From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: WJHC: Stats
Date: 26 Dec 92 22:56:05 GMT
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department

In article <1992Dec26.041606.29446@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>In article <1992Dec26.030433.7610@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>>
>>Establish regulars under 22 in the NHL...criterion 20 GP this
>>season as of the third week of December...(5 GP for a goaltender)
>
>I think this is overly stringent...  But I won't question it now.
>
>>So there are between 35 and 40 players under 22 in the NHL playing
>>on a regular basis...a little over 5% of the players...and their
>>are only a handful of them that are a dominant or a significant
>>contributor.  I would not doubt that some shrewd general
>>managers would "lend" their 20 and 21 year olds to the Olympic
>>program for player development as Pat Quinn did with a 21-year old
>>Adrian Plavsic last year.  Many of the other young players in the minor
>>leagues could be loaned to an Olympic program without much effect
>>on the NHL team.
>
>Good writing, Gerald, but the math is a bit off, I believe.  If there are
>40 players comprising of, let's say, 8% of the "established regulars," then
>there are 500 regulars in the league, which makes it 21 per team, one more
>even than the number that can be dressed.
>

The 20 GP (i.e. having dressed for about 60% of the games played) is not
a very stringent criteria...and about an average of 22 or 23 players per
team qualify under that criteria...so my statement of a little more than
5% is much more correct than saying 10%.  It is about 1.5 players per
team out of 22 or 23 players.

>If you say there are 16 regulars for each team (15 skaters, 1 goalie, let's
>say), then 40 (which comes out to a little over 10%) is not an insignificant
>number.  Plus, I think your criterion is too stringent on the basis that many
>of the youngsters currently playing in the league have just been called up
>(to replace veterans who flopped/got hurt early in the season), and it's too
>quick to say if they will become "established regulars" or not.  For example,
>Ray Whitney was called up when Petri Skriko was released, and has yet to be
>scratched for a single game.
>

As I said, typically, with my loose qualification of an established
regular...i.e. dressing for at least about 60% of the GP...means that
about 22-23 players tend to qualify per team to that definition...
  
Yes, I perhaps didn't include some players like Ray Whitney, but these
are balanced by those young players who are included who have now been
sent down to the minors after having failed to make it (Drake Berehowsky
matchs Ray Whitney)...

...and a young player called up is more likely to replace a young
player...especially since the advent of non-recallable waivers.

...22 and 23 are really the breakthrough ages in the NHL for the vast
majority of players...really only Canada and Russia would lose a
significant number of players if a age-group Olympics were held, and
that of course would make the Olympics more competitive...not less...
and since a country could have most of the team ready and prepared,
an NHL team releasing one of these young stars as a last minute
addition for a month would be easily conceivable.  With so many teams
making the playoffs, say for example, if such an Olympics were this
year, if say Quebec were safely into the playoffs in February...an
NHL team might be willing to release a player like Sundin for a month.

Gerald
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey