Gibson Decides to Defect to the OHL
by Daniel AC on Jul 27, 2011 3:04 PM PDT
in Ducklings
Email
Print
DANIEL:
I know the Ducks have been mired in a slow offseason. Part of that can be attributed to an overpriced free agent market and part of it can be attributed to the fact that some big RFAs need to sign in order for the trade market to heat up. Either way, the cash strapped Ducks haven't been making a lot of news this summer. Enter John Gibson. The Ducks first selection in the second round of the 2011 Entry Draft decided to let Duck fans get in on one of the more compelling debates that exists in the hockey universe, Major Junior versus NCAA. The OC Register is reporting that Gibson has elected to play in the OHL next year, rather than the University of Michigan. The Kitchener Rangers website confirms that Gibson has signed with the team and will be at camp, which starts August 31. Since that's all the news, you'll find my thoughts after the jump.
The only way this move really makes sense to me is that John doesn't want to wait for playing time. If he went to Michigan he'd probably be riding the bench most games while senior Shawn Hunwick got most of the starts. He probably could have challenged for more playing time, but a glance at the season stats of the current goalies on the Kitchener squad shows that his playing time would be more assured. If that's the reason, then I suppose it's a fair one, and one with which I can agree. Personally, the type of goalie I want in my system is the kind who wants to be in the crease as often as possible.
However, I think he's making a mistake if he thinks that the OHL will have him facing better competition. I know the major junior leagues more closely replicate the professional schedule and experience of professional hockey, but I don't think they capture the competitiveness better than the NCAA. The NCAA has older players, who would be AHL eligible if they gave up their amateur status, the major junior league is mostly filled with, you know, juniors. Two years of physical development can make a huge difference in the quality of competition you face.
Furthermore, I think a move like this makes less sense for a goalie. Netminders tend to develop a little more slowly, settling into professional roles in the 24-26 range. In that situation, getting the 4 year comfort of the NCAA to more fully develop his game before heading to the AHL makes more sense than having to abandon his coaches after 2 years at Kitchener.
Finally, the educator in me can't help but be a little disappointed that he's skirting a chance at a decent education. That's not a knock on U of M, rather I think athletes are sometimes allowed to get by without fully engaging the academic side of their experience. Still, a little education would be better than none. I can't think of anyone who was worse off for learning a little bit more about the world.
Overall, I think Gibson is making a mistake. I don't think he'll see any particular advantages by switching to the OHL, and he's going to miss out on the college experience. I don't think this will have a catastrophic impact on his development as a player; I just think that if he was going to have to spend the extra years working on his game, the NCAA would have provided the best opportunity to do that.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agree
Gibson has to do what’s right for him, but I was really looking forward to a Hunwick-Gibson tandem in the Frozen Four next year. (I’m a college hockey homer).
Contributor - Anaheim Calling
i get the Jr. players are mostly younger kids but the talent level still exceeds the NCAA and the opportunity for more chances to play really justifies the decision for me.
This article does a good job of summing up the difference. It’s not just a talent issue. It’s an age and development issue. Guys who take longer to develop benefit more from an NCAA experience. Goalies, usually , need more time to develop. You can’t just look at it as “more talented kids play major junior.” There are other factors.
Ryan Miller and Tim Thomas
Are both NCAA products. If Gibson was a top forward in his draft class, then it would make sense for him to be in the CHL.
Contributor - Anaheim Calling
And how old was Tim Thomas when he made the NHL? 28. He played college hockey for four fucking years, then went to Europe for a few years and FINALLY made it.
It’s a bad one for U.S. hockey. The most popular game in the country is football. I would argue that’s partially do to the impact of the college game. If NCAA hockey grows, hockey in the U.S. grows. The real problem is that kids are starting to think that major junior is a fast track for the NHL and for some kids it is. But there’s a large segment of the population that benefits from being a professional athlete in the NCAA sense, rather than the major junior sense.
Im with you that NCAA is the future for the NHL in the US
Hockey is growing at the college level. Ole Miss now has a div 3 club ice hockey team. This is in SEC country where no one ever thought it would catch on. Most SEC colleges now have an ice hockey team. While the growth is painfully slow, these teams were not around 10 years ago. It is the result of Bettman going into the non traditional markets. Hockey is a game that really does sell itself. You just need to get people to a game. The south is starting to discover what a gem the game truly is. Now if the PAC 10 could make a much larger impact on hockey if it wanted to. Most PAC 10 schools have an NHL or AHL team in the area and there is a fan base already in place waiting to be tapped. But action needs to be taken by the conferences along with schools. The NHL needs to help out the NCAA as much if not more than what they do for the CHL.
by Newport Rebel on Jul 28, 2011 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Major junior IS a fast track to the NHL. How many guys drafted in the first round in the 2011 draft were from the NCAA? 1. Not 15. Not 10. Not 5. 1. 5 from Sweden, 1 from the US development program, and 23 from major junior. Name one NCAA to NHL success story and I’ll name 10 that came from major junior.
First, NCAA players are almost never drafted in the first round, unless they started college before their 18th birthday. Most NCAA guys who get drafted are on their way TO college.
Second, I can only think of one goalie in recent memory who has gone straight from major juniors to being the starting goalie on his team, Chris Mason. Almost every goalie out of major junior has to spend time in the AHL. If you look at Mason now, maybe his recent struggles are attributed to him not spending enough time in development. A goalie isn’t the type of player you want to fast track into the NHL.
More importantly, major junior starts guys out younger than the NCAA. The U.S. junior hockey system can’t compete with the Canadian major junior system. In other words, Canada identifies and professionalizes younger talent faster. The major junior leagues can get players long before they are ever eligible to play college hockey, and once they have, those players are no longer eligible for college hockey. This inherently makes major junior players look better at draft time and seem more developed.
Also, not every player is NHL ready at 20. Major junior and the NCAA offer two roads to development. Some players take longer, that’s just how it is. For a kid ready to play at the NHL level when he’s 19 or 20, a junior career makes sense. For a guy who needs to fill out his frame and won’t be physically mature until he’s 22-23 can be greatly benefited by an NCAA system that allows him to spend 4 years in one place and learn a lot about the game. I don’t think one path is inherently better, I think each has its respective merits.
Finally, I think the major junior system is worse than the NCAA system. It takes young kids and ruins their futures for the benefit of a few guys who will actually make the NCAA. A lot of major junior teams don’t pay for their players’ educations after they age out, even though they are supposed to. I think the NCAA and major junior should work something out so that these kids can salvage something and get an education. If college can be the major form of development for football players, I don’t see why it can’t work for hockey players.
Did you mean Steve Mason from CBJ? Quick only played 33 games in the AHL before hitting the NHL, he had 2 years in the NCAA. Cam Ward played a single AHL season after the WHL. Varlamov played 30 AHL before he got into the NHL. Brodeur got into the NHL after 32 AHL games and juniors before that. Schneider did 3 years NCAA then 2 AHL before he got the backup spot in Vancouver. Not saying Gibson is as good as anyone of these guys but a good goalie can come from this route. I still agree that he probably should have stayed in school for the education. I don’t think it will really hurt his development. You don’t develop much sitting on the bench, but it would have only been another year and then he would have been the starter.
Yes, I meant Steve Mason.
Varlamov never played major junior hockey in Canada. I don’t know anything about player development in Russia, so I’m not really including it in my analysis. If it’s like other European leagues, where young guys can play in what essentially amount to local professional leagues, then they he’s had a very different experience in his development.
Johnathan Quick did 2 years at college, and split a season between the AHL and ECHL. If you count his ECHL time it amounts to a full season of professional grade hockey before he became a full time NHL player.
Schneider is a good example of how the NCAA can benefit players who take longer to develop and emerge with a more complete game, rather than relying on their talent to get them through junior.
Brodeur is one of the greatest goalies of all time, I don’t know if it’s fair to include him in this discussion, but I suppose he is an example of a guy who can emerge from junior and have a great career.
For some reason I was assuming Gibson has played some NCAA but I couldn’t find his playing history and at 18 that’s probably unlikely (It was really late when I posted and I was half awake). Has anyone considered raising the Draft eligibility age to 20 or something? Teams would probably have a better idea of how players are going to develop, so there might be less borderline players making draft day.
It’ll never happen. It would be death for the major junior league, because it ends at 20. NHL teams would en up drafting NCAA kids that they could leave at their schools to develop. Raising the age would take away major junior’s advantage.
by Daniel AC on Aug 1, 2011 5:13 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Anaheim Calling
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
CK Photo Galleries
