Quoting: BurgerBoss
I'd say AHL, because it's the best developing ground in playing against adult professionals. NCAA and CHL have both the age limit of 21, therefore all of the players there are young. It's a level playing field in that sense for all the rookies and young guys, but the case is different in NHL with the players being all from 18 to 43 years old at the moment,
Quoting: Xqb15
The NCAA doesn’t have a 21 yr old age limit.
I think this falls into the category of it depends on the player. If a player needs to mature and get stronger the NCAA is significantly better because the amount of time put into training and practice in season is significantly more. The draw back is the amount of games and difference in talent in competition.
If a player needs to play to develop, ie defensive game awareness, then the AHL is significantly better, because they play 70+ games and is arguably the 2nd best league in the world.
exactly there is no age limit in the NCAA matter of fact, players in the NCAA tend to be older.
There isn't a question about it. The NCAA develops better players.
Not only is there more time for coaching, most programs have better facilities, and you are looking at players constantly having to adjust to things like different rink sizes etc... which make them more well rounded players.
On top of it, there are no old slow guys in the NCAA. It's a faster paced game where the focus is on hockey. There is limited goonery.
The NCAA is actually one of the largest producers of NHL players now. Their rate of player production keeps rising year after year.
32% of players on active NHL rosters played college hockey. Up from 20% in 2000.
It keeps rising, because the benefits provided are next level and can't be matched. Like most sports. It will eventually be the primary path to the NHL for anyone not capable of playing at 18.