EHM The Blue Line

I have two prospects that i just drafted, Kyle Turris and C.J Severyn..

Heres the difference?

Kyle Turris and C.J both have committed to Universitys down in the states. The question is Vancouver Giants own Turris rights and have better coaching then the College that Turris is heading to? I have read that the better the coaches that coach the team the players play for the better the prospect will develop into. The

Question i have is with C.J

C.J is going ot Wisconsin but their coaching has ok coaching but isnt that great but his OHL team rights team has bad coach. So what would be best to do with him leave him in college where their coaching is just .5 percent better then the OHL team or should i send him to OHL where he will play 40 more games then he would in college...

I'm probably wrong, but I didn't think there was an option. I thought once a player has committed to college, then that's where he's going...?

Though, if the option is there, then I personally would choose the OHL. Simply because it's an active and simulated league in the game where you can see and verify all that goes on in it... whereas the US colleges are just kind of there cosmetically with ghostly stats coming from the darkness.

Whether that makes a difference, I don't know, but that's what I'd feel more comfortable doing.

Well see the thing is, with my prospects i do kind of liek a Canada/Russia Summit Series but instead of Canada i do my teams prospects.

I know After he move to the college teams u can sign the prospects and then send them back to juniors... But you bring up a true point i never thought of that.... Just since in real life NHL teams play in Prospect tournament this Russia/Team Prospects 8 game schedule is kind of my way of doing a prospect tournament... But i was going to sign and bring C.J but i donno what was better for his development but thanks for the help...

With the committed kids, once they sign with the college team somethimes they are willing to sign with you. Prior to the actual movement to college they won't sign with you. After..they sometimes will.

WARNING: IN some cases (I had it happen to Turris) the AI GM of the team in question, in Kyle's case...the Vancouver Giants...once the player signs to a college team...the junior team will release his rights. Then if YOU sign him to your NHL club, the only options are to have him play on your farm teams. Which you may not want, as it may harm development.

Sometimes, the CHL team will release its rights as soon as the player agrees to join your squad. So before confirming the move, check again if the player still has CHL rights!

Back on the initial question, i personnally prefer having my guys in Canadian major juniors rather than in US college. Young guns mainly need icetime, and there are way more games in the CHL than in colleges. That's maybe why the CHL cursus ends at age 20 while the US one ends at age 22.

I don't know how it runs in real life though... Do the NHL teams sign their college prospects to send them in major juniors? Or do they let them in college?

Shadd666 wrote: I don't know how it runs in real life though... Do the NHL teams sign their college prospects to send them in major juniors? Or do they let them in college?

Few top-end prospects play their college careers all the way through. Jack Johnson played for two seasons, Erik Johson for one. Those that have done so include at least Brendan Morrow, Chris Drury, Ryan Miller and Jordan Leopold (the four most successful recent Hobey Baker winners), but none of them were a high first-round pick.

I actually find that many prospects develope better in College in the game - esspecially if they are not top prospects.

Players from the CHL are often not completely ready for the AHL at 20 years of age, whereas the College prospects can wait until they are 22-23 if you let them stay in college for all 4 years.

If you look in the savegame editor, CHL prospects often end the CHL with a Current Ability of 80-90 (average AHL ability) while College prospects are often at 100-110 (top AHL ability). While a CHL guy then needs at least 2 years in the AHL before being NHL ready (110-120 ability), the College prospects only need one year and are then often around 120 ability.

Keep in mind, that this does not count for the very top prospects, as they will also be over 100 when done with the CHL.

A poor CHL prospect might even end his CHL career with only 70 ability, and then gets killed in the AHL and does not develope, or has to be sent to the ECHL and stagnates there.

ElQuapo: Well... if i do my maths correctly according to what you say...

CHL: end their CHL cursus at age 20, then need 2 AHL seasons, and therefore get NHL ready at age 22 (well, not all, obviously...)

College: end their college cursus at age 22, then need 1 AHL season, and therefore get NHL ready at age 23... That's to say one year later that CHL kids. Not the most conclusive point in favor of the colleges

The interesting thing to compare is not their ability at the end of their cursus, but the abilities at the same age. At age 22, kids coming from CHL already have 2 full years of AHL, where they probably learnt more things than the kids in college, thanks to a higher level of play, more games played and better coaches. That's why I tend to think that CHL is better for prospects devellopement... Probably not in 100% of the cases, but most of the time. I may be wrong though

Shadd666 wrote:ElQuapo: Well... if i do my maths correctly according to what you say...

CHL: end their CHL cursus at age 20, then need 2 AHL seasons, and therefore get NHL ready at age 22 (well, not all, obviously...)

College: end their college cursus at age 22, then need 1 AHL season, and therefore get NHL ready at age 23... That's to say one year later that CHL kids. Not the most conclusive point in favor of the colleges

The interesting thing to compare is not their ability at the end of their cursus, but the abilities at the same age. At age 22, kids coming from CHL already have 2 full years of AHL, where they probably learnt more things than the kids in college, thanks to a higher level of play, more games played and better coaches. That's why I tend to think that CHL is better for prospects devellopement... Probably not in 100% of the cases, but most of the time. I may be wrong though

That is true, but that is also why I say it is mostly for non-top prospects, as many CHL prospects will not be ready for the AHL directly and will get killed there - this is not so often the case with College prospects, as they have developed 2 years more before entering the AHL.

I guess I must be the only person who's had a prospect develop by playing a year in the E.I will check out the coaching staff of any team I have a prospect I'm interested in, and I would rather loan him out onto an AAL-4 or E team with better coaching then play in the college system. If the team by some miracle has some decent coaches I'll let him stay there.

My experience with prospects who go to college is that they always stagnate there. They may go in looking halfway promising at age 18, but when they come out with the same ratings at age 22, they're one step away from being has-beens. This is why I'll bring anyone who has even half a shot at an NHL career into my organization after at most two college years.

Mind you, this is a strategy that was developed with pre-3.04 patches; if colleges are actually developing prospects in 3.04, great, but bringing promising juniors to AHL works too...

You guys mention that some college players and Junior players arent ready to make the junior right away to the AHL... But the thing is if you send them down to ECHL for a yr and they get made and absent from the team then what is that just the chance you take?

Frankly, if a guy who isn't ready for the AHL two years after you drafted him, why sign him? The only two cases where I even consider it are these:

1. The player is a goalie, I have a spot for him in ECHL, I don't have at least 4 goalies under contract, and there's some hope that this guy might turn out to be good enough for the back-up job at some point.

2. The player is an enforcer, and he's big and bad enough to maybe be my home-grown tough guy a few years down the road.

For anyone else, it's goodbye.

From what I've seen NHL teams can't sign players from college and send them to juniors. But what I have seen is some CHL teams have had success in signing players from thier college teams. I know Peter DeBoer here in Kitchener has been able to sign a few guys away from college.

Loosie wrote:From what I've seen NHL teams can't sign players from college and send them to juniors.

You mean in the game or in real life? In EHM, every once in a blue moon you'll find a college player whose CHL rights are being held by someone. If you can sign this guy to your NHL team, you'll get the option to send him to juniors.

Kekkonen wrote:

Loosie wrote:From what I've seen NHL teams can't sign players from college and send them to juniors.

You mean in the game or in real life? In EHM, every once in a blue moon you'll find a college player whose CHL rights are being held by someone. If you can sign this guy to your NHL team, you'll get the option to send him to juniors.

I don't believe there is any rule against this IRL either, only the other way around. College teams can't sign players who have played in Major Junior, as they are considered professionals.

Well i know in real life Jim O'Brien who was Ottawa's 1st round pick 30th overall a yr or two ago was playing at the University of Minnesota but left to go play in the WHL Settle Thunderbirds, or unless Ottawa Sens wanted him to play CHL instead of College