In recent days, much has been made about a released IIHF report that suggests European players are better served developing at home as opposed to going to the CHL. The report examined the success of European born players in the NHL from the years 2001-2006. In that time, the IIHF found that 233 European players had some level of NHL success. However, only 11.2% of those 233 played in the Canadian Hockey League. You can read more about it from Yahoo Canada's Neate Sager, here.
On paper, these statistics are pretty alarming. It's got a lot of OHL journalists talking about whether CHL Imports are good for the league. For instance, Kitchener Rangers beat writer Jeff Hicks recently wrote a column urging young german forward Tobias Reider to stay home (here), rather than report to Kitchener.
But I wasn't sold, so I decided to do a little research of my own. I examined the NHL Drafts from 2003, 2004, and 2005 and recorded the number of NHL players (or still strong NHL prospects) from each route. Below are the results...
2003 NHL Entry Draft
CHL Europeans With Significant NHL Time = 2/31 = 6%
CHL Europeans Who are Still Good Prospects = 0/31 = 0%
Non CHL Euro's With Significant NHL Time = 8/72 = 11%
Non CHL Euro's Who are Still Good Prospects: = 1/72 = 1%
2004 NHL Entry Draft
CHL Europeans With Significant NHL Time = 8/38 = 21%
CHL Europeans Who are Still Good Prospects = 2/38 = 5%
Non CHL Euro's With Significant NHL Time = 15/60 = 25%
Non CHL Euro's Who are Still Good Prospects: = 2/60 = 3%
2005 NHL Entry Draft
CHL Europeans With Significant NHL Time = 4/25 = 16%
CHL Europeans Who are Still Good Prospects = 3/25= 12%
Non CHL Euro's With Significant NHL Time = 8/33 = 24%
Non CHL Euro's Who are Still Good Prospects: = 4/33 = 12%
The first thing that automatically jumps out at you is that the number of European players being drafted (regardless of league) is dropping from 2003-2005. However, it is important to remember that 2005 was the first draft of the new CBA...aka going from a nine round draft to a seven round draft.
The second thing that jumps out at you is how close the percentages are for Europeans who spent time in the CHL versus those who didn't. Something tells me that the IIHF skewed those statistics in their favor to come up with such a large discrepancy between success for those who come over to the CHL as imports and those who don't. Either that, or the 2001 and 2002 NHL Drafts were not kind to the CHL Import Draft.
The thing that this report fails to recognize is the new CBA (which was briefly mentioned before). Without solid transfer agreements, and the allure of European leagues which offer a lot of money to play in (KHL for instance), European players are being drafted less and less by NHL teams. Now NHL teams have less time to decide on whether to sign European draft picks, when before they had their rights for life (or until they released them). On average, it often takes European players a few years to find a legitimate role on their senior league teams. This means NHL teams may have to make a call on whether to sign a player before that player has reached the pinnacle of playing time back home. Definitely makes it hard to get noticed...unless you're a guy like Mikael Granlund who is already a star in the SM-Liiga.
That's where the CHL comes in. The CHL offers European players a chance to get noticed; a chance to receive premier playing time in one of the best developmental leagues in the world. It's not about which league is better, it's about which league is giving me the chance to impress an NHL team the most. Which league am I going to get first or second line ice time on?
For other players (Russians in particular), it's also about making a commitment to North America. You've heard about the Russian factor to death...you've also seen Alexander Burmistrov get drafted ahead of Vladimir Tarasenko and Evgeny Kuznetsov despite many believing him to be the inferior prospect (and player). If Russian players come over to play in the CHL, it shows NHL teams that they are committed to playing in the NHL some day. They are willing to do anything to reach their goal, including spending time in a North American developmental league.
The question at hand is (and probably what has the IIHF in such a foul mood), is the CHL abusing these two factors to get players to come to North America? Truthfully, I think you'd have a hard time proving otherwise. This is especially true when you see quotes like this from Spitfires General Manager Warren Rychel on recent import selection Alexander Khokhlachev.
"I think one of the reasons he slid down to us is people were unsure of his future plans. A lot of kids are beginning to realize it helps them coming over here. [Tom] Kuhnhackl knows now he came a year too late. He probably would've gone in the first round of the draft if he'd come over last season."
What Rychel means to say is that it helps them get drafted higher in the NHL, not necessarily that it gives them a better chance to reach the NHL. There is a big difference.
However, that's the whole point. Regardless of what path a European player (or any player for that matter) takes, it's up to him to get to the NHL. I'm a firm believer that a person controls their own destiny. If you work hard to reach your dreams, whether you play in Guelph, Moscow, or Modo makes no difference. It's remarkably difficult to carve out a career in the NHL as a professional hockey player. If you fail to achieve this, it wasn't the fault of the CHL for "wasting his talent." Nor was it the fault of his club team in Europe for "never giving him a chance." It's the fault of the player for not working hard enough, or (even if it sounds blunt) just not being good enough. Sorry IIHF, I think it's time to go back to the drawing board. If you truly want players to develop back in Europe, perhaps you should just let teenagers play where they want to, rather than placing restrictions on their movement. If anything...you've given the CHL the ammo to work with (as I stated above). Can you blame the CHL for using it against you?
Subscribe to this comment's feed
I agree with everything you said. First you got to look where these players are coming from. It is harder to leave the Elitserien or the Finish league becuase they treat their prospects well. Both leagues have well developed juniour and pro teams. Now if you talk about Slovakia, Germany, Check Rep., Swizerland, Norway, and other smaller hockey nations they do not have a well developed Euro league. The Slovaks have tried U18 and U19 , which those teams would play in the slovak mens league. Similar to the USA two year program. The USANDP is from U17 and U18. Perhaps this system should be built on in Euro nations that do not have enough players for a leauge. I was as The CHL in the Top Prospects Game and noticed their were Canadians, Americans, Checks, Suiz, and I realized that event was a great platform for Europeans to make it. Look at Tom Khunacnkl Germany for example. He played in lower leagues in Germany. Scouts said it would have been better if he went to the Windsor Spitfires, also he did regret it. Some players benifit from playing with men, but others would benifit from a good juniour league.
What the IIHF should realize that alot of these CHL imports in one draft class don't report. Also, teams look to better their clubs with Euro talent will help them right now. While some teams say their player will go to the NHL. Like you said the player could be overated by the club and or he isn't good enough to turn into a great juniour to a great NHL.
On the Russian Factor, Alexander Burmistrov called the KHL "an old mans league." That quote intriqued me. So the what questions we need to answer which clubs in the MHL that can help a player tap into his potential. Which CHL teams can. If a player feels either side will help him then good for him.
Look at Vladmir Taresenko he believes he should be playing in the KHL against men. More power to him, but if a player like Telegin or Stanislav Galiev want to join the CHL let them its their lives. Even though you had these players from ages 5-15, doesn't mean you own them forever. A player will make his decision to leave if he so wishes. I think there should be a buy out clause at every juniour prospect that signs as 16 year old. Example if a player gets drafted in the KHL and he signs as a 16 year old he should have boy out clause. Once an NHL or CHL team drafts this player the the sum of money is paid and that player is transfered. I think for a 16 year old 10% could be good enough. If a player does not sign with his European club and he is drafted as a 16 year old in either USHL or CHL they don't have to pay them.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
