Draft Roulette

Michael Prapavessis is a rarity.

Oh, he may well end up being a very outstanding addition to the Engineers this coming fall. From all indications, he almost certainly will be an excellent defensive add, and a real quarterback for the RPI power play. But when I say "rarity," I'm not talking about his talent.

As a draft pick of the Dallas Stars, he's very much an oddity in the college hockey world. Why? Because Dallas just doesn't draft a lot of college-bound players. There were only two players last season who saw the ice in all of college hockey whose rights were owned by Dallas: Michigan's Alex Guptill (who signed with the Stars following the year, foregoing his senior season) and Maine's Devin Shore (who led the Black Bears in scoring last year by a country mile).

Every other team in the NHL, with the exception of Detroit (three), had at least twice the number of prospects playing in Division I last season, and most had six or more - Florida and Chicago led the way with a whopping 14 players each.

What does that mean for Prapavessis? To answer, we should first take a look at what the draft means.

The NHL draft is unique among professional sports drafts in North America in that a drafted player does not give up his amateur status in order to either be drafted or have their rights maintained. The two most followed drafts, put on by the NFL and NBA, require potential draftees with remaining collegiate eligibility to relinquish that eligibility before the draft even takes place. In baseball, drafted players may choose to sign with their team, relinquishing amateur status, or they can choose not to, in which case the drafting team loses rights to the player.

Hockey is different. As outlined very well by SB Nation last week, few pay attention to the NHL Entry Draft in part because most of the names called are years out from appearing even in the minor leagues. Teams can draft players and then allow them to continue their development in college or in major junior leagues until making a decision on signing them. When it comes to college players, they have 30 days after the player leaves school (past two years out from the draft) to sign them before losing their rights. That can, in some instances, give teams as many as five or six years to monitor a prospect's development before making a decision to offer a contract.

When it comes to draftee development, NHL teams certainly don't mind leaving a player in college or major junior for a few years. That's development that doesn't cost them a nickel. Frequently, they only come calling when they feel a player is ready for the pros, or that their development will be accelerated or enhanced in the minors.

From a college program's perspective, the NHL Draft has a number of edges. One benefit of having players drafted comes in simple prestige, but the draft, by its nature, limits a player's options. That's also potentially beneficial.

RPI fans can see this benefit illustrated in the early departures of Ryan Haggerty and Mike Zalewski. Neither player was drafted, and both players had solid seasons last year as free agents that impressed scouts enough to draw contract offers. With free agents, NHL teams have to jockey with each other in order to sign the ones they want to develop. Zalewski could have potentially had many offers on the table, or it's possible Vancouver was the first one, seeking to get in ahead of other teams to gain his services for the future.

In a world where Zalewski had been drafted, however, that dynamic doesn't exist. The only question becomes the needs and plans of the team holding his rights. If Columbus, for instance, held his rights, Vancouver wouldn't have been showing up with a contract, and the only concern is whether Columbus wants him to keep developing for free in college.

This is also well illustrated by the only drafted player on the RPI roster last season - Jason Kasdorf. There was more than a little speculation among RPI fans following Kasdorf's injury that Winnipeg could potentially sign him away, but in the bigger picture, this made little sense. Goaltending needs especially being easier to establish, one only had to look at the fact that Winnipeg had another goaltender in college hockey - UMass-Lowell's Connor Hellebuyck - who was putting up fantastic numbers.

If you were going to choose between signing a player with two outstanding seasons under his belt, including one in which he led his team to the Frozen Four (and was drafted in an earlier round), and signing one that had one outstanding season and then suffered a season-ending injury that snuffed out his second and is untested since the injury, which would you sign? You'd probably sign the same one Winnipeg signed, as Hellebuyck has left Lowell after two years, and you'd leave the other in college to see how he bounces back from his injury.

So in some ways, it's good to have NHL draft picks on your roster. It's honestly not a matter of simply having more talent and having a better team - yes, being drafted by the NHL means a player probably has more overall talent, but hockey's still a team sport. This year's national championship was won by a team with a total of one NHL draftee on their roster (beating a team with 14). A year earlier, it was a team with just four. Having few draftees isn't necessarily a hindrance, just as having many isn't a panacea.

But there are certainly drawbacks as well. The biggest of them have to do with team needs. If an NHL team is lacking at a position where your team has one of their draftees, they might be leaving sooner rather than later. More concerning can often be the preferences of front offices when it comes to development. There are some that are more likely than others to tell a prospect that they'd prefer to see them playing in major junior rather than staying in (or going to) school. Non-draftees don't have a team hovering over them giving their opinions.

That brings us back to Prapavessis. Why does Dallas have so few prospects playing college hockey? Are they shuffling players away from the NCAA?

Prapavessis is Dallas' first college-linked draft selection since 2012, when they drafted Shore in the 2nd round and Lowell defenseman Dmitry Sinitsyn in the seventh round. Shore is still with Maine after two years, Sinitsyn left Lowell after one season and played last year in the WHL.

In 2011, Dallas drafted defenseman Jamie Oleksiak of Northeastern in the first round, and he never played another game in college as he was off to the OHL the following season. In 2010, their one and only collegiate selection was Guptill, who just left Michigan after three years. They also drafted goaltender Jack Campbell in the first round, who had de-committed from Michigan the previous November and chose to play in the OHL instead.

Seeing a pattern?

(As a complete aside to the main topic of this article, Prapavessis' OHL rights are held by London, which has a reputation for being the most ruthless team in major junior when it comes to pursuing college players.)

So what about Los Angeles, you say? They drafted Alec Dillon, slated to be on campus in 2015. We've outlined here that he's a target for Edmonton in the WHL, considering that they traded for his rights. The good news is that the Kings just won their second Stanley Cup in three years with the same goaltender who came up through college (Jonathan Quick, who spent two years at UMass).

However, one of the Kings' scouts is already indicating that their "development guys" are going to be the ultimate arbiters of whether he ends up in Troy or Edmonton. We'll probably know the answer relatively soon, as he'll probably be in Edmonton for the 2014-15 season if that's the route he's going to take.

The NHL draft, as it pertains to college hockey, is a definite crap shoot on many levels. We'll have to see if this year's results ultimately carry positives or negatives for the Engineers.

Amateurish

You should probably get up to speed on the Nic Kerdiles situation in Wisconsin

The University of Wisconsin men’s hockey team could lose high-profile freshman winger Nic Kerdiles to what one school official said was an extraordinary case involving NCAA amateurism rules. 

UW coach Mike Eaves announced Monday that the school is appealing a NCAA decision to make Kerdiles ineligible for the upcoming season. 

If that decision were to stand, it’s doubtful that Kerdiles, a second-round NHL draft pick of Anaheim, would remain in school and return to the Badgers in 2013-14. It’s likely the Ducks would want him to continue his development somewhere else this season, which could mean a move to the Major Junior circuit in Canada. 

... 

Multiple sources in the NHL and college hockey indicate the NCAA acted on photos and postings made public via social media that involve an agent and took place leading up to the NHL Entry Draft in June. 

... 

It’s commonplace for hockey prospects like Kerdiles to have family advisers — almost all are certified as professional sports agents — as long as the adviser abides by NCAA rules that prohibit marketing the player, negotiating with professional teams on the player’s behalf or providing extra benefits like clothes, meals or merchandise of value. 

It’s not clear what specific issues led the NCAA to rule against Kerdiles, an 18-year-old from Irvine, Calif., but the Bucky’s 5th Quarter website culled a photo from an agent’s Twitter account that showed Kerdiles and two of the agent’s clients holding glasses that advertised a specific energy drink. 

The photo could be construed as Kerdiles being marketed by the representative as well as being used to promote a specific product. 

The agent who posted the energy drink photo, Toronto-based Ian Pulver of Pulver Sports, didn’t return a phone call seeking comment Monday. Pulver was also shown in the photo with Kerdiles and others at dinner.

Well, if that just isn't a kick in the pants. As if the NCAA didn't already have enough problems keeping talented young players in school, now something like this comes along to either scare the amateurism back into everyone or drive NHL-minded prospects to major junior.

Like the article says, it's not uncommon for NHL prospects to have "family advisers" while playing in the NCAA - agents in all but name and pay. These "advisers" latch onto prospects in the hopes of cashing in down the road when they negotiate that big contract, a necessary evil when it comes to landing high caliber players for any program, from Wisconsin to RPI.

This "infraction" seems pretty thin. He was caught in a picture with his "adviser" holding a product? Good God, someone call the ambulance, I think I may have fainted.

The NCAA is notorious for being overzealous in its defense of the high and moral position of amateur sports, but college athletics has long been a development area for professional leagues, most notably in football, basketball, and baseball, but in the last 20 years hockey has certainly joined that realm. The major difference with the other three sports is that there isn't really much of a viable alternative to college (unless players are coming right out of high school). That isn't the case with hockey, as a player who can't play in college really won't think twice about heading north of the border to major junior.

This is a simmering problem, and this incident only threatens to make things worse... and for what? A picture on Twitter? Jeez.

Running For the Border

Lost in all of the discussion of the shell game going on amongst Division I conferences this offseason is the continuing war between the CHL and the NCAA over talent - and there is new evidence that the NCAA is losing the battle.

The 2011 NHL Entry Draft was somewhat noted for its lack of collegiate talent in the early rounds. The first selection linked to a college team was defenseman Jamie Oleksiak, who just finished his freshman year at Northeastern, selected 14th overall by Dallas. That followed on with North Dakota recruit J.T. Miller, taken next at 15th by the Rangers, and a pair of Miami recruits, Connor Murphy and Tyler Biggs, by Phoenix and Toronto respectively, at 20th and 22nd. That was it for first round picks - four.

Now, it looks even worse. It's actually down to one. Miller and Murphy have decided to reneg on their commitments and will instead play major junior in the Ontario Hockey League, Oleksiak has left Northeastern and will also play in the OHL, and throw in early second round choice John Gibson (Anaheim), a Michigan commit, who is also bound for the O. Of the top eight draftees who had college hockey connections a little over a month ago at the draft - either as commits or current players - fully half have now defected north of the border.

RPI was indirectly hit by this last season, with recruit Nick Quinn eventually choosing the OHL over college shortly after decommitting, though his choice not to come to RPI may have been affected by other elements, not the least of which was his unexpected cut from Dubuque by Jim Montgomery due to a misinterpretation of USHL rules. There's also Jerry D'Amigo, who ended up finishing his season last year in major junior with Kitchener after he struggled in the AHL, but again, that wasn't a direct correlation - he signed a pro contract, which is why he left RPI, and was probably a little disappointed to have ended up in the OHL.

The Engineers have won some battles, too. D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri were both highly coveted by their OHL teams, both ultimately chose RPI during the summer of 2009. Incoming freshman Jacob Laliberté had also apparently been pursued by Gatineau of the QMJHL that same summer.

Make no mistake - the "war" we talked about last summer has largely come about because some very talented players who in years past probably would have been pushed 100% to the CHL are now considering and in many cases playing NCAA hockey in the United States, both Americans and Canadians. This speaks to the still-growing value of college hockey as a route to the professional ranks. Though this year's draft wasn't the best in that respect, recent drafts have had college and college-linked players performing extremely well (along with American players in general).

The CHL, however, isn't ready to admit that the NCAA can be a fertile ground for talent to grow, not while they're losing good players. They're also willing to take advantage of NCAA rules which force a player who chooses major junior to stay on that route, since the NCAA considers the CHL to be a professional league since many of its players are paid. Once they reel a player in, there's no going back, though NCAA players always have the option to change direction - like Oleksiak did.

College commitments are almost always adhered to within the college community - after all, no coach wants his own commits poached, so he's not likely to go after another's. The CHL certainly doesn't respect those decisions and in many cases will relentlessly pursue top college-bound players up until the point where it becomes obvious that they will not change their minds. It does speak a bit to the character of some (not all) of these players that their commitment - their word - doesn't mean much.

Don't forget, though, that the NHL plays a role here. Some teams out there have proven themselves to be friendly to college hockey - especially teams like Toronto (Brian Burke), New Jersey (Lou Lamoriello), and Washington (George McPhee) who have administrators with links to college. But there are a number of teams out there that clearly accept the CHL's line - Montreal, Anaheim, and Dallas among them. Atlanta was long known to be fairly hostile to college hockey, we'll have to see whether a wholesale management change during their move to Winnipeg will change that for the Jets, who have Jason Kasdorf's draft rights.

For the time being, however, the role of college hockey's PR arm, College Hockey Inc., continues to be important. Paul Kelly has the arduous task of winning hearts and minds for the NCAA experience, and while there's still a long way to go, the effort is being made, and the die has been cast. The CHL may emerge victorious this summer, but the battle continues.

Media Pitstop #1: Adam Wodon

As the season gets closer, we're going to sit down with some media personalities from around the college hockey universe to get their takes on the offseason that has been and the season that will be. Our first sucker volunteer is Adam Wodon. Wodon is the Managing Editor of College Hockey News (CHN), and he's been covering college hockey since 1988. He's a former play-by-play man in the ECAC, having served in that role for Cornell and Princeton over the years, and in the mid-2000s was an occasional college hockey analyst for ESPN and was a regular color man for college broadcasts on CSTV. Before starting CHN - considered one of the "Big Three" news sites for college hockey on the Internet - in 2006, he was a senior writer at USCHO.com for nine years. Basically, he knows what he's talking about.

Believe it or not, we did not photoshop his picture. He should probably be thankful, although we should probably point out that the picture is almost five years old and he's no longer in his mid-30s. (Happy birthday, Adam.)

Without a Peer: It seems like with this so-called "World Hockey Summit" coming up in Toronto that the CHL/NCAA war is ready to heat up even more. What's your take?

Adam Wodon: Well, originally we'd been told that (College Hockey Inc. President) Paul Kelly hadn't been invited, which is true, except that Tom Anastos of the CCHA was invited.

WaP: Is that really a good substitute?

AW: There may be more to the issue than meets the eye. I don't know if it's personal between the people involved, but to me, Tom is as good of a power broker as anyone. Theoretically, Paul Kelly is supposed to be that guy, but I'm sure Tom will get the job done as well as anybody could. Whether that will actually accomplish anything... I don't know if anyone could accomplish anything.

WaP: Bruce Ciskie had a commentary yesterday talking about how the CHL is whining about Paul Kelly doing essentially the same thing they've been doing for 15 years.

AW: Well, it's true. Obviously, we're all biased from our point of view, and they have the right to sell their product, so to speak. I just think it's unfortunate that so much of it is propaganda, and I think that's what really upset people. I don't really know what you can do about it, but a lot of it is misleading and really, it's a disservice to the kids that are involved. From that standpoint, what Paul Kelly is trying to do as far as education is great. That's only going to go so far unless the NHL steps in to do something, and they haven't shown any inclination to do that. I don't think you're going to get anywhere getting the NCAA to change its rules and regulations, so the only option is to hope the CHL plays nice. Otherwise, the only thing that might fix it is if the NHL were to lay out some sort of restrictions on things the way its done in other sports.

WaP: Supposedly there was some hope that the two sides could come to an agreement whereby neither side would poach the others' commitments, even though it's fairly one-sided in that CHL teams are poaching NCAA commits well more frequently.

AW: From what I understand, they've changed a lot of the rules, where you can't play junior A unless you're 16, and there's only a few 16-year-olds allowed on a junior A team. They've eliminated the holding areas for those guys, so they're pumping them into major juniors faster in order to get them wiped off the NCAA radar before NCAA teams even get the chance to recruit them. That's one of the "dirty tricks" out there. It's not illegal, but it's a disservice to the kid, forcing them into those ranks that way, before they have a chance to get educated or really decide what they want to do. We can debate this all day long, but I steadfastly remain behind the idea that (major junior) is not a faster route to the NHL for 99% of hockey players.

WaP: Especially specific types of players that might be better suited for the college route.

AW: Unless you're among the elite of the elite, and even then, I don't believe the NCAA hurts your progress whatsoever. Just look at (Jarred) Tinordi right now, he's a great example. They tell him, "oh, it'll be a faster route to the NHL." Please. It'll still be two or three years. The same thing could have happened going to college for two or three years and then jumping to the NHL. The fact of the matter is, the guys who play four years of college often are then ready for the NHL, whereas guys that leave early spend two or three years in the minors quite frequently. There's so much evidence out there that supports that, but the myth continues. They've certainly won the propaganda war, that's for sure. Ultimately, what are you going to do? They're not going to stop doing that.

WaP: With almost 40 underclassmen that have left to sign pro contracts, what kind of effect is that going to have on the level of play this season?

AW: I'd already thought in the last couple of years that it had leveled the playing field quite a bit. Look at all the teams in the last few years that have made the NCAAs and advanced. It's not just RIT and Bemidji State, but Northeastern a few years ago, and Yale recently. There have been teams in the NCAAs that hadn't even been there recently, like Northern Michigan and Alaska for the first time last season. St. Cloud State won a game! So the playing field had already started to become more level in the years leading up to this even though we haven't seen a team come from nowhere to win the national championship that's never won it before. The funny thing is, it's like, how many more guys could it possibly be? We've set a record this year. The trend has always been growing, but it just keeps happening. Either (the NHL) is digging even deeper to get guys, or the recruiting has improved and they're just taking them faster. It's a shame when RPI and Harvard lose guys, because they don't have much margin for error. RPI in particular, that was a bad one, but unfortunately, Harvard's going to have a huge drop off.

WaP: Well, hopefully you don't have to feel too bad for us.

AW: They should still be OK, but obviously, D'Amigo's a big loss. He wasn't really lights out for (the Engineers), but he was certainly on his way to becoming that for them. He was going to probably be one of the elite players in the nation this year. But overall, the trend is definitely leveling the playing feels. To some extent, you might say that's good looking at it from that standpoint. We did have the feeling in the late 1990s and early 2000s that the rich were getting richer. It does help in that regard, but it helps in a way you wish it wasn't helping for the overall picture.

WaP: Turning to the ECAC... who's going to beat Yale?

AW: Well, I thought it was going to be RPI!

WaP: Do we still have a shot?

AW: I was talking to Ken Schott, and I probably still would have picked Yale regardless. He was saying "oh, who's the favorite now," and I hadn't been aware that RPI was to begin with, but they'll be contenders. If (Yale) gets any semblance of goaltending this year, they'll be fine. If they'd had any to speak of last year they would have been in the Frozen Four.

WaP: How about Boston College? Can anyone beat them nationally?

AW: It's so easy to say that the national champion is going to be the team to beat, but we were talking about it on the way back from Detroit last season, thinking about the top 10 for this year and (BC) was so clearly number one. They have so many players coming back that they're heads and shoulders. But we've seen before that things don't necessarily play out like that. There have been years where teams that have seemed to be so clear-cut number one all year long have something happen and they dive bomb at the end. There are no foregone conclusions, but you'd be crazy not to pick them number one if you're doing a ranking.

WaP: They're so far ahead just in Hockey East, and then you look at some of the other elite teams around the country and they're far ahead there too.

AW: Michigan State loses three underclassmen, Michigan has been losing guys to the NHL and major junior, Notre Dame's had a rough offseason and then Tinordi bails out. Wisconsin got hammered. North Dakota's probably in the mix, though. At this point you just have to thumb through the top programs and find out who's lost the least. Going back to the ECAC, though, I would not overlook Cornell. They will take a step back and I'm not sure they're going to make the NCAA's but they're not going to plummet or anything.

WaP: They're Cornell. They're never that far from the top even when they're having a down season.

AW: The key is their new goalie (Andy Iles). He put up better numbers on the Under-18 team than Jack Campbell did last year. We'll see what happens. He's 5'8" which is practically unheard of at Cornell, but he's a local guy (from Ithaca). If he does anything, they'll be fine. They're not going to compete as well nationally. But do you know who my dark horse is nationally this year? Merrimack.

WaP: Merrimack?

AW: (chuckles) Yeah. My dark horse to make the NCAAs.

WaP: Bombshell. How do you think the WCHA realignment is going to play out?

AW: Obviously, Bemidji State will instantly have rivalries and whatnot. Nebraska-Omaha's a little bit outside that scope, but with (UNO coach) Dean Blais coming back into the league they'll find their way into the mix pretty quick. It only makes the WCHA stronger, as if they really needed to be stronger, so it's a little crazy, but now they've got even more teams to beat each other up with. It remains to be seen what kind of effect that has for them on the national level, whether it helps or hurt them. I'm more interested to see how the three new coaches in the CCHA (at Bowling Green, Ohio State, and Western Michigan) work out. We won't be able to tell this year, but Western and Bowling Green, if they can get their act together and start competing for the same types of players Miami is getting, we might see the CCHA have some more compelling races. They've been a pretty top-heavy league for a number of years.

Don Lucia and the Changing Face of Recruiting

If you have yet to read the outstanding interview with Minnesota head coach Don Lucia at College Hockey News, you owe it to yourself to give it a look. Lucia and Adam Wodon touch on some of the issues surrounding the Gophers - issues that have led to frustration among the Gopher faithful and amusement among the many Gopher haters - but, like an onion, this interview has layers. As you peel away the layers, you delve into some core issues that every team has to deal with when it comes to recruiting and holding onto players that are relatively new and that Minnesota, perhaps, highlights most brightly.

For years, Minnesota recruited only the best high school players in the state of Minnesota. The team went decades without having a player who hailed from outside of the Land of 10,000 Lakes. It was tradition, but tradition didn't lead to a great deal of success, especially on the national level. When Don Lucia first arrived in Minneapolis, he broke the status quo almost right away. The game winning goal in the Gophers' first national championship victory in almost a quarter-century was scored by a North Dakotan (Grant Potulny). Soon, the Gophers were bringing in Europeans (like Thomas Vanek) and Canadians (like Kris Chucko), and Minnesota won a second consecutive national title and were top contenders for years.

But then, a slow slide began. Last season, the Gophers finished with a losing record for the first time under Lucia (and the first time he was personally under .500 in 17 straight seasons as a college coach), and missed the national tournament for the first time since his first season in Minneapolis. What happened?

As the interview discusses, Minnesota, as one of the giants of college hockey, attracts gobs of blue-chip talent. But in the new recruiting atmosphere, created in part by the collective bargaining agreement put into place after the 2004-05 NHL lockout, sees many of the top talents leaving for the pros much quicker than they did in the past.

But there's another element: the growing war for talent with the Canadian Hockey League, colloquially referred to as the "major junior" leagues - the WHL, the OHL, and the QMJHL. College teams have a major disadvantage to major junior when it comes to attracting talent: college players can leave for major junior, but the opposite is not true. Once you're in major junior, you're there, but going to college doesn't preclude a player from leaving for the CHL. Thus, NCAA teams increasingly are becoming concerned not only with losing players (and recruits) to pro contracts, but also to major junior contracts.

Michigan, another titan of college hockey, is growing to be the poster child for the major junior problem. They've lost two top recruits that had been expected in Ann Arbor - last winter, losing US Junior Team goaltender Jack Campbell to the OHL, and just last week losing top forward prospect Lucas Lessio, also to the OHL.

RPI is not immune from this phenomenon, especially with the successful recruiting of late. Even before Brandon Pirri and Jerry D'Amigo arrived on campus, the wonder was whether one or both would suddenly jump to the OHL, but they spurned Sudbury and Kitchener respectively. Wanna freak out? Type "Brandon Pirri" into a Google search box. Google will suggest "brandon pirri ohl" before "brandon pirri rpi." In June, the Saginaw Spirit traded for his rights, suggesting they think there's at least a chance Pirri could come to the OHL.

But Pirri's flight risk isn't limited to Saginaw - the Chicago Blackhawks own his rights and have loomed ominously in the background. The collective bargaining agreement set up a salary cap that the Blackhawks played hard and fast with in building a Stanley Cup winning team, and the time has come to pay the piper, leading to an absolute fire sale that has decimated Chicago's farm system. In need of bodies to fill out their roster and the roster in Rockford, their AHL affiliate, they have looked to sign rookies - they're far cheaper than veterans, especially in the minor leagues, and they've already gone shopping in the college ranks, plucking Nick Leddy away from Lucia with three seasons of eligibility remaining.

Is Brandon Pirri coming back to RPI? Probably. There hasn't been much to definitively indicate that he would take either route. Will he be here after this season? That would be shocking. The same is true of Jerry D'Amigo - anything RPI gets from these super sophs after this season, it has to be said, is going to be gravy. That's just the way things are for the very best players

When Kyle Palmieri left Notre Dame this week to sign with Anaheim, he became the 37th player in all of college hockey (one, Oswego's Eric Selleck, was from D-III) to forfeit college eligibility to sign a pro contract. Of those, 17 (including Selleck) were giving up either two or three years of remaining eligibility. That's practically an unheard of number of underclassmen jumping ship, and the very best players are starting to leave after just one or two seasons in college, with the talent war with major junior only exacerbating the situation.

So what ends up happening? For the top teams like Minnesota and Michigan, who bring in top players left and right, it means more and more frequently that they're only going to be as good as their most recent freshman class - the ones they can bring onto campus, anyway. It also means that they are actively making plans to lose some of their players early, recruiting even more top talent than they might normally expect to need, and managing their arrival dates.

But how can teams mitigate this problem without necessarily yo-yoing up and down the league standings every year? Coaches understand college's role as a development level for professional hockey. But there are prototypes out there for top players they can get maximum production from - players like Chase Polacek, overlooked in high school and considered to be too small for the NHL, but he works just fine in college, doesn't he? Jacob Laliberté projects to be very similar, and as we've mentioned before, his size makes it more likely that he'd develop better in college than in major junior, though he too is a question mark when it comes to possibly heading to the CHL. These are the diamonds in the rough that will be the anchors of top teams in the near future, working hand in hand with the shooting stars that will be gone after a year or two.

Those types will be just as important as the blue chippers as the recruiting trail continues to evolve.