On the NAHL website, such content (if it exists publicly) is clustered under the drop-down menus labeled The NAHL and Play in the NAHL.The USHL has an "Important Dates" tab on their website that outlines roster deadlines, etc. Does the NAHL have a similar calendar or if not, does someone know the important roster dates for the NA? My google searching came up empty.
On the NAHL website, such content (if it exists publicly) is clustered under the drop-down menus labeled The NAHL and Play in the NAHL.
The only thing you got wrong is the "yet" part.Ok, so there must not be anything publicly posted yet (unless I missed it)?
The only thing you got wrong is the "yet" part.
ETA: I beg you to reread this post from @Barclay Donaldson. And really read it this time.
@PipeDream If my memory serves, teams tend to break camp with an allowed roster of 30 and then after the showcase, there is a hard cap of 25. These dates fluctuate each year based on when the showcase occurs but that should give you a good idea. That doesn't mean teams only have 25 in town at a given time, that number is likely to be around 30 on any given home weekend. Unless you're Kenai, then it is 25. Too costly to get players to and from. They really are at a severe competitive disadvantage on their homestands.
No such thing as UN-biased media, but ...Not a junior hockey question. Is there any threads or good unbiased sites that focus on the New England prep league? Thanks.
they are pay sites...appreciate it thoughNo such thing as UN-biased media, but ...
I'm able to access all news items on each NE prep website that I linked, without a penny spent. Maybe you were looking for more specific information.they are pay sites...appreciate it though
Here is the policy and there are other associated forms on the USA Hockey website as well:
https://cdn1.sportngin.com/attachme...531.266873777.1633023003-274594681.1607006202
Would still be curious as to any real-world experience (benefits or pitfalls) of this process from the player's perspective.
Benefits:
it means a team is interested enough in a player to protect them from the other teams in the league
more likely to have their organization watching the protected player develop and improve
Downfall:
it means if/when the team cuts you, they'll herd you into one of their money making team
no other team in the league can get you unless they trade for your rights
If the player can be added to their protection list, go for it. The only exception is if you have every team in the league knocking down your door, then you can play the field.
Thank you BD. There is no tier 3 team affiliated with this particular NA team to the best of my knowledge.
You'll see that churn everywhere. Injuries, coaching changes, budget constraints, "better" players becoming available, off ice issues, the list goes on. You'll find this throughout all levels of hockey from U16s and up to the NHL.Question comparing junior leagues across North America. There seems to be a lot of churn in the NAHL rosters and that's quite visible by looking at the transaction page and USA hockey add/drop listing. Is the churn similar in the NCDC and/or the Canadian Jr leagues such as the AJHL, MJHL, CCHL, etc.?
In my admittedly short time experience with following USHL & NAHL hockey (6-7 years), it seems to me that youth hockey players end up in one or the other jr. league based on their exhibited talent plus a consensus of the scouts' assessments of potential skills growth. So I'd be inclined to believe that NAHL players by & large are in that League because they weren't considered "good enough" to make a USHL roster. Further, I haven't seen stats on #s of NAHL players moving up to Tier I, but I'd be surprised if your "gut" prediction of 6 players on a good Tier II team being talented enough to advance in U.S. junior hockey wasn't greatly overestimated.This is a very generalized question so I get it will be hard to get a specific answer, but how big is the gap between tier 1 and tier 2 for on ice talent in regards to the number of tier 2 players on an average team that could play tier 1? My gut says the top line, top pair and maybe the best goalie could be of value to a team in the tier above, is that about right as far as a quick calculation? Or is there a big disparity to where it may only be one or two guys per team that could cut it?
This is a very generalized question so I get it will be hard to get a specific answer, but how big is the gap between tier 1 and tier 2 for on ice talent in regards to the number of tier 2 players on an average team that could play tier 1? My gut says the top line, top pair and maybe the best goalie could be of value to a team in the tier above, is that about right as far as a quick calculation? Or is there a big disparity to where it may only be one or two guys per team that could cut it?
This is a fairly accurate high level view. The NAHL is more watered down, as others have mentioned, but has a much larger footprint and reach of scouting. Top (underage) players in the NAHL are potential low NHL picks or Division 1 players, where as USHL has a much larger volume of commits and NHL picks.This is a very generalized question so I get it will be hard to get a specific answer, but how big is the gap between tier 1 and tier 2 for on ice talent in regards to the number of tier 2 players on an average team that could play tier 1? My gut says the top line, top pair and maybe the best goalie could be of value to a team in the tier above, is that about right as far as a quick calculation? Or is there a big disparity to where it may only be one or two guys per team that could cut it?