2019-20 CHL SP Game Used Preview & Checklist

[Savard18]

What IS your point? If someone gives you an example, you just reject it by making up your own reasons as to why the example is not valid. Nearly 90% of all players who played in the NHL this year have spent time in the AHL. Let me guess..... those 90% must all be backup goalies and 3rd/4th liners, right?

My point is profoundly simple - stars do not develop in the AHL so there is no purpose in buying AHL cards unless you're a fan of the AHL...

And I have rejected nothing, on the contrary - I have agreed with many posters , sure I made fun of a few examples but they were light-hearted jokes......

Look, I could name a bunch of good players that took a little while to develop, and whom spent time in the AHL .. But I'm not going to buy AHL cards when I can get their NHL card....

That's all I'm saying...

[Savard18]

@Savard18 it has been pointed out to you many times but you haven't acknowledged it yet, but you do know that this thread and the set that is being talked about are not AHL right?

Yea, I'm aware of that....

Then this thread turned into "which star players took the AHL route"....

Look, I thought UD was doing an SPGU AHL release and I thought that entire concept was ridiculous.... Imagine for a moment if UD did that? would you really like an "All-Star Skill's Six Jersey's/Patches"???

And since when are CHL cards "rookie cards"???

[Savard18]

Well, don't want to burst your bubble here.... but the lawsuit has nothing to do with UD's exclusive rights to making licensed NHL trading cards.

If you know much about IP laws, and monopolies - you know that such a law suit wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Upper Deck is not preventing anyone else from making trading cards. Heck, they're not even preventing anyone else from becoming a licensed manufacturer, outside of the fact that they currently have an exclusive deal with with NHL/PA (I think two more years to go? I might be wrong).

The NHL owns a bunch of trademarks (logos). The Players are part of Group Licensing though the PA. They can sell usage of those trademarks & licensing to whomever they want. Think about it. If you & I enter into a contract, where I pay you a bunch of money to sell photographs of you.... that doesn't give anyone else the right to do it, and there is no reason to compel you to sell those same rights to anyone else.

There's a couple of lawsuits. I believe UD actually got the ball rolling. They're seeking damages from Leaf, as they claim Leaf's continued manufacturing of unlicensed hockey cards damages their brand... and Leaf's signing of NHL players to exclusive autograph contracts further damages them, and devalues the exclusive agreement they have with the NHL & PA. Not sure if anyone has reminded them that they continue to make unlicensed cards for all other sports, and have athletes from all sports signed to exclusive autograph contracts, despite not holding a license for that league.

I have a hard time believing they'll win, but I'm no expert.

Leaf has counter sued them. It has nothing to do with the exclusive rights, but distribution, and strong-arm tactics. My understanding is that the major distributors of Upper Deck product are forbidden from also distributing Leaf. i.e. "If you move their product, we'll find someone else to move ours". Furthermore, Upper Deck "diamond dealers" are not allowed to carry Leaf hockey products, or they risk their diamond dealer status being pulled. That gives them early access to products.

I suspect Leaf does have a good case there, but again.... I'm no expert.

In my opinion, more licensees would be a good thing. Upper Deck would make better products if they had competition. They did that while Panini was involved. Then Panini was pushed out, and UD started to get progressively lazier.

From things I've read over the years, I get the sense that it's actually the PA, and not the league, that is really high on exclusive deals. It gives them one company to deal with, and it makes things simpler. When the current agreement is up, I think it's more like that Upper Deck gets replaced with someone else (Topps or Panini) and they would now be the exclusive, than it is a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, etc) actually joins the fold.

I would love to see Leaf get an NHL license, but I just don't see it happening. They don't really need to. My impression is they're doing fine as they are right now.



Sure, star is a subjective term.... but again I'll point out: 11 of the top 25 scorers in this past season (all of which, should be considered stars) played some time in the AHL. Not all of them played a lot, but they played.

You poo-poo'd on the idea of an AHL set, because the AHL doesn't have the talent. The truth is, a majority of NHL players that most consider to be "stars" played in the AHL... and thus could have been included in an AHL set at somepoint.

Let's use the 2015 Stanley Cup Champions as an example (I'm just going with a roster that was very good, and I think you'll be familiar with).

We all know that neither Kane nor Toews played in the AHL. Most would agree that those were their best two players in 2015. Certainly the "biggest names". So in that sense, no... the top-end talent didn't play in the AHL.

These players, I would all have assigned the subjective term "star" to: Hossa, Keith, Saad, Sharp, Richards, Seabrook, Crawford.

I realize I've left out some good names, but like you said... it's subjective, and those are the guys I'd call stars (yeah, Richards was way past his prime).

Keith, Saad, Sharp, Seabrook, and Crawford all played in the AHL at some point. If I include Towes & Kane, I've subjectively tagged a group of 9 guys and called them "stars". 5 played in the AHL.

I don't think that playing in the AHL negatively impacts a player's ability to be a star in the NHL, at all. It's simply a reflection of the fact that they're not quite ready at 20 years of age.

Again, 11 of the top 25 scorers in the NHL this season, spent time in the AHL. These are all guys that didn't come into their own until after the age of 20, are playing top line minutes today, and are star players by any measure.

Yes, sometimes future stars will spend time in the AHL for numerous reasons, be it rehab, contract juggling - there are so many reasons why a player can spend time in the AHL, and sometimes it has nothing to do with his talent, but rather his contract and the fact he's waiver exempt ...

Look, I don't even go out to bars that much, perhaps 1-2 times a year maybe - but I went out a couple of weeks ago and was trying to explain this very concept to a fellow Hawks fan and he had absolutely no idea what I was talking about with ELC's being waiver exempt....

Look, having to explain the virtues of waiver exempt players and Entry Level Contracts to a drunk casual hockey fan in a Bears jersey is NOT the easiest thing to do, lol....

[MR.M's Cards]

Yea, I'm aware of that....

Then this thread turned into "which star players took the AHL route"....

Look, I thought UD was doing an SPGU AHL release and I thought that entire concept was ridiculous.... Imagine for a moment if UD did that? would you really like an "All-Star Skill's Six Jersey's/Patches"???

And since when are CHL cards "rookie cards"???

you turned this into a which star players took the ahl thread because you failed to properly read the initial post. It started with " I mean name the last star player that spent an entire year in the AHL before they went on to be an NHL star? if I cant name one you can't, lol" which was both arrogant and proven to be wrong. And the only person in this entire thread talking about rookie cards is you

[Savard18]

you turned this into a which star players took the ahl thread because you failed to properly read the initial post. It started with " I mean name the last star player that spent an entire year in the AHL before they went on to be an NHL star? if I cant name one you can't, lol" which was both arrogant and proven to be wrong. And the only person in this entire thread talking about rookie cards is you

Look, my question despite the fact I was off-base on the OT is still a legitimate question....

I mean would you rather discuss weather or not a CHL card is a rookie or not? lol..... I say NOT,,,,,, 16-year-old kids shouldn't have a "rookie card"....

[MR.M's Cards]

No, I would not wish to discuss it. No one I know would consider a CHL card a rookie card

[Savard18]

No, I would not wish to discuss it. No one I know would consider a CHL card a rookie card

I agree with you.....I wish Score understood this circa 1991.....These kids shouldn't be allowed to auto a damn thing until they're 19 unless it's an IP auto.....

[30ranfordfan]

Look, my question despite the fact I was off-base on the OT is still a legitimate question....

I mean would you rather discuss weather or not a CHL card is a rookie or not? lol..... I say NOT,,,,,, 16-year-old kids shouldn't have a "rookie card"....

I agree with you.....I wish Score understood this circa 1991.....These kids shouldn't be allowed to auto a damn thing until they're 19 unless it's an IP auto.....

In the year 2020, Upper Deck can only make cards of NHL players, who have played an NHL game. Not sure if it's the league or the PA (or both?) that forced that change (about 20 years ago). In 1990, or 1997, or pick a year in that decade.... no such rule existed.

Eric Lindros' rookie card was produced as part of an NHL licensed set. CHL SP Game used is not an NHL licensed set. The Lindros card was a rookie card, by any set of standards I have ever heard of. The CHL SP Game Used cards will not be rookie cards, based on any set of standards I've ever heard of.

You will not hear one person suggest these CHL cards should be "rookie cards". That is not what these are, nor is it what Upper Deck is trying to sell.

Not sure why those kids shouldn't be allowed to sign a few autographs. I mean, with the piddly little amount CHL players are "paid" - they'd burn their entire pay cheque if they took their girlfriend to the movies. If someone wants to pay them to sign a few autographs... go for it.

[odjickfan]

I think this set has some potential. The memorabilia is game-worn, and the production will probably be limited. I Wonder what they will do with the rest of the jerseys.

[RGM81]

I think this set has some potential. The memorabilia is game-worn, and the production will probably be limited. I Wonder what they will do with the rest of the jerseys.

I've always been a fan of "Career Journey" type cards, at least with players I collect. It's cool to own a card that has CHL and NHL material of the same player, or if a guy has been on a couple teams to have that represented (unless there's been a trip to Boston LOL).