Prospect Info: 5th - 137: Wings select Jordan Sambrook (D)

[Redder Winger]

Liljegren also missed time to go play in the U20. He wasn't getting benched or buried to lesser minutes because of his play or that the club is overstocked ahead of him.

I don't really buy into the whole "they've got to earn their minutes" argument for these guys not playing or not being promoted, either. We've seen too many guys get the opportunities only when injuries made room for them to still give it a carte blanch nod. Also, I think it's just plain unrealistic to expect a 21 year old to come into camp and out play many vets, which includes just being as stable and unflappable. There are some things that only come with experience, and until a guy is given it, he's not going to have it.

There has to be a point where, with each prospect, you say they've learned what they can in the lower league and you either promote them or cut bait. But the Wings have had a habit of just hanging onto them and letting them fail upwards. Even if we're signing Daley, the truth is we probably should have just walked from one of XO/Jensen and promoted Russo/Hicketts, who I think both had shown they had taken what they can from the AHL. At some point, we're not preparing these guys to be NHLers, just better AHLers.

I forget which GM said it last year.
He said, look, we've got to make spots available for young kids to come and earn the job.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Absolutely.
If you're rebuilding, what is the advantage of adding a 34-year-old defenseman to an already old defense.
Why not play XO 70 games and Hicketts 60 games?

What's the worse that could happen?

When weighing pros and cons, it sure is easy for me to see the pros:
Pros:
Important development at the NHL level of young defensemen.
Better chance to assess the young D at the NHL ability.
Creates more opportunities for playing time at the AHL level for the prospects there.

We have too many defense men at or near the same level, and that level is barely NHL caliber. It's a good idea to scrap some of them and give some of the kids a chance, but those decisions should not be made based on age alone. Why play Daley and sit XO? Because Daley is better than XO. why not trade or cut XO to make room for Hickets, Cholowski or Hronek? Why not trade or cut Jensen to make room for them? Screaming that we need to cut a veterans ice time to make room for the kids simply because he is a veteran is just as asinine as saying the "tie" always goes to the veteran over one of the kids.

If a kid is ready to log NHL minutes, bring him up and shuffle aside some of the players who have had their shot and showed they are a cut below serviceable NHL players. If a kid is not ready then there's no point in pushing aside anyone to make a roster place just cause some fans want to see a youngster on the roster. There's nothing to lose in doing this when the team is this bad, but there's nothing to gain either; the kid can be assessed in a lesser league; he can develop and learn in a lesser league. If he's not ready to be in the NHL how does it serve his or the team's best interest to throw him into a situation where he is in over his head and cannot keep up with the pace of the game? I'm not suggesting that it will ruin or stunt his development, but it's not going to make him magically blossom either.

The people hollering over signing Daley seem to be mad that he's blocking our youth - but what youth is he really blocking? Who is ready to log big minutes in the NHL and is being denied that opportunity? And the idea that it doesn't matter if they are ready, bring them up anyways just seems to be the irrational cries of a frustrated and impatient fan base. I can sympathize with that, but I disagree with it. Develop and teach these kids the right way, let them learn to play the right way, let their maturity, their instincts and their talents develop, and when they are ready get them up here. Going in to full panic mode and jettisoning all the older players to flood the team with youth is not a magic fix - it will likely cause more problems than it solves.
Apologies for the lengthy post and the repetition scattered through it.

 

[Redder Winger]

We have too many defense men at or near the same level, and that level is barely NHL caliber. It's a good idea to scrap some of them and give some of the kids a chance, but those decisions should not be made based on age alone. Why play Daley and sit XO? Because Daley is better than XO. why not trade or cut XO to make room for Hickets, Cholowski or Hronek? Why not trade or cut Jensen to make room for them? Screaming that we need to cut a veterans ice time to make room for the kids simply because he is a veteran is just as asinine as saying the "tie" always goes to the veteran over one of the kids.

Because Daley is run-of-the-mill and XO could get better.
Defenseman tend to peak much later into their NHL experience.
There are tons of metrics.
But XO put up 7 ES points in 540 minutes.
Daley had 10 in 1230 minutes.
Ericsson had 11 in 1280 minutes.
In points/60 only Hickets (63 minutes) and Green were better.
In shots/60, nobody was better than XO (5.88)
In minor penalties/60, XO was best on the team.
In hits/60, XO was third on the team.
In giveaways/60, XO was 2nd lowest on the team.
XO led the team in rebounds created/60.
XO was 4th in takeaways/60
He was 5th in blocks/60 (including Hicketts and his 60 minutes)
In CF% he was 2nd on the team.
In GF% he was third on the team (again, that counts Hickets and his 60 minutes).

The idea that XO is significantly behind our other NHL defenseman is FICTION according to the data.
And unless he was significantly behind the other guys, why wouldn't you play the youngest D on your roster?

If a kid is ready to log NHL minutes, bring him up and shuffle aside some of the players who have had their shot and showed they are a cut below serviceable NHL players. If a kid is not ready then there's no point in pushing aside anyone to make a roster place just cause some fans want to see a youngster on the roster. There's nothing to lose in doing this when the team is this bad, but there's nothing to gain either; the kid can be assessed in a lesser league; he can develop and learn in a lesser league. If he's not ready to be in the NHL how does it serve his or the team's best interest to throw him into a situation where he is in over his head and cannot keep up with the pace of the game? I'm not suggesting that it will ruin or stunt his development, but it's not going to make him magically blossom either.

Nobody is rushing anyone.
XO has already played in the NHL.
You could then open another spot (the XO spot) and rotate it between Russo, Renouf, Hicketts, Hronek or whoever, finding the guy who is most deserving of the spot.

The people hollering over signing Daley seem to be mad that he's blocking our youth - but what youth is he really blocking? Who is ready to log big minutes in the NHL and is being denied that opportunity? And the idea that it doesn't matter if they are ready, bring them up anyways just seems to be the irrational cries of a frustrated and impatient fan base. I can sympathize with that, but I disagree with it. Develop and teach these kids the right way, let them learn to play the right way, let their maturity, their instincts and their talents develop, and when they are ready get them up here. Going in to full panic mode and jettisoning all the older players to flood the team with youth is not a magic fix - it will likely cause more problems than it solves.
Apologies for the lengthy post and the repetition scattered through it.

Youth being blocked:
Xavier Ouellet
Robbie Russo
Joe Hicketts
Filip Hronek
Daniel Renouf

We've got an old, mediocre and expensive defense.
We made it older, more expensive and more mediocre - for no good reason - when we should be focusing on developing youth.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Haven't developed a good defenseman in forever, and have overloaded the GR roster forever. Almost like those two things might go together...

Maybe, but more likely we just haven’t drafted well on D and haven’t had the number of picks that force struggling prospects out quickly. We don’t know if Hronek becomes a good NHL D, but again; actual good prospects will gravitate upwards even in ”overloaded” systems without being gifted spots. And the best prospects can bypass the AHL completely. For some reason we’re really concerned with the development of lesser prospects with a ceiling as #4-7D though.

Jensen was 26 when he got a roster spot last year. XO was 23. Russo is 25 right now. Hicketts will be 22 in May. Sulak is 24 right now. These aren't new toys.

In more general terms we had discussions probably 4-5 years ago about how we desperately needed to clear room for XO/Sproul/Backman/Marchenko. And before that it was Smith/Kindl/Almqvist, before that Ericsson. Most of them weren’t doing anything in the AHL to warrant much hype but still fans were stressing out about them.

It's the wrong move for a rebuilding team with an old, crappy and, relative to talent, expensive defense.

We don’t actually gain much by making it a young, crappy and, relative to talent, overpaid defense. We still need to wait for the actual good prospects to be ready.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Because Daley is run-of-the-mill and XO could get better.
Defenseman tend to peak much later into their NHL experience.





Nobody is rushing anyone.
XO has already played in the NHL.
You could then open another spot (the XO spot) and rotate it between Russo, Renouf, Hicketts, Hronek or whoever, finding the guy who is most deserving of the spot.




Youth being blocked:
Xavier Ouellet
Robbie Russo
Joe Hicketts
Filip Hronek
Daniel Renouf

We've got an old, mediocre and expensive defense.
We made it older, more expensive and more mediocre - for no good reason - when we should be focusing on developing youth.

XO could be better, at this point most fans don't seem to think so, and what is even more in XO's disfavor is that the organization doesn't seem to think so. With that in mind I'm not sure why they would defer to XO over Daley.

Yea, signing Daley made the team older, but the reason was so the back end could be more solid, more consistent and more NHL ready. Obviously we don't have any all-stars on our back end, but adding a steady veteran for three seasons while the likes of Ouellet, Russo, Hickets, Hronek, Renouf et al build and develop their way toward being full-time NHLers is not such a serious offense as it's being made out to be. Daley is indeed the definition of mediocre or run-of-the-mill, I grant you that, but sadly, that's top four on this team and it's still a more reliable defense man than any of those kids will be for another season or two - if they ever reach that level.

And we still have a bad enough defense that roster spots can be opened up for these kids to move up, but I think what the team will do instead will be to bring these kids up on injury call-ups and see how they handle it. If a kid shows he's ready, that is when you clear out one of your middling defense man to make room for the new kid or that is when you don't bring in another steady vet during the off-season. Until those kids can earn the NHL ice time management is forced to bring on steady d-men to patch together an awful defense corps. It's not ideal and it's not entertaining, but it's kind of where we seem to be at this point in time.
If we're just clearing out space to bring the kids up then why have a system in place to develop them at all? Just ask any player under 23 which league he'd like to play in and how many minutes he'd like to play per game and let him get his tail out there, I mean, what do we have to lose in doing it that way?

 

[Redder Winger]

XO could be better, at this point most fans don't seem to think so, and what is even more in XO's disfavor is that the organization doesn't seem to think so. With that in mind I'm not sure why they would defer to XO over Daley.

Yea, signing Daley made the team older, but the reason was so the back end could be more solid, more consistent and more NHL ready. Obviously we don't have any all-stars on our back end, but adding a steady veteran for three seasons while the likes of Ouellet, Russo, Hickets, Hronek, Renouf et al build and develop their way toward being full-time NHLers is not such a serious offense as it's being made out to be. Daley is indeed the definition of mediocre or run-of-the-mill, I grant you that, but sadly, that's top four on this team and it's still a more reliable defense man than any of those kids will be for another season or two - if they ever reach that level.

And we still have a bad enough defense that roster spots can be opened up for these kids to move up, but I think what the team will do instead will be to bring these kids up on injury call-ups and see how they handle it. If a kid shows he's ready, that is when you clear out one of your middling defense man to make room for the new kid or that is when you don't bring in another steady vet during the off-season. Until those kids can earn the NHL ice time management is forced to bring on steady d-men to patch together an awful defense corps. It's not idea and it's not entertaining, but it's kind of where we seem to be at in my opinion.
If we're just clearing out space to bring the kids up then why have a system in place to develop them at all? Just ask any player under 23 which league he'd like to play in and how many minutes he'd like to play per game and let him get his tail out there, I mean, what do we have to lose in doing it that way?

I never care for what "tons of fans" think. Tons of fans think they way they do because they listen to Ken Daniels and Chris Osgood - who, if they aren't on the Red Wings' payroll, might as well be.
Because they just want to believe their coach and team is doing things the right way.

Here are facts.
There are tons of metrics.
But XO put up 7 ES points in 540 minutes.
Daley had 10 in 1230 minutes.
Ericsson had 11 in 1280 minutes.
In points/60 only Hickets (63 minutes) and Green were better.
In shots/60, nobody was better than XO (5.88)
In minor penalties/60, XO was best on the team.
In hits/60, XO was third on the team.
In giveaways/60, XO was 2nd lowest on the team.
XO led the team in rebounds created/60.
XO was 4th in takeaways/60
He was 5th in blocks/60 (including Hicketts and his 60 minutes)
In CF% he was 2nd on the team.
In GF% he was third on the team (again, that counts Hickets and his 60 minutes).

The idea that XO is significantly behind our other NHL defenseman is FICTION according to the data.
And unless he was significantly behind the other guys, why wouldn't you play the youngest D on your roster?

So, that leads me to my speculation.
The coach is a blithering f***ing idiot. So desperate to win. So loyal to his American NCAA kids.
But completely f***ing clueless.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Maybe, but more likely we just haven’t drafted well on D and haven’t had the number of picks that force struggling prospects out quickly. We don’t know if Hronek becomes a good NHL D, but again; actual good prospects will gravitate upwards even in ”overloaded” systems without being gifted spots. And the best prospects can bypass the AHL completely. For some reason we’re really concerned with the development of lesser prospects with a ceiling as #4-7D though.


In more general terms we had discussions probably 4-5 years ago about how we desperately needed to clear room for XO/Sproul/Backman/Marchenko. And before that it was Smith/Kindl/Almqvist, before that Ericsson. Most of them weren’t doing anything in the AHL to warrant much hype but still fans were stressing out about them.


We don’t actually gain much by making it a young, crappy and, relative to talent, overpaid defense. We still need to wait for the actual good prospects to be ready.

Most CHL dmen I suspect spend some time in the AHL

We have more picks this year and last then we would average in three or four drafts over past twenty years, and next year looks to be continuing that trend.

The philosophy is gonna need to bend a little here

Less veterans
More movement up
More movement out

 

[Nut Upstrom]

I never care for what "tons of fans" think. Tons of fans think they way they do because they listen to Ken Daniels and Chris Osgood - who, if they aren't on the Red Wings' payroll, might as well be.
Because they just want to believe their coach and team is doing things the right way.

Here are facts.
There are tons of metrics.
But XO put up 7 ES points in 540 minutes.
Daley had 10 in 1230 minutes.
Ericsson had 11 in 1280 minutes.
In points/60 only Hickets (63 minutes) and Green were better.
In shots/60, nobody was better than XO (5.88)
In minor penalties/60, XO was best on the team.
In hits/60, XO was third on the team.
In giveaways/60, XO was 2nd lowest on the team.
XO led the team in rebounds created/60.
XO was 4th in takeaways/60
He was 5th in blocks/60 (including Hicketts and his 60 minutes)
In CF% he was 2nd on the team.
In GF% he was third on the team (again, that counts Hickets and his 60 minutes).

The idea that XO is significantly behind our other NHL defenseman is FICTION according to the data.
And unless he was significantly behind the other guys, why wouldn't you play the youngest D on your roster?

So, that leads me to my speculation.
The coach is a blithering ****ing idiot. So desperate to win. So loyal to his American NCAA kids.
But completely ****ing clueless.

I totally, completely agree with you 100% - what "tons of fans think" is irrelevant, that is why I followed my comment about the fan's opinions with this line: "..what is even more in XO's disfavor is that the organization doesn't seem to think so..." And give the fans here more credit, none of us are being swayed like lemmings because the coach is telling us what to believe.

I'm not reading through your wall of numbers, I'll take them to mean that your opinion is that XO is a better NHLer than Daley - if that's your stance then we've no reason to discuss this anymore - the crux of your position is 180 degrees away from the crux of mine. As for Xo, I think he's a better NHL defense man than Jensen, I would rather have him in the line up than Jensen, but I think Daley is the better NHLer than XO. If your argument against boils down to everyone running the team are idiots and morons then, again, this is a futile discussion - I mean, if you know more than professional hockey minds what is the use of a fan like me trying to talk the game on your level?

 

[Frk It]

Maybe, but more likely we just haven’t drafted well on D and haven’t had the number of picks that force struggling prospects out quickly. We don’t know if Hronek becomes a good NHL D, but again; actual good prospects will gravitate upwards even in ”overloaded” systems without being gifted spots. And the best prospects can bypass the AHL completely. For some reason we’re really concerned with the development of lesser prospects with a ceiling as #4-7D though.

Personally, I could care less about guys like XO, Jensen, or Russo.

I'm concerned with Saarijarvi and Hronek, and want to prioritize the development of those guys. Now I get it Saarijarvi is on the small side, but I just feel like this has been a thing for a little while. I recall Hogan and Paetsch making it hard for Marchenko, Sproul, Backman to get more IT when they were coming up as well. Maybe we need to re-think how we set up the GR roster a bit.

The idea that XO is significantly behind our other NHL defenseman is FICTION according to the data.
And unless he was significantly behind the other guys, why wouldn't you play the youngest D on your roster?

So, that leads me to my speculation.
The coach is a blithering ****ing idiot. So desperate to win. So loyal to his American NCAA kids.
But completely ****ing clueless.

I'm guessing he just doesn't fit into the type of system he wants the team to run. I mean Jensen played 81 games this year, and I don't think he is particularly good. But he is a great skater and fits into the uptempo game Blashill wants the team to try and run.

I liked XO as a prospect, but he just never made the improvements in skating like we all wanted. I don't see him being more than a bottom pairing defenseman (on a good team) if we were to move on from him, so I don't really get the big deal with him not playing more.

 

[Redder Winger]

Personally, I could care less about guys like XO, Jensen, or Russo.

I'm concerned with Saarijarvi and Hronek, and want to prioritize the development of those guys. Now I get it Saarijarvi is on the small side, but I just feel like this has been a thing for a little while. I recall Hogan and Paetsch making it hard for Marchenko, Sproul, Backman to get more IT when they were coming up as well. Maybe we need to re-think how we set up the GR roster a bit.



I'm guessing he just doesn't fit into the type of system he wants the team to run. I mean Jensen played 81 games this year, and I don't think he is particularly good. But he is a great skater and fits into the uptempo game Blashill wants the team to try and run.

I liked XO as a prospect, but he just never made the improvements in skating like we all wanted. I don't see him being more than a bottom pairing defenseman (on a good team) if we were to move on from him, so I don't really get the big deal with him not playing more.

It's a big deal because it shows how how much Holland and Blashill are full of f***ing shit when they talk about "rebuilding."
You can't even play the 1 under-25 defenseman you have, even though he's statistically better than at least half your defense.

And now you have a press conference talking about our old defense and the need to get younger?

Ken Holland needs to go away and take his jackass coach with him.

 

[Redder Winger]

I totally, completely agree with you 100% - what "tons of fans think" is irrelevant, that is why I followed my comment about the fan's opinions with this line: "..what is even more in XO's disfavor is that the organization doesn't seem to think so..." And give the fans here more credit, none of us are being swayed like lemmings because the coach is telling us what to believe.

I'm not reading through your wall of numbers, I'll take them to mean that your opinion is that XO is a better NHLer than Daley - if that's your stance then we've no reason to discuss this anymore - the crux of your position is 180 degrees away from the crux of mine. As for Xo, I think he's a better NHL defense man than Jensen, I would rather have him in the line up than Jensen, but I think Daley is the better NHLer than XO. If your argument against boils down to everyone running the team are idiots and morons then, again, this is a futile discussion - I mean, if you know more than professional hockey minds what is the use of a fan like me trying to talk the game on your level?

"I'm not reading through your wall of numbers."

Then stop responding. Or go look yourself and see what you discover.

Change my mind with some facts. Because all I see is arguing for the establishment because it's established.

At some point, accepting the opinion of an organization that's lost its way... is foolish.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

"I'm not reading through your wall of numbers."

Then stop responding. Or go look yourself and see what you discover.

Change my mind with some facts. Because all I see is arguing for the establishment because it's established.

At some point, accepting the opinion of an organization that's lost its way... is foolish.

I watch 75-80 regular season games a year, my opinions are where they're at based on what I've seen. Quotes from the coaches, from the media or from the organization aren't going to make me change my opinions. A small sampling of hand-picked numbers aren't going to be enough to change my opinion - and I doubt they would change yours if I decided to waste my time compiling them.
Your numbers are just that: numbers. I'm willing to accept that they are accurate stats but they do little to prove who the better player is unless they encompass all facets of those players' games taking all factors into account. I'm sure your wall of numbers supported the opinion you want to get across and if that makes said opinion a fact in your mind that's cool by me - your facts are not my facts it would seem. Your numbers are not my facts - just stats.

 

[Oddbob]

"I'm not reading through your wall of numbers."

Then stop responding. Or go look yourself and see what you discover.

Change my mind with some facts. Because all I see is arguing for the establishment because it's established.

At some point, accepting the opinion of an organization that's lost its way... is foolish.

I think you rely on these advanced numbers too much. I mean Brendan Smith who I personally liked, always seemed to have good metric numbers, better than many on the team, but no one was saying he was one of our best. XO has shown what he has got and that is not good enough to be anything more than a fringe NHL'er who pretty much everyone wants to see be replaced with better.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Personally, I could care less about guys like XO, Jensen, or Russo.

I'm concerned with Saarijarvi and Hronek, and want to prioritize the development of those guys. Now I get it Saarijarvi is on the small side, but I just feel like this has been a thing for a little while. I recall Hogan and Paetsch making it hard for Marchenko, Sproul, Backman to get more IT when they were coming up as well. Maybe we need to re-think how we set up the GR roster a bit.



I'm guessing he just doesn't fit into the type of system he wants the team to run. I mean Jensen played 81 games this year, and I don't think he is particularly good. But he is a great skater and fits into the uptempo game Blashill wants the team to try and run.

I liked XO as a prospect, but he just never made the improvements in skating like we all wanted. I don't see him being more than a bottom pairing defenseman (on a good team) if we were to move on from him, so I don't really get the big deal with him not playing more.

Well Hoggan played right wing, which is a part of where some of this goes to fit a narrative. I get people being upset but the 5-6 vet leaders Grand Rapids should have, well they need them if you watch that level. I get we all wish everyone was playing all the time. But this is where things can sometimes get sidetracked. Who that vet usually blocks is a Nastasiuk. A guy that has busted or ultimately might benefit from figuring things out not at that level like Frk or other guys who have been turfed to the ECHL at times and still made it. It isn't the life and death scenario people want to make it out to be when trying to figure out why guys who fail a lot of the time have failed.

Jordan Sambrook was a long-shot the moment we selected him. His draft position said that. If they pass on signing him and he re-enters the draft good on him, but let's stop pretending that really what these guys need is ten more games in Grand Rapids their first 20 year old pro season and we have this thing corrected. That is unlikely, if this kid cannot beat out who we have than it isn't a big deal. If he doesn't want to sign, well there is really nothing we could do.

 

[Frk It]

Well Hoggan played right wing, which is a part of where some of this goes to fit a narrative. I get people being upset but the 5-6 vet leaders Grand Rapids should have, well they need them if you watch that level. I get we all wish everyone was playing all the time. But this is where things can sometimes get sidetracked. Who that vet usually blocks is a Nastasiuk. A guy that has busted or ultimately might benefit from figuring things out not at that level like Frk or other guys who have been turfed to the ECHL at times a
nd still made it. It isn't the life and death scenario people want to make it out to be when trying to figure out why guys who fail a lot of the time have failed.

Jordan Sambrook was a long-shot the moment we selected him. His draft position said that. If they pass on signing him and he re-enters the draft good on him, but let's stop pretending that really what these guys need is ten more games in Grand Rapids their first 20 year old pro season and we have this thing corrected. That is unlikely, if this kid cannot beat out who we have than it isn't a big deal. If he doesn't want to sign, well there is really nothing we could do.

Hey, I just said maybe we could do things a little differently. I’ll stick to talking about prospects.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Hey, I just said maybe we could do things a little differently. I’ll stick to talking about prospects.

You don't run an AHL franchise with zero priority on winning. I see it posted a lot around here. Not saying that is totally what you're for. I am saying that naming a captain that helped lead that franchise to the mountain top as a d-man that actually plays winger isn't a good look. Just no other real way to say that, maybe you meant Evans, but he was important to keeping AA alive when he hotdogged late in games...

Earning your way should be important everywhere. It is very important in other organizations as well. Take Nashville, this has always been a big deal there. Vili Saarijarvi isn't ready to play big minutes at that level, he couldn't elevate himself over others. That is likely very important message to how he approaches training this summer, at least I hope it is.

I see this a lot, but teams don't under play kids because they just feel like it. These people are in the business of winning, Todd Nelson wants to win. If Saarijarvi was his believed best option he would be playing him more. We can keep this narrative, but it is a dangerous narrative is all. He will get more ice time when he does what his coaches want, what they talk to him about daily and how they are helping him develop into the best he can be in the framework of the team. Not all these guys are going to make it though. Treating the AHL team like a participation award isn't going to change that.

Full disclaimer when I lived in Milwaukee and spent a lot of time watching AHL games I changed my opinion on a lot of this. It is a different level than I think most not following it understand.

 

[Redder Winger]

I think you rely on these advanced numbers too much. I mean Brendan Smith who I personally liked, always seemed to have good metric numbers, better than many on the team, but no one was saying he was one of our best. XO has shown what he has got and that is not good enough to be anything more than a fringe NHL'er who pretty much everyone wants to see be replaced with better.

Smith's numbers were always a mixed bag.
And Brendan Smith got plenty of time to prove himself (even if he never did get much powerplay usage for some dumb reason). He was 27-28 when he was traded away, with nearly 300 games to his name.
Ouellet has 141 games.

 

[Frk It]

You don't run an AHL franchise with zero priority on winning. I see it posted a lot around here. Not saying that is totally what you're for. I am saying that naming a captain that helped lead that franchise to the mountain top as a d-man that actually plays winger isn't a good look. Just no other real way to say that, maybe you meant Evans, but he was important to keeping AA alive when he hotdogged late in games...

Earning your way should be important everywhere. It is very important in other organizations as well. Take Nashville, this has always been a big deal there. Vili Saarijarvi isn't ready to play big minutes at that level, he couldn't elevate himself over others. That is likely very important message to how he approaches training this summer, at least I hope it is.

I see this a lot, but teams don't under play kids because they just feel like it. These people are in the business of winning, Todd Nelson wants to win. If Saarijarvi was his believed best option he would be playing him more. We can keep this narrative, but it is a dangerous narrative is all. He will get more ice time when he does what his coaches want, what they talk to him about daily and how they are helping him develop into the best he can be in the framework of the team. Not all these guys are going to make it though. Treating the AHL team like a participation award isn't going to change that.

Meh, Jeff Hoggan wasn’t near and dear to my heart. Was thinking of guys like Exelby and Janik I suppose. Always seems to be like there are a bunch of those guys lingering around and we are sitting wondering why X can’t get any games in.

If we were sitting here and had developed a bunch of good defenseman and you want to defend what’s been done, go for it. But we haven’t. So trying to think outside the box a little. Or maybe we just aren’t good at drafting defenseman and they can’t beat out crusty vets (when they should). Guess that’s possible.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I recall Hogan and Paetsch making it hard for Marchenko, Sproul, Backman to get more IT when they were coming up as well.

Being bad hurt their chances to get IT as well. Now Saarijarvi is talented enough where perhaps he could have gotten better and better with more opportunity, but overall I think there is value in these kids looking at a Hogan or Paetsch and asking "why are they playing over me?" and figuring out how to get time, rather than being given a free ride to a full-time lineup spot and maybe playing the wrong way for 70 games instead of the right way for 40.
I've always looked at Sami Vatanen as a comparable for Saarijarvi, and Vatanen became a full-time AHLer in his d+4. That looks right on track for Vili.

 

[Winger98]

Meh, Jeff Hoggan wasn’t near and dear to my heart. Was thinking of guys like Exelby and Janik I suppose. Always seems to be like there are a bunch of those guys lingering around and we are sitting wondering why X can’t get any games in.

If we were sitting here and had developed a bunch of good defenseman and you want to defend what’s been done, go for it. But we haven’t. So trying to think outside the box a little. Or maybe we just aren’t good at drafting defenseman and they can’t beat out crusty vets (when they should). Guess that’s possible.

Yeah, not sure why the Wings method is getting any love at all considering the track record. If someone wants to just say that all of them sucked anyway they can do that, but I don't think you can absolve the Wings of all responsibility for player development. If that arguments going to be made, I'm not sure why you have a development staff at all, why guys like Fischer have had a job at all as a roving instructor, etc.

Players get better by playing. You can couch defense of the system in players earning their time and what not, but they're not going to get better by not playing. If they did, no one would care if they came up and just sat on the Wings bench for a year and took part in practice. Pruning a Jensen or a Russo or a XO to clear a path for a better prospect to play and get his reps isn't a hard or drastic thing to do.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Yeah, not sure why the Wings method is getting any love at all considering the track record. If someone wants to just say that all of them sucked anyway they can do that, but I don't think you can absolve the Wings of all responsibility for player development. If that arguments going to be made, I'm not sure why you have a development staff at all, why guys like Fischer have had a job at all as a roving instructor, etc.

Players get better by playing. You can couch defense of the system in players earning their time and what not, but they're not going to get better by not playing. If they did, no one would care if they came up and just sat on the Wings bench for a year and took part in practice. Pruning a Jensen or a Russo or a XO to clear a path for a better prospect to play and get his reps isn't a hard or drastic thing to do.

I guess all I can do is advise you to go to a bunch of Monster games and figure out that level. What is being proposed comes from a standpoint of ideally the Wings prospect gets it and is actually better at that age and consistent at that age to supplant vets. The good ones do, nobody blocked Larkin. Svechnikov isn't sitting and learning. Hronek very quickly overcame this and never left the lineup.

Accelerating kids that aren't ready is the Edmonton trade mark for the last decade? Did that work?

We need to get better, there are a variety of ways to do that, making your AHL team a Red Wings only pursuit where the players get crushed mentally and physically isn't the answer for me, but I have spent considerable time watching AHL games.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

It's just too bad their isn' a difference between creating room within your development system to allow kids to develop and throwing 18 year old kids immediately into the AHL to fail.

I wish their was perhaps some middle ground, some new approach to a way that has failed for 17 years to produce a top pairing Dman without it always having to be so dramatic or extreme

 

[Redder Winger]

I guess all I can do is advise you to go to a bunch of Monster games and figure out that level. What is being proposed comes from a standpoint of ideally the Wings prospect gets it and is actually better at that age and consistent at that age to supplant vets. The good ones do, nobody blocked Larkin. Svechnikov isn't sitting and learning. Hronek very quickly overcame this and never left the lineup.

Accelerating kids that aren't ready is the Edmonton trade mark for the last decade? Did that work?

We need to get better, there are a variety of ways to do that, making your AHL team a Red Wings only pursuit where the players get crushed mentally and physically isn't the answer for me, but I have spent considerable time watching AHL games.

Baloney. Edmonton didn't accelerate kids who aren't ready.
Edmonton couldn't draft beyond the top 10.

Stop making excuses for the failures of this team.

THis team gains nothing by clogging up both the NHL and AHL with old defensemen who block the way of their first-year D.

I'm for firing Holland, Blashill, Nelson and Martin at this point.

 

[Winger98]

I guess all I can do is advise you to go to a bunch of Monster games and figure out that level. What is being proposed comes from a standpoint of ideally the Wings prospect gets it and is actually better at that age and consistent at that age to supplant vets. The good ones do, nobody blocked Larkin. Svechnikov isn't sitting and learning. Hronek very quickly overcame this and never left the lineup.

Accelerating kids that aren't ready is the Edmonton trade mark for the last decade? Did that work?

We need to get better, there are a variety of ways to do that, making your AHL team a Red Wings only pursuit where the players get crushed mentally and physically isn't the answer for me, but I have spent considerable time watching AHL games.

I disagree that anyone is saying this. Looking at fringe roster guys like Jensen and XO, looking at guys who are essentially pointless prospects like Russo, and cutting bait to make room isn't making GR a Red Wings only pursuit. Even moving out just one of Lashoff/McIlrath/whoever isn't exactly a roster takeover. It's also in the Wings interest to put a priority on developing kids. Yeah, Ryan Martin wants to put a winner down there, ideally for Detroit that happens as well as developing their prospects. However, those two things don't always go hand-in-hand, and those two things will naturally conflict.

Setting the bar for a guy to play as being a polished vet for that league without ever playing in that league is just unrealistic and without balance. Yeah, the really good young players can step in and acclimate really quickly. Others take more time. From GR's perspective, they probably don't want to invest that time because it takes away from their competitiveness. From Detroit's perspective, that time should be invested.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Yeah, not sure why the Wings method is getting any love at all considering the track record.

Personally I don't believe the difference between XO the #7D and XO the #1D is how fast he gets icetime in Grand Rapids or in Detroit. I also don't believe we're going to have the next Lidstrom in our pipeline sitting on the bench somewhere; real talent will quickly surpass any veterans that could be considered roadblocks.

It's just too bad their isn' a difference between creating room within your development system to allow kids to develop and throwing 18 year old kids immediately into the AHL to fail.

I wish their was perhaps some middle ground, some new approach to a way that has failed for 17 years to produce a top pairing Dman without it always having to be so dramatic or extreme

Imo the middle ground is what we're doing. I think "unfortunately" our NHL D was remarkably and surprisingly healthy which gave less chances for Hicketts/Russo/Hronek to go up and open up some room for Saarijarvi to play a bit more. Situations like that will happen sometimes. Also we're stocking up on D which creates a lot of competition in the system and not everyone can get big icetime.