Can a high profile prospect refuse to play for the team that drafted them?

[Brodeur]

So essentially a player is owned by a team until he’s 27 unless they trade his rights?

No, not necessarily, other posters listed out the various scenarios. Maybe to make it easy, let's just take this year's draft with a hypothetical scenario.

Team X wins the lottery but for whatever reason presumed #1 pick Shane Wright doesn't want to sign. He could hypothetically refuse to sign and re-enter the 2024 Draft at which point he'd be taken by Team Y who would own his rights for a couple years. Wright could refuse to sign, play an overage year in the OHL and beer league for another season, and then he'd be UFA in the summer of 2026 when he'd be required to sign a two year ELC. But that's pretty unrealistic that he'd give up four years of pro hockey and delay his ELC for that long.

He could refuse to sign and force a trade before he re-enters the 2024 Draft. Team X would only get the 33rd overall pick in 2024 as compensation, so it would be more beneficial to start a bidding war and trade Wright while they still own his rights.

Bryan Berard explains why he asked the Senators to trade him - Sportsnet.ca

It wasn't the same scenario, but Ottawa drafted Bryan Berard with the top pick in 1995 and there were complications with signing him (Berard wanted to play immediately, Ottawa wanted him to go back to juniors / didn't have the money to pay him) which led to some bad blood. Berard requested a trade and Ottawa dealt Berard in January 1996.

Carolina drafted Jack Johnson with the 3rd overall pick in 2005 back when people thought he was a mix of Scott Stevens and Scott Niedermayer. Carolina offered to sign him to an ELC during the spring of 2006 but Johnson was having a grand time in college and wanted to go back for his sophomore year. Apparently there was some animosity with the Johnson camp and Carolina regarding the negotiation which led to Carolina trading Johnson to Los Angeles on the eve of the eve of the 2006-07 season. Vaguely recall some threats that Johnson would play out his four years at Michigan and go UFA rather than sign with Carolina, but he signed with Los Angeles after his sophomore year.

Another posted listed out the Blake Wheeler scenario. Wheeler was an outlier in that he didn't start college hockey until his D+2 season and ended up spurning Phoenix who had drafted him 5th overall in 2004. Wheeler became UFA in the spring of 2008. But I think most considered Wheeler a raw project when he was drafted, so this is definitely a different scenario than a "generational" player who could step into the NHL at 18.

It's one thing for a raw prospect who was expected to need 2-3 years of development before turning pro to consider not signing. But it's a different question for a generational guy to sit out. As many others said, Eric Lindros is your closest example and he only sat out a year before Quebec decided to auction him off.

 

[Anglesmith]

we just disagree
as i tried to show, it seems that any non-Russian prospect, whether CHL or NCAA or IIHF
have the same opportunity to wait out ~4+ years and become UFA

every spring, there are threads tracking all the impending rights expirations at
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
and CapFriendly shares similar lists for various scenarios

It definitely seems that way when taking a surface glance at the rules, but the actual statistics show that only NCAA players take this route. Plugging our ears and pretending that there is no difference in light of that makes no sense to me. It is like saying "the die looks like a fair die to me" when it has rolled exclusively 6s for 20 consecutive rolls.

The fact is, NCAA players get to make money, get a degree (usually from an impressive-sounding school) and live close to home, and end up as UFAs before ever needing to go into the real world and fend for themselves. No other prospects have that. And that, apparently, is enough of a difference in situation to create this issue.

 

[cwede]

It definitely seems that way when taking a surface glance at the rules, but the actual statistics show that only NCAA players take this route. Plugging our ears and pretending that there is no difference in light of that makes no sense to me. It is like saying "the die looks like a fair die to me" when it has rolled exclusively 6s for 20 consecutive rolls.
The fact is, NCAA players get to make money, get a degree (usually from an impressive-sounding school) and live close to home, and end up as UFAs before ever needing to go into the real world and fend for themselves. No other prospects have that. And that, apparently, is enough of a difference in situation to create this issue.

I understand and agree that for NA prospects, the NCAA route to UFA is less-risky, less-complicated, and stronger developmentally

I wonder what examples there may be of IIHF kids, who waited out the 4 years playing at/near home, and then chose an NHL team to join?

 

[Brodeur]

I understand and agree that for NA prospects, the NCAA route to UFA is less-risky, less-complicated, and stronger developmentally

I wonder what examples there may be of IIHF kids, who waited out the 4 years playing at/near home, and then chose an NHL team to join?

Florida drafted Joonas Donskoi in the 4th round in 2010 but were unable to come to terms by the June 1, 2012 deadline. Presumably Donskoi was back in the 2012 NHL Draft pool but went unselected (maybe 2013 as well?). He later had a breakout season in Finland and signed with San Jose in 2015. But maybe not a case of a high level prospect opting not to sign.

 

[Chainshot]

The poster's rectal cavity.

 

[wetcoast]

Nice try, Shane. Hope you like dry heat.

I really doubt that Shane signed up here 10 years ago but you got the likes that you wanted eh?

 

[Chips]

demand a trade or go to US college and play all 4 years and become UFA ( NHL needs to fix this)

but that's about it I think....

I’m pretty sure 4 years applies to CHL as well. Decline to sign with the team who drafts you. Wait 2 years, get drafted again, decline, wait two years.

there’s pluses and minuses to that version and the NCAA version but if a player is highly competitive/worried about his development enough (that he doesn’t want to get ruined by a shit NHL team) he can be a FA in 4 years for a cost (still with an ELC)

 

[Jim Bob]

Section 8.6 of the CBA covers it all.

The age of the player when drafted and what league they were playing in and what they do after they are drafted all play into how long a team has the draft rights to a player.

The simplest examples are 18yo kids drafted out of the CHL, like Shane Wright. If they stay with their CHL club, the team that drafts them holds their rights for two years. After which they re-enter the draft.

Players drafted out of Jr A or the NCAA at 18yo have their rights held for 4 years. After that time they are usually too old to re-enter the draft and are then FAs, like Adam Fox and others.

And players drafted out of Europe basically have their rights held until the team doesn't want to hold their rights any longer.

 

[MichaelFarrell]

Not entitled at all, IMO. The player is paying the price by turning down money to not play for that team.

Not saying I like when players do this, but this doesn't make them entitled.

You’re giving up years of your professional career. Of course you are losing money.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Can a player not enter the draft ?

Of course lol. What you think there's a gun to their head?

 

[Chrisinroch]

Have you heard the tragedy of Darth Lindros the Wise?

Also: No, I don't believe so. I believe the NHL team would retain NHL rights of the player and the clock on that tenure would start when the player is back in N. America

Excellent

 

[Royale With Cheese]

You’re giving up years of your professional career. Of course you are losing money.

That's my point.

They are making a choice to not play and to not receive money. Therefore, they are not entitled.

 

[Regal]

we just disagree
as i tried to show, it seems that any non-Russian prospect, whether CHL or NCAA or IIHF
have the same opportunity to wait out ~4+ years and become UFA

every spring, there are threads tracking all the impending rights expirations at
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
and CapFriendly shares similar lists for various scenarios

To me, those calling it a loophole are being nonsensical. The rules apply the same to all players, so not sure how that constitutes a loophole anymore than normal UFA rights. It’s just posters being emotional

 

[cwede]

Can a player not enter the draft ?

I dont think it works that way
Teams have lists of eligible players and draft from that
Could draft a blind ballerina if they wanted
Recall last summer, the deviant prospect who posted pictures of a sex partner asleep and unaware. In wake of scandal, he asked teams not to pick him.
But a now-former NHL GM selected him early

 

[Tawnos]

It definitely seems that way when taking a surface glance at the rules, but the actual statistics show that only NCAA players take this route. Plugging our ears and pretending that there is no difference in light of that makes no sense to me. It is like saying "the die looks like a fair die to me" when it has rolled exclusively 6s for 20 consecutive rolls.

The fact is, NCAA players get to make money, get a degree (usually from an impressive-sounding school) and live close to home, and end up as UFAs before ever needing to go into the real world and fend for themselves. No other prospects have that. And that, apparently, is enough of a difference in situation to create this issue.

NCAA players aren't allowed to make money playing their sport.

The only reason why CHL players never do it is that there isn't really anywhere for them to continue development after they age out of juniors. So they're likely to sign with the team that drafted them the second time around. Also, the problem was usually with the original drafting team, and they're not going to be taken by a team the second time around that didn't do their diligence on whether or not he'd sign. Really, this works out better than having to wait another 2 years like NCAA players do.

 

[Chips]

IMO if a player refuses to play for the team that drafted him, he is an entitled little bitch.

Yea no, the players is the entitled one, not the fans who “deserve” to own a players life trajectory



to the OP it’s been said again and again, the KHL as a specific route isn’t super viable but there’s the NCAA if they player had the foresight to assume an awful team would draft him; or as a CHL player he can stay there over being picked twice.

***question:
I know NA players can’t go from the CHL to the AHL before age 20, but since AHL teams can sign their own guys, can a CHL player not sign and stay in the CHL two years until 20, then sign with an AHL team for two years? The main advantage NCAA players have here is a less intense schedule that allows them to grow if they’re undersized, and they’re playing against men.

The CHL has always been seen as better development wise so that’s an advantage more generally, but specifically for the OPs question of not signing with the team that drafted you, it could be an issue in development if you’re older playing easy minutes against kids.

Question 2: Also can a CHL player leave that league at any point after 18 and join a college NCAA team? Before and or after the new money rules in NCAA? Like get drafted, not sign and play CHL 2 years then join a college team to play against men?

 

[Chips]

NCAA players aren't allowed to make money playing their sport.

The only reason why CHL players never do it is that there isn't really anywhere for them to continue development after they age out of juniors. So they're likely to sign with the team that drafted them the second time around. Also, the problem was usually with the original drafting team, and they're not going to be taken by a team the second time around that didn't do their diligence on whether or not he'd sign. Really, this works out better than having to wait another 2 years like NCAA players do.

Mind you the rules changed didn’t they? Can’t NCAA players profit now? Not that NCAA players specifically in our sport will make shit, probably nothing, but they can .

 

[Tawnos]

Mind you the rules changed didn’t they? Can’t NCAA players profit now? Not that NCAA players specifically in our sport will make shit, probably nothing, but they can .

To be clear, they can get endorsements and compensation for using their images, but they're still not making a salary. I'd guess that most of the players aren't going to be able to get much of anything. I think some schools do a stipend, but it's not much money either.

 

[Tawnos]

Yea no, the players is the entitled one, not the fans who “deserve” to own a players life trajectory



to the OP it’s been said again and again, the KHL as a specific route isn’t super viable but there’s the NCAA if they player had the foresight to assume an awful team would draft him; or as a CHL player he can stay there over being picked twice.

***question:
I know NA players can’t go from the CHL to the AHL before age 20, but since AHL teams can sign their own guys, can a CHL player not sign and stay in the CHL two years until 20, then sign with an AHL team for two years? The main advantage NCAA players have here is a less intense schedule that allows them to grow if they’re undersized, and they’re playing against men.

The CHL has always been seen as better development wise so that’s an advantage more generally, but specifically for the OPs question of not signing with the team that drafted you, it could be an issue in development if you’re older playing easy minutes against kids.

Question 2: Also can a CHL player leave that league at any point after 18 and join a college NCAA team? Before and or after the new money rules in NCAA? Like get drafted, not sign and play CHL 2 years then join a college team to play against men?

For question 2, what matters is where a player was drafted out from, so a guy drafted out of the CHL is re-entering the draft after two years anyway. He'll still be able to be a UFA after 4 years, like any other CHL draftee... or NCAA draftee for that matter.

On the first question, after 2 years the player gets re-drafted.

 

[jbeck5]

Mathieu Chouinard.

Drafted by Ottawa in first round.

Opted to re enter draft 2 years later.

Drafted by Ottawa in second round.

 

[Chips]

For question 2, what matters is where a player was drafted out from, so a guy drafted out of the CHL is re-entering the draft after two years anyway. He'll still be able to be a UFA after 4 years, like any other CHL draftee... or NCAA draftee for that matter.

On the first question, after 2 years the player gets re-drafted.

I know they’ll get drafted but take that out of the equation for a sec; can a drafted (while in the CHL) but unsigned player sign with an AHL team directly at age 20?

And do players I assume sometimes join college and then the NCAA team after 18? Does playing in the CHL consider a youth player “professional” that he couldn’t leave the CHL, go to college and join a NCAA team?


I’m just thinking about the difference in developmental viability of a CHL player holding out vs an NCAA player, the latter being able to play against men less likely to develop bad habits manhandling boys to easy goals; if there’s a way for a player initially drafted at 18 playing for a CHL team, still getting drafted again at 18 but could he at any point switch to a different league

 

[Eisen]

demand a trade or go to US college and play all 4 years and become UFA ( NHL needs to fix this)

but that's about it I think....

Why? It's the one thing that gives a player power over his destiny and it's expensive enough for him.

 

[Tawnos]

I know they’ll get drafted but take that out of the equation for a sec; can a drafted (while in the CHL) but unsigned player sign with an AHL team directly at age 20?

And do players I assume sometimes join college and then the NCAA team after 18? Does playing in the CHL consider a youth player “professional” that he couldn’t leave the CHL, go to college and join a NCAA team?


I’m just thinking about the difference in developmental viability of a CHL player holding out vs an NCAA player, the latter being able to play against men less likely to develop bad habits manhandling boys to easy goals; if there’s a way for a player initially drafted at 18 playing for a CHL team, still getting drafted again at 18 but could he at any point switch to a different league

The player re-enters the draft, and if no one takes them, they become UFA just like any undrafted player outside of the normal draft eligibility rules.

Players have switched from CHL to NCAA after being drafted, but the rules that apply to them regarding this topic are still the same ones that applied when they were drafted and would've applied if they stayed in juniors.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Let’s say an 18 year old kid “generational talent” decides he doesn’t want to play for the team that drafted him. Could he sign in Russia for 3 years for potentially more money and sign with whoever he wants at 21?

Random question

it has sort of happened and we have gotten this thread every year for about 20 years now

 

[Anglesmith]

To be clear, they can get endorsements and compensation for using their images, but they're still not making a salary. I'd guess that most of the players aren't going to be able to get much of anything. I think some schools do a stipend, but it's not much money either.

With the cost of university in the states, living without expenses while playing college hockey represents significant earnings. It's not a slam dunk that other leagues such as in Europe could offer a better financial situation.

I'm not saying that the draw of college hockey is money. I'm saying there is no significant financial loss in staying there.