the AHL, only back to junior.

“You bet I’d like to have more say over a high pick if I had that option,” one Eastern Conference GM said Friday. “I think a lot of my counterparts would at least like to have the ability to keep that player in our system, with our coaches and our development and training staff working with him on a daily basis, rather than in junior.”

OHL commissioner and former CHL president Dave Branch said Friday that he expects to arrange a “date and time” with the NHL to discuss the next agreement.

“We have not had any discussion and out of fairness to the process, I wouldn’t want to speak out of turn,” Branch said. “I think we all have common interests here. We’ll just see what happens here.”

The NHL is scheduled to write the CHL a cheque for $12.6 million in total grants this season, according to a copy of the agreement. The NHL is also required to pay an additional $60,000 per skater and $75,000 per goaltender for major junior- eligible players who play in the NHL instead.

Not every NHL manager would be on board with that potential change.

“I personally feel we need to protect the CHL,” Blues GM Doug Armstrong said. “We have had 19-year-olds [Europeans] in the AHL, but I feel they develop more being the alpha dog in the CHL if they are good enough.”

Rest assured, this will be a major talking point at the NHL’s GM Meetings in Florida in early March.

“There are special cases and that might make sense,” Canucks GM Jim Benning said. “But I haven’t had very good experiences with 19-year-olds in the AHL. It’s a tough league. Unless it’s a special case, I think it’s better for everyone’s development to play in junior and try to dominate against their own age instead of grown men. It reduces risk of injury and they still have great coaching and strength and conditioning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, darksabre said:

That would be HUGE

It would be, but I think some of the old school GMs are going to scoff at the idea because it could mean diluting their previous Canadian Juniors program.  That said, more and more players are coming in from outside that program and with players ultimate goal being to play professionally they are going to head to places where GMs are likely to look for them and select them.  If the CHL holds out on this upcoming agreement I could see an even greater spike in kids being chosen from outside the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting take against this idea from some NHL GM's.  I would have thought there would be near universal support for it at the NHL level because they have developmental control earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, LTS said:

It would be, but I think some of the old school GMs are going to scoff at the idea because it could mean diluting their previous Canadian Juniors program.  That said, more and more players are coming in from outside that program and with players ultimate goal being to play professionally they are going to head to places where GMs are likely to look for them and select them.  If the CHL holds out on this upcoming agreement I could see an even greater spike in kids being chosen from outside the league.

There has been a 12.7 percent decrease in the number of players selected from the CHL over the past four drafts as it is, I wonder if changing the time amount of time NHL Teams hold players rights after drafting them from 2 years to 3 or 4 would help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

There has been a 12.7 percent decrease in the number of players selected from the CHL over the past four drafts as it is, I wonder if changing the time amount of time NHL Teams hold players rights after drafting them from 2 years to 3 or 4 would help. 

Damn.. pulling out the stats. 🙂

Something needs to change, but my guess is that because players in the league are developed better at a younger age that they are closer to playing in the league at an earlier age.  As such, GMs want them in their systems earlier.  Think about it.. we're on here talking about the prime being 23-25 now when it has traditionally been 27-29. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree dominating in your draft +1 season is important. But having to go back for your 19 year old season, seems like overkill.  For teams that think the kid isn’t ready for the AHL, they would then have the option to keep on CHL.   
Let’s hope it happens.  Though when it comes Cozens, I think he has the size and speed to play in the NHL next season.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Weave said:

Interesting take against this idea from some NHL GM's.  I would have thought there would be near universal support for it at the NHL level because they have developmental control earlier.

I think it pure loyalty to the CHL system’s finances.  Even if the AHL age limit was abolished, NHL teams would still have the option of returning players to the CHL if they thought that was best.  So, at the heart of it, opposition to lifting the age restrictions is not about doing what’s best for the players.  NHL teams would still be able to put players in whatever situation they thought was best.

Edited by Curt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a lot of people, like myself, follow the CHL for the draft  eligibles.  
 

that being said, most kids in their D+2 seasons aren’t ready for the AHL.  I’d be surprised if being allowed to play pro would effect 10 kids at most per year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Brawndo said:

There has been a 12.7 percent decrease in the number of players selected from the CHL over the past four drafts as it is, I wonder if changing the time amount of time NHL Teams hold players rights after drafting them from 2 years to 3 or 4 would help. 

Do you know where that 12.7% went?  Is it a spike in americans, in europeans, or does it look to be fairly distributed among the other sources of draftees?

 

17 hours ago, Curt said:

I think it pure loyalty to the CHL system’s finances.  Even if the AHL age limit was abolished, NHL teams would still have the option of returning players to the CHL if they thought that was best.  So, at the heart of it, opposition to lifting the age restrictions is not about doing what’s best for the players.  NHL teams would still be able to put players in whatever situation they thought was best.

Would they have the choice of returning them though?  Obviously it depends on how the rule is written, but if the player has the contract and refuses to return to the CHL, that could cause some issues.  I'm sure they take care of this in the language of the agreement, but it's one possibility out there.

Also, from the team perspective, having a player turn pro one year earlier than normal also starts their free agency clock ticking earlier.  Comparing that to one extra year of free development, it's something worthwhile to keep in mind.  Let a guy play and contribute at a high level in juniors or have him play in the AHL at a level where he more than likely won't have a major impact on the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shrader said:

Do you know where that 12.7% went?  Is it a spike in americans, in europeans, or does it look to be fairly distributed among the other sources of draftees?

 

Would they have the choice of returning them though?  Obviously it depends on how the rule is written, but if the player has the contract and refuses to return to the CHL, that could cause some issues.  I'm sure they take care of this in the language of the agreement, but it's one possibility out there.

Also, from the team perspective, having a player turn pro one year earlier than normal also starts their free agency clock ticking earlier.  Comparing that to one extra year of free development, it's something worthwhile to keep in mind.  Let a guy play and contribute at a high level in juniors or have him play in the AHL at a level where he more than likely won't have a major impact on the team.

It shouldn’t affect how young player contracts are handled.  Just because the player becomes AHL eligible doesn’t mean that they automatically need to sign their ELC.

The CHL isn’t going to turn away good players.  They’ll fight to keep them.  They are running a business after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Curt said:

It shouldn’t affect how young player contracts are handled.  Just because the player becomes AHL eligible doesn’t mean that they automatically need to sign their ELC.

The CHL isn’t going to turn away good players.  They’ll fight to keep them.  They are running a business after all.

No, you looked at that from the wrong angle.  They're going to sign these CHL guys as early as possible regardless of the rule just as they do now.  I'm talking about the ones who they (the NHL team) actually consider placing in the AHL over the CHL.  So we're talking specifically about the 19 year olds if they are able to agree on these changes.  Do you keep that kid in the CHL the extra year or do you throw him in the AHL and flirt with the potential of burning off one year towards free agency?  It only becomes an issue several years down the road, but it's worth keeping in mind.  The player will sure as hell want to shorten that timeframe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, shrader said:

No, you looked at that from the wrong angle.  They're going to sign these CHL guys as early as possible regardless of the rule just as they do now.  I'm talking about the ones who they (the NHL team) actually consider placing in the AHL over the CHL.  So we're talking specifically about the 19 year olds if they are able to agree on these changes.  Do you keep that kid in the CHL the extra year or do you throw him in the AHL and flirt with the potential of burning off one year towards free agency?  It only becomes an issue several years down the road, but it's worth keeping in mind.  The player will sure as hell want to shorten that timeframe.

Under the current CBA rules, any 18-19 year old player who doesn’t play at least 10 NHL games has their ELC “slide” by a year.  So if a 19 year old player is signed, but doesn’t play in the NHL, it doesn’t matter if he is in the AHL or CHL, his ELC doesn’t have a year burned off of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think only a few kids are ready for AHL hockey at 19. A few elite junior players are dominant in the CHL and once they have had this type of season, perhaps they are ready for the pro game. Their NHL team has to evaluate what their best path is. These teams will make mistakes but with input from multiple sources the majority of players should be placed in the right league for their development. I know the almighty dollar rules but they all need to think long term.
 

Some kids may be ready for the AHL but may benefit from another year of junior to properly mature, complete an education or perhaps have another year of family support if they are near home.

I am a CHL season ticket holder and enjoy seeing future NHL stars in our town. We are lucky to get 3 maybe 4 years of watching good players. In my opinion the AHL needs to be the landing spot for post junior, post NCAA and Europeans who want to keep developing their games to hopefully take the next step. If a guy has dominated the junior ranks, is an elite prospect and is physically ready for the pro game they should have the AHL as an option.

I am interested in comparing Cozens and Dach in a few years. They had similar numbers in the same league and their NHL teams chose different development paths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Curt said:

Under the current CBA rules, any 18-19 year old player who doesn’t play at least 10 NHL games has their ELC “slide” by a year.  So if a 19 year old player is signed, but doesn’t play in the NHL, it doesn’t matter if he is in the AHL or CHL, his ELC doesn’t have a year burned off of it.

Which is why I threw the word potential in there.  If this kid is in the AHL, you are able to call him up at any point throughout the season.  They don't much care about the one year on the ELC, but it's more about the 40 games that would count as an accrued season, burning off one year towards unrestricted free agency.  Teams will start to play games to avoid that number., or either number really, not calling up the kid even if his play has warranted it.  I think the teams would much rather not have to pay attention to that and just let the kid play the whole year in the CHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 year olds should be allowed to leave the CHL and play in the AHL. The CHL will be just fine without the couple dozen players at most that this happens too. 19 year old AHL players should have the same 10 NHL contract ability. If you play 10 NHL games you start your elc, if not it slides to 20. I would say that it should apply to the 20yr old year as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, French Collection said:

I think only a few kids are ready for AHL hockey at 19. A few elite junior players are dominant in the CHL and once they have had this type of season, perhaps they are ready for the pro game. Their NHL team has to evaluate what their best path is. These teams will make mistakes but with input from multiple sources the majority of players should be placed in the right league for their development. I know the almighty dollar rules but they all need to think long term.
 

Some kids may be ready for the AHL but may benefit from another year of junior to properly mature, complete an education or perhaps have another year of family support if they are near home.

I am a CHL season ticket holder and enjoy seeing future NHL stars in our town. We are lucky to get 3 maybe 4 years of watching good players. In my opinion the AHL needs to be the landing spot for post junior, post NCAA and Europeans who want to keep developing their games to hopefully take the next step. If a guy has dominated the junior ranks, is an elite prospect and is physically ready for the pro game they should have the AHL as an option.

I am interested in comparing Cozens and Dach in a few years. They had similar numbers in the same league and their NHL teams chose different development paths.

If only a few kids are ready for the AHL at 19, then there shouldn't be a huge concern about this affecting too many players or too many teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eleven said:

If only a few kids are ready for the AHL at 19, then there shouldn't be a huge concern about this affecting too many players or too many teams.

You could literally just limit teams to one 19 year old CHL kid can go to the AHL per team and solve that issue too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

You could literally just limit teams to one 19 year old CHL kid can go to the AHL per team and solve that issue too. 

So do you mean one 19 year old per NHL team or per CHL team?  In the first option, what happens if 3 or 4 of those guys happen to be from the same CHL team?  That team gets purged and they're very angry about it.  In the second scenario where it is only one kid per CHL team, what happens if Chicago wants to bring up a kid from London but so does St. Louis?  Who wins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shrader said:

Which is why I threw the word potential in there.  If this kid is in the AHL, you are able to call him up at any point throughout the season.  They don't much care about the one year on the ELC, but it's more about the 40 games that would count as an accrued season, burning off one year towards unrestricted free agency.  Teams will start to play games to avoid that number., or either number really, not calling up the kid even if his play has warranted it.  I think the teams would much rather not have to pay attention to that and just let the kid play the whole year in the CHL.

Hmm, interesting.  So think NHL teams may start sticking prospects in the AHL for half a season even though they feel that they are NHL ready, in order to preserve an extra year of RFA status.  That’s possible.

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shrader said:

So do you mean one 19 year old per NHL team or per CHL team?  In the first option, what happens if 3 or 4 of those guys happen to be from the same CHL team?  That team gets purged and they're very angry about it.  In the second scenario where it is only one kid per CHL team, what happens if Chicago wants to bring up a kid from London but so does St. Louis?  Who wins?

Teams do load up for a playoff run at the trade deadline (which passed a few weeks ago in the OHL). They often get a bunch of 19 & 20 year olds and try to go deep into the playoffs. 
Hopefully the AHL agreement would mean guys need to be moved up at training camp so the CHL teams could set their rosters and not worry about losing 3-4 call ups at playoff time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People keep mentioning "it would only affect a handful of players," but that's the point- it will affect the leading goal scorers in the league. The CHL knows these players are the biggest draw for their product.

This has nothing to do with "what is right for player development." It's a protectionist business policy, and GM's with a soft spot for the CHL (perhaps, as a Canadian cultural institution) have enabled it.

I doubt a single non-Canadian GM is in favor of the agreement, as it stands now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, erickompositör72 said:

People keep mentioning "it would only affect a handful of players," but that's the point- it will affect the leading goal scorers in the league. The CHL knows these players are the biggest draw for their product.

This has nothing to do with "what is right for player development." It's a protectionist business policy, and GM's with a soft spot for the CHL (perhaps, as a Canadian cultural institution) have enabled it.

I doubt a single non-Canadian GM is in favor of the agreement, as it stands now.

The CHL is a feeder system to the NHL.  It seems reasonable to me that the NHL would want to protect the quality of that feeder system.  A higher quality lead should produce higher quality players.  Of course the CHL wants to keep the high end guys to protect their business. So the question is whether or not what a prospect gains from being taken away one year early balances out what is lost in the quality of the league.  I'm not so sure that as a whole, the players gain much of anything in the long run from it.  I'd much rather stick with the current system and uniform rules across the board for all of those CHL players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, shrader said:

The CHL is a feeder system to the NHL.  It seems reasonable to me that the NHL would want to protect the quality of that feeder system.  A higher quality lead should produce higher quality players.  Of course the CHL wants to keep the high end guys to protect their business. So the question is whether or not what a prospect gains from being taken away one year early balances out what is lost in the quality of the league.  I'm not so sure that as a whole, the players gain much of anything in the long run from it.  I'd much rather stick with the current system and uniform rules across the board for all of those CHL players.

I'd rather the CHL doesn't get special treatment, which is what it's getting now. Sam Reinhart should have played his draft year in the AHL. Dylan Cozens should have(/should have had) the option of playing this year and next year in the AHL.

IMHO

But I agree the the rules should be uniform for all players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...