When the USHL released its official 23-man rosters on September 21st they noted that 295 players had D1 NCAA commitments and 13 were drafted in the NAHL. Given that the USHL is the top junior league in the United States and the largest feeder league to NCAA Division 1 college hockey; we felt it would be interesting to analyze the 23-man rosters.
Every analytical study stems from questions. The main question we were interested in was where do USHL players come from? Then we can look at more granular statistics on what are the ages of players in the league? What are the states they come from? What leagues do they come from? Do they come from the Futures Draft or the Entry Draft?
We focus on the 23-man roster instead of draft results or affiliate lists because the 23-man roster is an indication from the team that those are the 23 best players (at least today) that are able and willing to play on their team.
In this article we will provide the questions at the heart of our research and then explain our findings with tables and explanations.
What is the age breakdown in the USHL?
Junior hockey is mostly made up of players between the ages of 16-20. Some leagues are “younger” like the USHL and some leagues tend to be “older” like the EHL. Instead of looking at the average age of the league, we broke down the birth years of every player in the league. Below is the chart:
|
D.O.B |
# of Players | % |
| 1996 | 50 | 13.62% |
| 1997 | 128 | 34.88% |
| 1998 | 127 | 34.88% |
| 1999 | 48 | 13.08% |
| 2000 | 14 |
3.81% |
What does this tell us? There are actually some interesting comparisons to draw from this data. First, most junior leagues in the US, especially at the Tier 3 level, would show a declining graph where the most players are 1996’s, then a little less for 1997’s and then significantly less for the younger birth years. This data represents a bell curve showing 70% of the USHL players are between 1997 and 1998 birth years (18-19 year olds). Over 95% of the USHL players are born between 1996-1999, and just under 4% of the league is composed of 2000 birth years (the youngest allowable in the league).
Why is this the case in the league?
There are built in reasons why the league is younger than those found in other junior leagues and it is because the rules mandate that a team can only roster four 20-year-old players. If we do the quick math of the 16 teams in the league multiplied by 4 players on each team that equals 64. So even though there are 64 allowed in the league, only 50 are actually in the league this year. This could be the case for multitude of reasons, but the biggest factor would be the fact that a USHL average career is less than 2 years, so for players matriculating into junior hockey at 17 and 18, the majority of them will be playing college hockey before they reach 20-21 years old.
On the other side of the coin, the reason only 15% of the league is in the 1999-2000 age group is because of the difficulty of the league. Very few players at 16-17 are good enough to play in the USHL and so the ones that do are typically high end talents. This is proven by the long list of USHL players on NHL Central Scouting.
Lastly, we wanted to take a look at the month breakdowns. It is an old adage in hockey that you want to be born in the first six months of the year and not the last, but we were curious if that is the case in the USHL.
| Month | # of Players | % |
| Jan | 40 | 10.90% |
| Feb | 38 | 10.35% |
| Mar | 35 | 9.54% |
| Apr | 42 | 11.44% |
| May | 40 | 10.90% |
| Jun | 32 | 8.72% |
| Jul | 21 | 5.72% |
| Aug | 30 | 8.17% |
| Sep | 20 | 5.45% |
| Oct | 26 | 7.08% |
| Nov | 25 | 6.81% |
| Dec | 18 | 4.90% |
As we can see, there is definitely more players being born in the first six months (226 or 62%) than the last six months (141 or 38%). The month to month breakdowns were interesting but didn’t prove to be statistically significant.
What geographical areas are USHL players coming from?
The short answer is that the USHL is the most geographically diverse league we have seen in North American junior hockey. The reason is simple: it’s the only Tier 1 Junior league in the United States which therefore attracts many of the top players from around the country. Second, it’s the best Division 1 college placement league in the world, so players from Canada and overseas who are looking to play college hockey make this a destination.
| State/Country | # of Players | % |
| Minnesota | 62 | 16.89% |
| Michigan | 50 | 13.62% |
| Massachusetts | 21 | 5.72% |
| Wisconsin | 18 | 4.90% |
| Illinois | 18 | 4.90% |
| Canada | 16 | 4.36% |
| New York | 15 | 4.09% |
| New Jersey | 14 | 3.81% |
| Sweden | 14 | 3.81% |
| California | 14 | 3.81% |
| Colorado | 12 | 3.27% |
| Finland | 10 | 2.72% |
| Pennsylvania | 7 | 1.91% |
| Czech Republic | 7 | 1.91% |
| Missouri | 7 | 1.91% |
| Ohio | 7 | 1.91% |
| Russia | 5 | 1.36% |
| Connecticut | 5 | 1.36% |
| New Hampshire | 5 | 1.36% |
| Florida | 5 | 1.36% |
| Texas | 5 | 1.36% |
| Germany | 4 | 1.09% |
| Virginia | 4 | 1.09% |
| Arizona | 4 | 1.09% |
| Idaho | 3 | 0.82% |
| Latvia | 3 | 0.82% |
| Iowa | 3 | 0.82% |
| Slovakia | 3 | 0.82% |
| Indiana | 2 | 0.54% |
| Tennessee | 2 | 0.54% |
| South Dakota | 2 | 0.54% |
| North Dakota | 2 | 0.54% |
| Georgia | 2 | 0.54% |
| Alaska | 2 | 0.54% |
| Ukraine | 2 | 0.54% |
| Hungary | 1 | 0.27% |
| Poland | 1 | 0.27% |
| Maryland | 1 | 0.27% |
| Nebraska | 1 | 0.27% |
| Norway | 1 | 0.27% |
| Denmark | 1 | 0.27% |
| Belarus | 1 | 0.27% |
| North Carolina | 1 | 0.27% |
| Japan | 1 | 0.27% |
| Utah | 1 | 0.27% |
| Rhode Island | 1 | 0.27% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 0.27% |
The breakdown is interesting for a multitude of reasons. First off, there are 16 countries represented here and over 30 different states in the US.
However, if we look deeper at the league we see that it doesn’t follow the same geographical trends that we see in college hockey. Although Minnesota and Michigan are the two largest feeder states into the league, which is the same for college hockey; they account for almost 1/3 of the USHL. In college hockey the number is much less. We also see that Massachusetts is a distant third at 5.72%. Compare that to college hockey statistics where Massachusetts is still third but by much closer margins.
If we look at countries, we see the league is composed of only 66 foreign players. That accounts for 18% of the league. In NCAA D1 the percentage of foreign players is 29%. So why the large difference? It is due to a league rule that limits the number of import players (Canadians are considered imports) teams are allowed on their roster to four. Obviously the league would be a higher caliber if they had more opportunities for Canadians and Europeans. However, the USHL is a USA Hockey sanctioned league and so allowing more import players would decrease the opportunities for home grown talent; not something USA Hockey likely wants.
So what does this all mean?
In looking at the data and understanding why we see some of the differences between USHL vs. NCAA, we also see two main biases in the USHL player pool. First, we see a slight bias in the USHL data towards the Midwestern states. Secondly, we see a bias towards midget hockey and junior hockey. Areas like Illinois and Michigan, both of which tend to lean towards the Midget AAA model as opposed to High School and local youth hockey, see higher numbers in USHL players whereas high school/prep school model states like Minnesota, Massachusetts and Connecticut see a lower percentage of players (in comparison to college hockey geographic breakdowns). These biases are not large but they bring us to our next question which is what leagues are USHL players coming from?
What leagues do USHL players come from?
We started this project looking at different divisions and different leagues and looked at trades but the data was almost too large that the results were cloudy. We simplified it and added in returning players to give us a simplistic look at where players are coming from using this year’s recent 23 man rosters. The chart is below:
| League | # of Players | % |
| USHL | 162 | 44.14% |
| NAHL | 40 | 10.90% |
| U18 AAA | 33 | 8.99% |
| Import | 28 | 7.63% |
| MN HS | 25 | 6.81% |
| U16 AAA | 22 | 5.99% |
| NE Prep | 16 | 4.36% |
| BCHL | 8 | 2.18% |
| OJHL | 7 | 1.91% |
| USPHL | 7 | 1.91% |
| USHS | 5 | 1.36% |
| CHL | 5 | 1.36% |
| CCHL | 4 | 1.09% |
| EHL | 3 | 0.82% |
| AJHL | 1 | 0.27% |
| MJHL | 1 | 0.27% |
This chart shows us a lot of important information in understanding the league. The first statistics that stands out is that the league is composed of only 44% returning players. Some may look at that and think that is really high or really low, but either way it’s a significant number. It means that 56% of the league turned over last season. Imagine that scenario in NCAA or NHL?
Another interesting fact is that 10% of the league is comprised of players coming from the NAHL the year before. So if we add the Canadian junior leagues, the returning USHL players and the NAHL, then we see 65% of the players in the USHL come from junior hockey. So where are the other 35% of the league coming from? The answer is mostly Midget AAA hockey (15%), Imports (8%), Minnesota High School (7%) and New England Prep School (4%).
The midget data is interesting because most coaches will admit that U18 midgets is watered down because the top players are playing junior hockey. If we compare that to U16 hockey where all the best players are still in the league. However, we see that U18 Midget AAA graduated 33 players to the USHL this season or 9% of the entire league. Not bad for the watered down reputation U18 hockey receives.
These numbers are a good indication of where the USHL Scouts are spending their time. They get 65% of their talent either returning or from other junior leagues and roughly 15% from Midget AAA hockey. So 80% of their energy is focused on those areas. The next 20% is made up of a combination of imports (other than Canadian junior leagues) and Prep/HS players.
What, if any, Is the correlation between the USHL Draft and the 23 man rosters?
The USHL has two separate drafts, known as the Futures Draft (Phase I) and the Entry Draft (Phase II). The Futures Draft is for rising 16-year-old players and the Entry Draft is for all ages from 16-20. The Futures Draft has 10 rounds and the Entry Draft has over 20. The biggest difference between the two is that Futures Drafts typically employ the strategy of “get the best player possible” whereas the entry draft has a lot more to do with the fit and the willingness of the player to go to that team. The best 2000 birth years in the country last year were either selected for the US National Program or drafted in the USHL Futures Draft. The players who do not get drafted or fall off the affiliate lists are eligible to be drafted in the Entry draft.
So our first area of study was what draft are players coming from? We assumed the league would be predominately Futures Draft picks with a mix of Entry Draft, Undrafted and Tendered players. However, the results were much different than we anticipated.
| Draft | # of Players | % |
| Entry | 205 | 55.86% |
| Futures | 90 | 24.52% |
| Undrafted | 57 | 15.53% |
| Tendered | 15 | 4.09% |
This was unexpected because the Entry Draft, by definition, is for players passed over in the Futures Draft. Some of these players were passed over 2-3 times before they eventually got drafted. The other interesting result was how high the number of undrafted players there are in the league, over 15%. The Futures Draft, which contains the top 160 players in the country (minus NTDP), only accounts for about 25% of the league. This should be a great message to Futures Draft picks to not get comfortable as well as those who were not selected to know neither was the majority of the league.
The next part of our study is to look at draft position. If we compare draft position statistics between the NHL and USHL we find a lot of differences. In the NHL, where you get drafted matters when looking at historical percentages. Players drafted in the first two rounds have a significantly improved percentage of future success than those drafted below the third round. There is insignificant differences between the success rates of fifth round draft picks and seventh round draft picks in the NHL, but there are stark difference between a first round draft pick and a third round draft pick. Is the same true in the USHL?
We first look at the top 100 players selected and break it down by 10’s to see if there are any strong correlations. The percentages on the far side are the percentage of players in the entire league, so for example, there are 20 players in the league who were selected in the top 10 picks and that accounts for 5.45% of the league.
| Draft # | # of Players | % |
| 1–10 | 20 | 5.45% |
| 11–20 | 22 | 5.99% |
| 21-30 | 24 | 6.54% |
| 31-40 | 21 | 5.72% |
| 41-50 | 20 | 5.45% |
| 51-60 | 16 | 4.36% |
| 61-70 | 20 | 5.45% |
| 71-80 | 12 | 3.27% |
| 81-90 | 11 | 3.00% |
| 91-100 | 13 | 3.54% |
The data shows that there tends to be more players drafted in the first 50 picks (107) than the bottom 50 picks (72). However, it also shows that in a league with 367 players only 107 or 29% are top 50 picks in the draft and only 49% are Top 100 picks. So what about the other half of the league?
| Draft # | # of Players | % |
| 1-100 | 179 | 48.77% |
| 101-200 | 79 | 21.53% |
| 201-300 | 27 | 7.36% |
| 300+ | 7 | 1.91% |
| Tendered | 15 | 4.09% |
| Undrafted | 57 | 15.53% |
When looking at the data we see there is a noticeable trend from Top 100 (49%) down to 101-200 (22%) down to 201-300 (7%). So it would appear that where you are drafted does matter. But it only matters to an extent. The fact that only 53% of the league (Top 100 + Tenders) were drafted within the first 100 picks of their Futures or Entry Draft shows that there is still 47% of the league coming from outside of the Top 6 rounds. That’s a lot of undrafted or late round picks especially if you compare it to NHL data which would show picks outside of the top 60 make up a very small percentage of the league.
Conclusion:
So in the end we have broken down the USHL players from the 23 man rosters and found out their ages, where they come from, what leagues they came from and where and when they were drafted.
What did we learn? We learned that the league is primarily made up of 17-19 year old’s, partially because of league rules and partially because of the nature of the drafts and player availability. We found out that there is a high turnover rate in the league as only 44% returned to the league this past year. With that being said 65% of this years USHL players have junior hockey experience heading into the season. We also found that while the college landscape mirrors a lot of the USHL player landscape, there is a Midwest bias and a strong junior and midget hockey bias in the USHL.
Maybe most interesting of all we discovered that most of the league was drafted in the Entry Draft (or Phase II) and that less than 25% came from the Futures Draft. Also, we discovered that where a player gets drafted matters, but only to a very limited extent. Nearly half the league was drafted after the top 100 picks or not drafted at all so in that light, the draft carries very limited significance.
Follow Up Study:
We are constantly running analysis on college hockey and roads and avenues to it. We study players, hockey statistics, historical trends, leagues, etc. We’ll be conducting a study later in the week about college hockey placement but our next USHL league study will be looking at the USHL Trade Market. What percentage of players are playing for the team that drafted them? How many trades occurred in the past season and what was the impact? Is there a correlation between the spike in college transfers and trades in junior hockey? How do league rules impact the trade market in the league? Who benefits from the trade market in the USHL? Several other interesting questions that we will dig up to discover if we can find any trends or patterns in the raw data.
Photo Credit: Dan Hickling/Hickling Images