Josh Norris moves up to #21 on the ISS Top 31 draft eligible list. Luke Martin dropped off the list a couple of months ago.
ISS Josh Norris/Luke Martin
- Thread starter Bob Miller
- Start date
Not to point fingers at Luke, as it's happened to many other players...
But, Bob, how do you see the system reacting to players who are rated high at one point, many times drafted high, and then not living up to expectations in either college or Jrs?
I've posted that I don't generally follow recruiting, but it seems as if the arms race between US colleges and Canadian Jrs, have not only pushed the recruiting to younger and younger ages, the "ranking" system that the NHL uses for drafting seems to be pretty harshly effected too.
A good example is my friend Zach Nagelvoort- he was drafted before he got here. While it was a 4th round pick, I'm sure he realizes that he didn't live up to that potential. (FWIW, Edmonton let him go, and he signed with an ECHL team).
All in all, the risks seem to be getting greater, given the number of players who don't seem to be panning out.
What's your take on it?
First, let me say, in agreement with you, that Zach Nagelvoort is one of the finer gentlemen to don a Michigan jersey. I was SO happy to watch him put together a solid senior season.
Regarding your question, let me tell you that NHL scouts HATE having to make the draft call on kids so young. Likewise, college recruiters/coaches have to make that call even earlier.
As in any sport, physical and mental maturation occurs differently for every player. As long as kids choose to commit and then continue to be drafted so early, such inconsistencies will continue. Not sure if that answers your question. Kind of stated the obvious here.
I'm kind of curious if there's any talk of upping the draft age to 20 or so. By then you have a much better idea of the potential.
Not sure if that would help us by making sure we get players for two seasons, or hurt by increasing the odds that we just have them for two seasons.
But for the people making a living finding new, professional, talent, it would help them a lot.
There is an NHL committee investigating whether to move the draftable age back to 19. In 1980, the age was moved from 19 to 18 to make it easier to absorb the younger WHA players when the NHL and WHA merged.
It would help NHL teams. The effect on college hockey wouldn't be that great in my estimation. It would affect a few, but not the majority of early defectors.
You mentioned that Colleges and Jr teams are forced to move X amount earlier to keep up- would it help them, too?
Or would they still just fight each other for talent?
In other words- is the challenge of recruiting kids earlier and earlier because of the NHL or because of Major Jr vs College?
Thanks for replying, it is quite interesting given that you do follow it much more.
At one time, the Major Junior vs. American College battle was a small factor. But, frankly, since a player can commit to a college and flee to Major Junior anywhere in the process yet may not move from Major Junior to American College, it's not a big consideration.
The major factor for early commitments is for the college to secure a promise before another college secures that promise. And, it's just a promise until a LOI is signed.
I don't see changing the qualifying age for drafting by NHL teams affecting that very much.
ISS only ranks the first round until a month before the draft when they come out with a very comprehensive draft prediction/ranking and player by player analysis. I consider them to be among the two or three leaders in the rankings business?
Most rankings currently have both Norris and Martin in the late 2nd or early 3rd. That's why I thought it noteworthy that they have Norris on the rise. Michael Pastujov will likely be a mid to late round choice as well.
Last edited:
