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 3Sure seems like another bust by our draft guru Timmins...
I somewhat agree but there are ways you can tell him without affecting him too much.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.
They've all be poor, no doubt, but he's been the worst of the bunch.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?
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?
Good point but like I said, I only spent two minutes on the example.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?
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?
Worst of the bunch?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?
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.
He doesn’t play as much as the other 2.Petry and Chiarot are definitely not playing well but Romanov has been an order of magnitude worse.
@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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.