Pros and Cons of Morgan Barron Turning Pro

Dumb question.

 

So, I'm somewhat new to hockey fandom and was wondering something.

 

Morgan Barron has the choice to either sign with the team, or become a free agent. What are the pros and cons of each choice? Does one choice promise more money, and the other more security?

So, I'm somewhat new to hockey fandom and was wondering something.

 

Morgan Barron has the choice to either sign with the team, or become a free agent. What are the pros and cons of each choice? Does one choice promise more money, and the other more security?

 

This isn't a dumb question. It's actually a really complicated one.

 

NHL teams have an incentive to pick NCAA players that are "projects" (for lack of a better term) because their rights last a LOT longer. Traditional junior players must be signed by the end of their second season post-draft, whereas NCAA players stay with their teams until 30 days after the player leaves college. That's important, because NCAA draftees who stick around to 21 or longer can sign a 2 year ELC (so they can move to their second contract a bit faster, and can avoid the slide rule), and oftentimes can negotiate bonuses that a standard ELC wouldn't cover.

 

Ultimately, it comes down to opportunity. Historically, when an NCAA opts to pursue free agency, it's because there's no room on the big club and they know they're NHL caliber. The Rangers have actually been significant beneficiaries of this over the years - Jimmy Vesey, Kevin Hayes, and Adam Fox all either opted for or threatened free agency with the Predators (then loaded with mid-six wings), Blackhawks (stacked at center), and Hurricanes (enough RD to make your head spin), respectively.

 

We've got opportunities at center, so I wouldn't expect Barron to opt for FA and search for greener pastures.

This isn't a dumb question. It's actually a really complicated one.

 

NHL teams have an incentive to pick NCAA players that are "projects" (for lack of a better term) because their rights last a LOT longer. Traditional junior players must be signed by the end of their second season post-draft, whereas NCAA players stay with their teams until 30 days after the player leaves college. That's important, because NCAA draftees who stick around to 21 or longer can sign a 2 year ELC (so they can move to their second contract a bit faster, and can avoid the slide rule), and oftentimes can negotiate bonuses that a standard ELC wouldn't cover.

 

Ultimately, it comes down to opportunity. Historically, when an NCAA opts to pursue free agency, it's because there's no room on the big club and they know they're NHL caliber. The Rangers have actually been significant beneficiaries of this over the years - Jimmy Vesey, Kevin Hayes, and Adam Fox all either opted for or threatened free agency with the Predators (then loaded with mid-six wings), Blackhawks (stacked at center), and Hurricanes (enough RD to make your head spin), respectively.

 

We've got opportunities at center, so I wouldn't expect Barron to opt for FA and search for greener pastures.

 

Makes sense. Thanks a lot for the great reply!

Barron has one year of NCAA eligibility left. He wouldn't be able to become a UFA until August 2021. Currently his options are sign and go (most likely) to Hartford for now or return to Cornell for his senior year.

If Cornell had played in the Frozen 4 and either lost or won, the decision would be much easier. Barron was the best player (co-captain, leading scorer) on the top rated NCAA team heading into the tournament (April 13 poll, USA Today). This was the big shot at a national championship, which is one of the serious goals he set for himself. If they'd played and lost he could say, oh well, gave it a shot. If they'd won he could check the box and move on, rewarding himself with a pro contract. But to be denied the chance, he gets neither the satisfaction or consolation. Obviously he wants an NHL shot, but is he ready to move on from something he worked so hard for without resolution?