The kid is a class act the whole way and he's going to haunt Flames fans for years. Get used to hearing the name "Hunter Shinkaruk", preceeded by "goal scored by" because you're going to be hearing it a lot at the Dome for the years to come.
- IanEsplen

That's odd. I grew up a few years ahead of Hunter in the same area. Never before have I heard him described as a "class act", not to mention the fact a lot of teams passed on him. Having met him multiple times in a real world (not him trying to impress) situation, I will have to disagree with your statement. It's cute that you can make that assessment having met him once if ever?

This is an honest question because I don't know the answer.

Why can't college players sign an entry level deal before they are done their college playing time? I understand that they cannot receive any compensation until they are finished playing in college, but could it not be treated as a commitment letter? Perhaps just that, a letter of commitment to the team, and not a contract where compensation is involved. But then they are contractually obligated to join that NHL organization once they college time is complete.

Isn't that how if works for high school athletes about to enter the college ranks? The colleges recruit them, and then the player decided which school he will be attending they sign a commitment letter to that school.

Even now for kids playing junior. They may sign their entry level deal, but they do not receive any compensation if they are returned to their junior team. Monahan could sign his entry level and still go back to Junior, not seeing any of the money but still being committed to the Flames.

Otherwise why wouldn't more college players to the Justin Schultz thing. It isn't a financial issue as the limit on entry level contracts is maxed out the same for all teams. But if you could choose between going to the Flames who are obviously re-building and assumedly will still be doing so a year from now, or you could choose to join a team like Boston (for example) that is in a much better position then why wouldn't you join the team further ahead. I get the "character" aspect to it, but it is completely within the way the rules are laid out.

At least junior players that go unsigned (I believe after 2 years) have to go back into the draft. So they don't get to become a UFA.

I really do hope that he joins the Flames. He is at least saying all the right things. But it is so easy to see why he would choose to go elsewhere.
- dal_johnson

Hope this helps.

http://www.lighthousehock...lege-loophole-ncaa-change

IMO (in no particular order):

Elson, Monohan, Ramage, Seiloff
- The-O-G

How did knight look?

Hope this helps.

http://www.lighthousehock...lege-loophole-ncaa-change
- Colin Dambrauskas

Jesus....I'm not a lawyer!

Can you put this in everyday terms for me?

This is an honest question because I don't know the answer.

Why can't college players sign an entry level deal before they are done their college playing time? I understand that they cannot receive any compensation until they are finished playing in college, but could it not be treated as a commitment letter? Perhaps just that, a letter of commitment to the team, and not a contract where compensation is involved. But then they are contractually obligated to join that NHL organization once they college time is complete.

Isn't that how if works for high school athletes about to enter the college ranks? The colleges recruit them, and then the player decided which school he will be attending they sign a commitment letter to that school.

Even now for kids playing junior. They may sign their entry level deal, but they do not receive any compensation if they are returned to their junior team. Monahan could sign his entry level and still go back to Junior, not seeing any of the money but still being committed to the Flames.

Otherwise why wouldn't more college players to the Justin Schultz thing. It isn't a financial issue as the limit on entry level contracts is maxed out the same for all teams. But if you could choose between going to the Flames who are obviously re-building and assumedly will still be doing so a year from now, or you could choose to join a team like Boston (for example) that is in a much better position then why wouldn't you join the team further ahead. I get the "character" aspect to it, but it is completely within the way the rules are laid out.

At least junior players that go unsigned (I believe after 2 years) have to go back into the draft. So they don't get to become a UFA.

I really do hope that he joins the Flames. He is at least saying all the right things. But it is so easy to see why he would choose to go elsewhere.
- dal_johnson

I believe there is always some money up front when you sign the contract.

Prospects that sign, generally seem to always show up at WHL or OHL camp with a new ride.

That might be where the hold up is.

Anyone else find it odd that Knight recently did pretty much the same thing as Schultz, yet no one is saying a peep about him?

I believe he told the Panthers that he would only play for a few of teams (Flames being one) and that they should trade him or he'd walk when he had the chance.

I'm guessing that since it was more out of the media until it happened that it was okay.

I believe there is always some money up front when you sign the contract.

Prospects that sign, generally seem to always show up at WHL or OHL camp with a new ride.

That might be where the hold up is.

Anyone else find it odd that Knight recently did pretty much the same thing as Schultz, yet no one is saying a peep about him?

I believe he told the Panthers that he would only play for a few of teams (Flames being one) and that they should trade him or he'd walk when he had the chance.

I'm guessing that since it was more out of the media until it happened that it was okay.
- IanEsplen

So where did you hear this?

How did knight look?
- Boom.

I would say just OK.

Thank being said, it was very scrambly out there, so unless a player is extremely skilled it's a tough go.

That's odd. I grew up a few years ahead of Hunter in the same area. Never before have I heard him described as a "class act", not to mention the fact a lot of teams passed on him. Having met him multiple times in a real world (not him trying to impress) situation, I will have to disagree with your statement. It's cute that you can make that assessment having met him once if ever?
- IggyOnly

Actully, I've chatted with him a few times.

My opinion as to where the " he's cocky" rumour comes from is that he is a real confident kid, who believes in himself and is also fairly mature for his age.

That can rub a lot of people the wrong way.

He came out last year to FHFF. He got along with everyone who was there and had a lot of fun playing hockey.

Actully, I've chatted with him a few times.

My opinion as to where the " he's cocky" rumour comes from is that he is a real confident kid, who believes in himself and is also fairly mature for his age.

That can rub a lot of people the wrong way.

He came out last year to FHFF. He got along with everyone who was there and had a lot of fun playing hockey.
- IanEsplen

The Canucks drafting him might have something to do with you talking him up so much...go bug cap fans for not taking him at 23

Jesus....I'm not a lawyer!

Can you put this in everyday terms for me?
- The-O-G

Everyday terms... Players can no longer quit college after the hockey season but before school ends in order to be available on June 1st (before Free Agency). They can still quit college after the hockey season ends but the remain exclusive "property" to their drafting team until August 15th (after Free Agency). This will prevent teams from banking on a player wishing to leave - Ala Jeff Schultz - and signing him as a big Free Agency acquisition.

Long story short, it doesn't prevent a player from leaving his drafting team for another, but it does make it less viable for a team to poach a player based on him leaving college early.

Everyday terms... Players can no longer quit college after the hockey season but before school ends in order to be available on June 1st (before Free Agency). They can still quit college after the hockey season ends but the remain exclusive "property" to their drafting team until August 15th (after Free Agency). This will prevent teams from banking on a player wishing to leave - Ala Jeff Schultz - and signing him as a big Free Agency acquisition.

Long story short, it doesn't prevent a player from leaving his drafting team for another, but it does make it less viable for a team to poach a player based on him leaving college early.
- IggyOnly

The player would still generate a ton of interest though. Even teams with a set roster might still be interested, if they consider the player an upgrade. Only teams with salary issues would be taken out. But, definitely does provide negotiation time.

The player would still generate a ton of interest though. Even teams with a set roster might still be interested, if they consider the player an upgrade. Only teams with salary issues would be taken out. But, definitely does provide negotiation time.
- Boom.

Absolutely. It doesn't stop this king of event from happening, it just tightens it all up a bit.

So where did you hear this?
- Boom.

I just remember Getzlaf driving a brand new Hummer when he played for the Hitmen.

As for Knight, maybe I misheard him, but he said on the radio that him and his agent didn't think Florida was a fit, so they asked them to move him to one of the teams they felt was a better fit for him. (I believe he said there were 4 or 5 teams)

It isn't exactly like Schultz because it sounds like they had a good conversation with the Panthers and it was a mutual parting of ways.

The Canucks drafting him might have something to do with you talking him up so much...go bug cap fans for not taking him at 23
- flashfire

Actully, I took him at 4 in our HB mock draft, so I've been pretty high on him for awhile.

I believe there is always some money up front when you sign the contract.

Prospects that sign, generally seem to always show up at WHL or OHL camp with a new ride.

That might be where the hold up is.

Anyone else find it odd that Knight recently did pretty much the same thing as Schultz, yet no one is saying a peep about him?

I believe he told the Panthers that he would only play for a few of teams (Flames being one) and that they should trade him or he'd walk when he had the chance.

I'm guessing that since it was more out of the media until it happened that it was okay.
- IanEsplen

No, I don't find it odd for two reasons you pointed out without bothering to consider.

1) He made it known that he was not interested in signing, and thus gave the Panthers a chance to get something in return (in this case a 4th rounder).

2) His agent did not turn it into a media circus to drive up his cost.

Everyday terms... Players can no longer quit college after the hockey season but before school ends in order to be available on June 1st (before Free Agency). They can still quit college after the hockey season ends but the remain exclusive "property" to their drafting team until August 15th (after Free Agency). This will prevent teams from banking on a player wishing to leave - Ala Jeff Schultz - and signing him as a big Free Agency acquisition.

Long story short, it doesn't prevent a player from leaving his drafting team for another, but it does make it less viable for a team to poach a player based on him leaving college early.
- IggyOnly

Still in many ways the same mindset applies. Gaudreau (for example) could wait until August 15th and then sign anywhere.

The article talks about how it is "compensation for the player losing 2 years of earning potential", but it is the players choice to do so. And yes junior or European players may be lost to a team after 2 years, but they have to go back into the draft (granted if they are not drafted then they can be free agents but this is mostly in regards to players of note who would very likely be drafted again).

As for players getting money up front, such as a signing bonus, then you make it that for college players they will not receive their signing bonus until they have chosen to leave school. Then the money is still there for them and committed to them, but because of them playing college the rules of that organization / league (not sure of the right wording there) dictate that they cannot yet receive any compensation.

It just seems to tempting and easy to me for a college athlete to decide to wait a couple years (and yes they fore go 2 years of their earning potential) but then have the complete freedom to play wherever they want to. I'm a Flames fan, but in a year's time why would a player want to join the Flames when they could join the Bruins, or the Blackhawks, or the Penguins. They will receive the same money but instantly be on a contender. With the way that the rules are set up I don't understand the motivation to not do that.

The kid is a class act the whole way and he's going to haunt Flames fans for years. Get used to hearing the name "Hunter Shinkaruk", preceeded by "goal scored by" because you're going to be hearing it a lot at the Dome for the years to come.
- IanEsplen

Your man crush on Shinkaruk is getting pretty embarrassing...almost to the GARTH/Grigo level.

Hunter is a really good player. I've watched him live many times. But there is a reason he fell...You just don't want to admit it.

This may take the cake for the dumbest poop I've read all year. You are a blogger who can't spell check (even when it's auto on this site), and your opinion is based off personal feelings not hockey sense. 4th...
- IggyOnly

Easy guys, Ian is a good shight, just picked the wrong team to pull for. I know I was ticked we didn't take Shinkaruk but who knows. He may turn out well for the Canucks, I hope not. Calgary wasn't the only team that passed on him so I don't buy the storyline hype that he will come back to haunt us. Whoever the Canucks picked at that spot is probably going to score against us.

Some real good news is, my good friends uncle is a scout for Carolina hurricanes... He said Poirier was a great pick, had single best game of any first rounder. Also said shinkaruk had a poor playoffs, and had a tough time against the bigger tougher teams. So take it any way you want.

Your man crush on Shinkaruk is getting pretty embarrassing...almost to the GARTH/Grigo level.

Hunter is a really good player. I've watched him live many times. But there is a reason he fell...You just don't want to admit it.
- Iggysbff

Reason sure. Doesn't mean it wasn't a dumb reason.

Sakic, fell because he had a weak handshake.
Kopitar, fell because of where he was born.
Hunter, I'm sure we'll find out in time as to why he fell

Still in many ways the same mindset applies. Gaudreau (for example) could wait until August 15th and then sign anywhere.

The article talks about how it is "compensation for the player losing 2 years of earning potential", but it is the players choice to do so. And yes junior or European players may be lost to a team after 2 years, but they have to go back into the draft (granted if they are not drafted then they can be free agents but this is mostly in regards to players of note who would very likely be drafted again).

As for players getting money up front, such as a signing bonus, then you make it that for college players they will not receive their signing bonus until they have chosen to leave school. Then the money is still there for them and committed to them, but because of them playing college the rules of that organization / league (not sure of the right wording there) dictate that they cannot yet receive any compensation.

It just seems to tempting and easy to me for a college athlete to decide to wait a couple years (and yes they fore go 2 years of their earning potential) but then have the complete freedom to play wherever they want to. I'm a Flames fan, but in a year's time why would a player want to join the Flames when they could join the Bruins, or the Blackhawks, or the Penguins. They will receive the same money but instantly be on a contender. With the way that the rules are set up I don't understand the motivation to not do that.
- dal_johnson

I guess this all depends on the mindset of the player. Does he want to be cog in a well-oiled machine, not necessarily called upon to do much beyond third line duties, maybe second every now and then, or does he want to be at the heart of a young team that is (hopefully) on the rise - a core piece and a leader for years to come? Not saying one is better than the other - the first scenario could turn into the the second after a few years, after all - but perhaps wanting to be part of the start of a new era might be just as appealing, or even more so, to some players than jumping onto an established contender.

Lance Bouma apparently sitting at about 220lbs

Reason sure. Doesn't mean it wasn't a dumb reason.

Sakic, fell because he had a weak handshake.
Kopitar, fell because of where he was born.
Hunter, I'm sure we'll find out in time as to why he fell
- IanEsplen

Was Eberle around?

Reason sure. Doesn't mean it wasn't a dumb reason.

Sakic, fell because he had a weak handshake.
Kopitar, fell because of where he was born.
Hunter, I'm sure we'll find out in time as to why he fell
- IanEsplen

So you were pissed when they didn't take him at 9?

Still in many ways the same mindset applies. Gaudreau (for example) could wait until August 15th and then sign anywhere.

The article talks about how it is "compensation for the player losing 2 years of earning potential", but it is the players choice to do so. And yes junior or European players may be lost to a team after 2 years, but they have to go back into the draft (granted if they are not drafted then they can be free agents but this is mostly in regards to players of note who would very likely be drafted again).

As for players getting money up front, such as a signing bonus, then you make it that for college players they will not receive their signing bonus until they have chosen to leave school. Then the money is still there for them and committed to them, but because of them playing college the rules of that organization / league (not sure of the right wording there) dictate that they cannot yet receive any compensation.

It just seems to tempting and easy to me for a college athlete to decide to wait a couple years (and yes they fore go 2 years of their earning potential) but then have the complete freedom to play wherever they want to. I'm a Flames fan, but in a year's time why would a player want to join the Flames when they could join the Bruins, or the Blackhawks, or the Penguins. They will receive the same money but instantly be on a contender. With the way that the rules are set up I don't understand the motivation to not do that.
- dal_johnson

Would you rather be on a contender or a team with the chance to play big line minutes and establish yourself as a valuable (cash and hockey ability) player? I would pick the latter in a heartbeat!