Tribute Alexander Romanov: Good luck in NYI

[Lshap]

Continue...

Last thread here

Click to read more...

 

[austin316]

Sure seems like another bust by our draft guru Timmins...

 

[Vachon23]

Sure seems like another bust by our draft guru Timmins...

They is difference between a bust and a guy that won’t reach the expectation that some fans had on him. He will be an NHLer, so that’s not a bust even if he won’t be a top 3

 

[417]

@Estimated_Prophet in response to your post in the now closed thread.

Sure Romanov isn’t playing great, but neither is the entire team.

Have you watched Jeff Petra? Given his role, he’s been far worse than Romanov, should we send him down to the AHL too?

It’s just a low hanging fruit “solution” because he can go to the AHL without being waived.

How about we allow him, like other players on this team, the time to find his game.

The solution for waiver eligible players isn’t always to send them down to Laval whenever they’re struggling.

 

[Archijerej]

@Estimated_Prophet

I agree he should have played in the AHL last season. He doesn't process the game fast enough, barely knows the language and we didn't have a suitable partner for him. With Kulak and Mete on the roster, and a possiblity to sign another D for league minimum, there was absolutely no reason to let him start in Montreal.

I don't know what's the solution now. Sending him down is basically telling the kid that he not only did not progress, but in fact did the opposite. Not good. On the other hand, I think there's truth in what Ducharme said last season: if the nail is crooked you don't continue to hammer at it, because it won't become straight that way.

 

[417]

If the entire D corps was playing well except for Romanov…I’d get the calls for him to be sent down (although I would still find it ridiculous).

But that’s not the case…so why single him out? Because he’s the only one eligible to be sent down without clearing waivers?

 

[NORiculous]

I don't know what's the solution now. Sending him down is basically telling the kid that he not only did not progress, but in fact did the opposite. Not good. On the other hand, I think there's truth in what Ducharme said last season: if the nail is crooked you don't continue to hammer at it, because it won't become straight that way.

I somewhat agree but there are ways you can tell him without affecting him too much.

(I’m sure someone putting more then 2 minutes of thought in the formulation could find something better, but it is an example. )

Ex: Alex, we would like you to take on a bigger role with the team, offensively and defensively. We have create a plan for you and we would like you to test it out for a few weeks/days in the AHL.

Since the team isn’t doing so well right now, we think the environment and speed to get the best and quickest results for you would be there.

Hopefully, you can get your head wrapped around this plan quickly and comeback with a freshening effect on the team.

We need you to do this for the team and think it would speed up your learning curve. Can we count on you?

 

[Deebs]

If the entire D corps was playing well except for Romanov…I’d get the calls for him to be sent down (although I would still find it ridiculous).

But that’s not the case…so why single him out? Because he’s the only one eligible to be sent down without clearing waivers?

They've all be poor, no doubt, but he's been the worst of the bunch.

So before we ruin another young player, why not send him down and let him develop in the minors before is too late.

 

[Sorinth]

I somewhat agree but there are ways you can tell him without affecting him too much.

(I’m sure someone putting more then 2 minutes of thought in the formulation could find something better, but it is an example. )

Ex: Alex, we would like you to take on a bigger role with the team, offensively and defensively. We have create a plan for you and we would like you to test it out for a few weeks/days in the AHL.

Since the team isn’t doing so well right now, we think the environment and speed to get the best and quickest results for you would be there.

Hopefully, you can get your head wrapped around this plan quickly and comeback with a freshening effect on the team.

We need you to do this for the team and think it would speed up your learning curve. Can we count on you?

If the boss at your current job told you they want you to take on a bigger role and first they want you to work in a satellite office for several weeks to learn this new role where you will be paid almost 12 times less then normal. The time will depend on how fast you can get your head wrapped around with new role. The company needs you to do this can we count on you?

How do you think you would react?

 

[NORiculous]

If the boss at your current job told you they want you to take on a bigger role and first they want you to work in a satellite office for several weeks to learn this new role where you will be paid almost 12 times less then normal. The time will depend on how fast you can get your head wrapped around with new role. The company needs you to do this can we count on you?

How do you think you would react?

Good point but like I said, I only spent two minutes on the example.

It might sting a little at first but if done correctly I think it can be done without Alex being depressed about it.

 

[dcyhabs]

Hire a young player development coach. Have him work with all the young and newly acquired guys. "Hey, the head coach doesn't have time to tell you but in that situation you always have to do this, let's work on that at the end of practice." Because habs head coaches could do that back in the '80s with Markov, they could work with him on stuff over and over until he got it, but Therrien and Julien are too important and too busy to do stuff like that, "not a development league."

In the '60s or '70s coaches could get away with not teaching players but look at the way the game was played. Times have changed and coaches who can't work with and teach young players have no place in the league. The "not a development league" comment should indicate an immediate problem, either the player is not trying to learn or the coach needs to go. They had to work pretty hard with Markov his first year or two but it paid off.

If coaches aren't teaching what are they there for? Sure, lineups, strategy, set plays, systems, but you have to teach your players to fit in to those. You have to live with the fact that some players were taught different styles.

 

[japhi]

For those saying send him down…. not sure that was/is an option. Not going to take a run at Russian players but these guys have leverage and I believe the deal when he came over was he plays in the NHL. So while we don’t develop players well, not sure Romanov is an example of this.

 

[Paddy17]

If the entire D corps was playing well except for Romanov…I’d get the calls for him to be sent down (although I would still find it ridiculous).

But that’s not the case…so why single him out? Because he’s the only one eligible to be sent down without clearing waivers?

It's easy to blame the drafted kid when things don't work out, but almost every young player we see REGRESS after their first year in MTL, or for some, first few months. We see the same thing happen with players coming from elsewhere (free agent or trade). Clearly, there is something we teach and ask players to do that just doesn't improve them, and even winds up being detrimental to their game.

 

[Beer and Chips]

His style is as an aggressive defender, he is trying to do too much which gets him in trouble. He really needs a reliable partner full time but in the current situation is difficult. Think Rivet with Markov, not that I am comparing him to Markov in any way other then as a young player.

 

[417]

They've all be poor, no doubt, but he's been the worst of the bunch.

So before we ruin another young player, why not send him down and let him develop in the minors before is too late.

Worst of the bunch?

have you watched Petry and Chiarot?

 

[Deebs]

Worst of the bunch?

have you watched Petry and Chiarot?

Yes

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Worst of the bunch?

have you watched Petry and Chiarot?

Petry and Chiarot are definitely not playing well but Romanov has been an order of magnitude worse.

 

[dcyhabs]

His style is as an aggressive defender, he is trying to do too much which gets him in trouble. He really needs a reliable partner full time but in the current situation is difficult. Think Rivet with Markov, not that I am comparing him to Markov in any way other then as a young player.

And Markov played with Brisebois when they were both young. That pairing was all offense no defense at all. Both had to learn, it took Brisebois a lot longer.

 

[417]

Petry and Chiarot are definitely not playing well but Romanov has been an order of magnitude worse.

He doesn’t play as much as the other 2.

This is more of the Poehling training camp analysis…over-analyzing the player who can be sent down and ignoring the ones who can’t.

 

[JianYang]

@Estimated_Prophet

I agree he should have played in the AHL last season. He doesn't process the game fast enough, barely knows the language and we didn't have a suitable partner for him. With Kulak and Mete on the roster, and a possiblity to sign another D for league minimum, there was absolutely no reason to let him start in Montreal.

I don't know what's the solution now. Sending him down is basically telling the kid that he not only did not progress, but in fact did the opposite. Not good. On the other hand, I think there's truth in what Ducharme said last season: if the nail is crooked you don't continue to hammer at it, because it won't become straight that way.

Romanov had a pretty good start to his career last year.

His first handful of games were about as good as you can ask for. His passes were crisp, and his agility was opening up alot of options.

As the covid season wore on, I noticed a huge drop in his game, and it never really came back. I'm willing to chalk that up to a brutal covid schedule after their 2 week shutdown, and just the rigours of experiencing a new brand of hockey at the highest level, not to mention a brand new culture.

Having said that, he still still looking like that same struggling player to me right now. The trick is to get him back to the guy who started his nhl career, because that's the difference between a potential top 4 guy and a generic top 6 guy.

As 417 mentioned though, alot of guys are struggling right now, and a lack of team success has a way of affecting players on an individual level too. At some point, things are going to become more positive though, and when that happens, I hope to see indications of the old Romanov coming back. It's very difficult for us to evaluate whether he's more weighed down by a lack of hockey sense, or a lack of confidence and second guessing of his own abilities. I hope it's the latter because that is something that can be worked on.

 

[Archijerej]

It's easy to blame the drafted kid when things don't work out, but almost every young player we see REGRESS after their first year in MTL, or for some, first few months. We see the same thing happen with players coming from elsewhere (free agent or trade). Clearly, there is something we teach and ask players to do that just doesn't improve them, and even winds up being detrimental to their game.

It's not that. One can distrust our coaching staff, but it's not like Julien, Ducharme, Richardson etc. don't know what a player should be doing in a particular situation on the ice. These are men with lots of experience at various levels. They are not morons.

The reason it's happening is that we are promoting players who are unprepared and press them into roles they are not yet capable of filling. And since we're trying to make the playoffs every year, we're not giving them much leash to learn on the job either.

The whole "NHL is not a developmental league" debate kind of misses the point. It is and it isn't at the same time. Teams that don't care about immediate results can absolutely develop players in the big league. We're not such a team, though. Since they insist on being competitive no matter what, they should only introduce rookies with an exceptional level of maturity in their game, or exceptional talent.

 

[Paddy17]

Romanov had a pretty good start to his career last year.

His first handful of games were about as good as you can ask for. His passes were crisp, and his agility was opening up alot of options.

As the covid season wore on, I noticed a huge drop in his game, and it never really came back. I'm willing to chalk that up to a brutal covid schedule after their 2 week shutdown, and just the rigours of experiencing a new brand of hockey at the highest level, not to mention a brand new culture.

Having said that, he still still looking like that same struggling player to me right now. The trick is to get him back to the guy who started his nhl career, because that's the difference between a potential top 4 guy and a generic top 6 guy.

As 417 mentioned though, alot of guys are struggling right now, and a lack of team success has a way of affecting players on an individual level too. At some point, things are going to become more positive though, and when that happens, I hope to see indications of the old Romanov coming back. It's very difficult for us to evaluate whether he's more weighed down by a lack of hockey sense, or a lack of confidence and second guessing of his own abilities. I hope it's the latter because that is something that can be worked on.

Agreed. He hasn't stopped regressing and looks totally lost out there. Ducharme says they spend a lot of time with him to teach him stuff. Clearly, it hasn't worked and made things worse every passing day. He's either the dumbest human out there and can't learn anything, or what they are teaching him is not the right things they should be teaching him as an individual. I would wager more on the latter.

Had he never shown anything at all, I would be more forgiving to the coaching staff. Had he been the first player to regress, I would be more forgiving. But, things being what they are, I don't see how he can improve with the current staff. If we're going to keep Ducharme et al., might as well trade him instead of losing him for nothing in 2 years.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

He doesn’t play as much as the other 2.

This is more of the Poehling training camp analysis…over-analyzing the player who can be sent down and ignoring the ones who can’t.

He doesn't play as much as the other two because he is awful

 

[Archijerej]

His first handful of games were about as good as you can ask for. His passes were crisp, and his agility was opening up alot of options.

I agree, but unfortunately this is meaningless. I have seen too many impressive performances from young players to fall for that. Once the adrenaline wears off, they tend to fall off a cliff if they're not ready.

Setting up Tomas Tatar on a breakaway in game 1, when the opponent looks about as organised as a fire in a brothel, is not exactly a good measuring stick for player's level of preparedness.

As the covid season wore on, I noticed a huge drop in his game, and it never really came back. I'm willing to chalk that up to a brutal covid schedule after their 2 week shutdown, and just the rigours of experiencing a new brand of hockey at the highest level, not to mention a brand new culture.

Completely normal and often repeated in Montreal. It is precisely this that you have to prepare players for. If they can't perform at an acceptable level then, it means they either don't have it, or were rushed before they were ready.

Having said that, he still still looking like that same struggling player to me right now. The trick is to get him back to the guy who started his nhl career, because that's the difference between a potential top 4 guy and a generic top 6 guy.

Easier said than done. Yet again, instead of a development plan, we are forced to think of a damage control plan.

 

[JianYang]

I agree, but unfortunately this is meaningless. I have seen too many impressive performances from young players to fall for that. Once the adrenaline wears off, they tend to fall off a cliff if they're not ready.

Setting up Tomas Tatar on a breakaway in game 1, when the opponent looks about as organised as a fire in the brothel, is not exactly a good measuring stick for player's level of preparedness.



Completely normal and often repeated in Montreal. It is precisely this that you have to prepare player's for. If they can't perform at an acceptable level then, it means they either don't have it, or we're rushed before they were ready.



Easier said than done. Yet again, instead of a development plan, we are forced to think of a damage control plan.

There are cautionary tales for sure, but its too early to jump to conclusions. Showing something early on is better than showing nothing at all, and progression is often not a clean linear path.

But hopefully some people had a reality check on Romanov's potential. The hype was astounding prior to his arrival. Like Poehling, a good wjc performance seems to elevate expectations even more