Development of Players Once They Reach NHL

[Curufinwe]

He's quite responsive on twitter if you wanna ask him questions.

 

[Rebels57]

Charlie O'Conner's take.

Flyers 5, Flames 2: 10 things we learned from a long-awaited...

Not including that Patrick has been flanked by line-killing Weise most of the season is a lazy bit of writing by Charlie.

So is not including that the goal on his turnover happened 16 seconds later after Weise failed to even attempt to back-check, then failed to win a race for a loose puck he could have easily gotten to and cleared out of the dzone. Not to mention that 99/100 NHL forwards would have been able to receive the initial pass from Patrick which was just slightly behind Weise but long enough that he had time to react to it.

Rather than butcher Patrick in the article, mentioning these facts would have been prudent. Also mentioning that being flanked by Raffl or Jake would likely be a major boon for Nolan, just like it was for Filppula last night, would have been informative for the casual fan.

 

[deadhead]

Funny how when a kid screws up, there's a litany of excuses.
That was a lousy, ill thought pass.
If Filppula made that pass there would be ten pages of screaming about playing washed up, stupid veterans.

Now I don't get bent out of shape b/c it's obvious to me Patrick isn't ready yet for prime time, and all he'd do on a top line is drag down better teammates. In a few weeks that may change drastically, the talent is there, just needs to recover some burst and get comfortable with NHL speed.

But it's the freakin' NHL, if you need excuses or perfect linemates, spend a year in the AHL.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Younger players have room to grow. Mistakes are expected. They need chances to learn from them and to recover.

Someone like Flip has no room to grow. He is what he is. He isn't going to magically stop being the often-idiotic enigma he's been for a long time.


These are not hard concepts.

 

[deadhead]

There's a difference between being patient with mistakes, and overlooking or accepting mistakes.
When you're evaluating whether a player is a good player, you look at mistakes as part of the package.
This is different than asking whether the player has the potential to become a much better player in the future.

Right now Patrick is a bad player and if I were a HC, I'd limit his minutes.
But because I'm stuck with him I'd keep playing him until he turns it around.
When he turns it around, then I'd increase his minutes.
Because he has great potential, someday (hopefully this spring).

 

[Beef Invictus]

Fun fact: Hakstol isn't doing what you'd want.


Why are you defending him, then?

 

[deadhead]

I'm not defending him, I'm just the voice of reason.
Fantasies that a "normal" coach would do things drastically different are just that.
A new coach might make some different decisions, but in the end, the only rookies who play a lot of minutes are either extremely talented (mostly high draft picks), have very high hockey IQs or the team is very thin, or all three.

Provorov has lead defensemen in minutes last year and this year, he's all of 20.
Ghost has increased his minutes despite being mistake prone (look at HDSCs allowed).
Sanheim won't play more until he's more consistent and reliable, his offense isn't good enough to balance out the cost of his mistakes. I don't think this will take forever, more like a couple months.
Konecny tries to do too much, that's what lands him into the doghouse, and would with any coach.
Patrick is a mess right now and shouldn't play big minutes until he gets it together.

And this would hold with practically any coach.
A kid wants more PT? Make positive plays, don't make negative plays.

The fire Hakstol thing ignores that the next guy isn't going to perform miracles, and that it takes time for most players to develop. Of course, Flyer fans aren't know for their patience.
I don't care if Hakstol stays or leaves, I just don't think his replacement will make a big difference.
The flood of talent will make a big difference, it's just going to take 2-3 years.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I'm just the voice of reason.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'm not defending him, I'm just the voice of reason.
Fantasies that a "normal" coach would do things drastically different are just that.
A new coach might make some different decisions, but in the end, the only rookies who play a lot of minutes are either extremely talented (mostly high draft picks), have very high hockey IQs or the team is very thin, or all three.

Provorov has lead defensemen in minutes last year and this year, he's all of 20.
Ghost has increased his minutes despite being mistake prone (look at HDSCs allowed).
Sanheim won't play more until he's more consistent and reliable, his offense isn't good enough to balance out the cost of his mistakes. I don't think this will take forever, more like a couple months.
Konecny tries to do too much, that's what lands him into the doghouse, and would with any coach.
Patrick is a mess right now and shouldn't play big minutes until he gets it together.

And this would hold with practically any coach.
A kid wants more PT? Make positive plays, don't make negative plays.

The fire Hakstol thing ignores that the next guy isn't going to perform miracles, and that it takes time for most players to develop. Of course, Flyer fans aren't know for their patience.
I don't care if Hakstol stays or leaves, I just don't think his replacement will make a big difference.
The flood of talent will make a big difference, it's just going to take 2-3 years.

No, you're absolutely defending him. You described what you would prefer to see him doing. It is not the thing Hakstol is doing.

You defend him, casting all blame away from him in ridiculous, overwrought, logically unsound ways. You cast all blame onto the players, refusing to countenance the notion that he is a driving force behind their struggles. That is a defense of Hakstol.

If you were a "voice of reason" you wouldn't always ignore anything that proves you wrong and carry on as if it doesn't exist. You would use that information to inform yourself. You do not.

 

[deadhead]

=You cast all blame onto the players, refusing to countenance the notion that he is a driving force behind their struggles.

I see Provorov doing fine, Sanheim struggling with mistakes, but it must be the coach!

I saw Giroux and Ghost struggle for half a season coming off similar surgery, but Patrick's problems aren't those of a rookie coming off surgery, compounded by a severe concussion? No, it must be the coach!

I just don't see the limited PT and struggles of a lot of our prospects as anything more than business as usual, 20-21 year old players tend to be inconsistent their first couple years.

Yes, there are a half dozen players in any draft taken after pick ten who quickly emerge as quality starters, but they're "flukes," often totally unexpected who just show up in TC a year or two after being drafted and blow everyone away. We haven't had one of those "flukes" yet among our draft picks. They're rare. Far more common are players who are "two steps forward, one step back" until the day they emerge as solid starters.

 

[Striiker]

Sanheim is already better than Hagg, MacDonald, and Manning. "Struggling with mistakes" is true for every single player in every single sport. I have no idea why people act like a rookie making a mistake means anything at all, meanwhile a vet makes the same mistakes, plus more, plus even worse ones... that's fine.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I see Provorov doing fine, Sanheim struggling with mistakes, but it must be the coach!

I saw Giroux and Ghost struggle for half a season coming off similar surgery, but Patrick's problems aren't those of a rookie coming off surgery, compounded by a severe concussion? No, it must be the coach!

I just don't see the limited PT and struggles of a lot of our prospects as anything more than business as usual, 20-21 year old players tend to be inconsistent their first couple years.

Yes, there are a half dozen players in any draft taken after pick ten who quickly emerge as quality starters, but they're "flukes," often totally unexpected who just show up in TC a year or two after being drafted and blow everyone away. We haven't had one of those "flukes" yet among our draft picks. They're rare. Far more common are players who are "two steps forward, one step back" until the day they emerge as solid starters.

And yet somehow you ignore Konecny.

We don't KNOW what Patrick's struggles are. We haven't seen enough of him getting consistent time or playing in a normal rhythm to know what he is. That's because Hakstol refuses to use him like that.

The same applies for Sanheim.


I asked you to provide a list of players who can sit for half an hour, like Sanheim, Patrick, and TK often do, and then get plopped into a game for a single shift and keep up like they've been in the swing of things and aren't cold.

I can't help but notice you refused to provide a list of said players. Why not? Is it because there are no players who thrive in those conditions?

 

[Beef Invictus]

Sanheim is already better than Hagg, MacDonald, and Manning. "Struggling with mistakes" is true for every single player in every single sport. I have no idea why people act like a rookie making a mistake means anything at all, meanwhile a vet makes the same mistakes, plus more, plus even worse ones... that's fine.

Or acting like veterans making mistakes is remotely equivalent to rookies making mistakes.

 

[Beef Invictus]

What precisely do the young players gain by sitting most of the game after a mistake?

Why is it fine to let veterans make constant identical mistakes over and over, but it is not fine to let young players play and learn and try to make up for it?

 

[Striiker]

Or acting like veterans making mistakes is remotely equivalent to rookies making mistakes.

Or ignoring that certain players mistakes are far easier to tolerate because they actually help the team otherwise and are easily a net positive. Ghost is the perfect example of that.

What precisely do the young players gain by sitting most of the game after a mistake?

Why is it fine to let veterans make constant identical mistakes over and over, but it is not fine to let young players play and learn and try to make up for it?

If every player was judged and punished as critically as rookies are, there wouldn't be a single player left to actually play. Everyone would be benched.

Patrick or Sanheim turned the puck over? OK, find me one player who didn't. Good luck with that.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

Funny how when a kid screws up, there's a litany of excuses.
That was a lousy, ill thought pass.
If Filppula made that pass there would be ten pages of screaming about playing washed up, stupid veterans.

Now I don't get bent out of shape b/c it's obvious to me Patrick isn't ready yet for prime time, and all he'd do on a top line is drag down better teammates. In a few weeks that may change drastically, the talent is there, just needs to recover some burst and get comfortable with NHL speed.

But it's the freakin' NHL, if you need excuses or perfect linemates, spend a year in the AHL.

If he's not ready to play at the NHL level, then why do they have him up here? Same with Sanheim and Konecny. Do they expect the kids to get better by osmosis? At least with other organizations, they aren't stapling their asses to a bench when they make a mistake. That's the point with young players - they're going to make mistakes. Only under Haktard do they get stapled to the bench. Weise or Lehtera or MacDonald or Manning make a mistake and he finds a reason to praise their play and continue to give them ice time. The man's a joke of a head coach and the only thing consistent in his approach is his continual throwing young players under a bus when things go wrong.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Or ignoring the certain players mistakes are far easier to tolerate because they actually help the team otherwise and are easily a net positive. Ghost is the perfect example of that.



If every player was judged and punished as critically as rookies are, there wouldn't be a single player left to actually play. Everyone would be benched.

Patrick or Sanheim turned the puck over? OK, find me one player who didn't. Good luck with that.

Patrick's turnover last night was more on Weise not even trying to receive it, then the goal that ensued later was largely because Weise made ZERO effort to defend. Weise won't be punished.

Flip makes some of the worst turnovers I have ever seen. We were warned about his blind passes to nowhere, but those are nothing compared to his tendency to stare directly at an opposing player and then pass to them when there isn't a Flyer in his line of sight. He hasn't missed a shift, much less an entire f***ing period.

 

[Adam Warlock]

Hextall keeps sending us in one frustrating circle.

"We are are building for the future. We are getting younger. That has growing pains."

Young players dont see NHL ice time.

"We want to lean on veterans. Inexperience loses hockey games. We are a playoff team"

Team loses games playing veterans. Misses playoffs.

"We are are building for the future. We are getting younger. That has growing pains."

 

[Lindberg]

Deadhead falling for the old Dunning Kruger effect.

 

[Striiker]

Patrick's turnover last night was more on Weise not even trying to receive it, then the goal that ensued later was largely because Weise made ZERO effort to defend. Weise won't be punished.

Flip makes some of the worst turnovers I have ever seen. We were warned about his blind passes to nowhere, but those are nothing compared to his tendency to stare directly at an opposing player and then pass to them when there isn't a Flyer in his line of sight. He hasn't missed a shift, much less an entire ****ing period.

SHHHHHHHHHH you can't say that! If you add context to a young players mistake then you're just making excuses. Every goal against must have a person to blame and if a rookie touched it, at any point within the last shift, it's on them.

If a vet makes a mistake it's fine because it wasn't a "rookie mistake". He was trying his best and effort is all that matters. Look at the veteran presence and heart that Manning displays! Or Weise. Or Filppula. Or Lehtera.

And then Hagg is in a whole other category than defies belief. The worst rookie on the team who gets the treatment the best deserve. Completely infallible, as far as I can tell.

 

[freakydallas13]

The kids may as well just loosen their skates and get comfortable for the 3rd, or just hit the showers after the 2nd and find a spot in the box to watch from above.

I don't ever recall being so confused in emotion for a win - damned if we do, damned if we don't. I think Hak is here for the season, and I think we will need to be statistically eliminated before we start seeing the youth "movement", until then, it's too risky?! smh

We didn't see the youth movement last season after we were eliminated, so there is no evidence that would be the case this season.

 

[freakydallas13]

Boeser is also a better player than Konency, much better shooter right now.

Ooohhhhh, it makes perfect sense now! When Konency asks Hack why he gets benched for entire periods, Hack tells him "...because Boeser has a better shot"

It's so genius, how did I not see it before? A+ Hack, well done.

 

[Magua]

"Development of Players Once They Reach NHL".......

What do you mean once they reach NHL?

 

[klutch]

I totallly agree with Beef on the coming in cold subject. That's why bullpen pitchers are one of the most underrated positions in all of sports (different view).

I mean, these kids have to feel the gitters every shift. They make one mistake and BOOM benched. If I were in their shoes, I'd be taking less chances on offense to play turtle shell defense for more TOI.... Working on defense by not creating offense is NOT the development I'd want for my players, and it seems that's the Hak/Hexy way of life. Maybe they're masterminds, and these players will all be Doughty's and Kopitar's through these obscene obstacles.

 

[Rebels57]

Watching people that "get it" argue with the same doofus that doesnt is almost as maddening as watching Haks 10,000 mile stare after a goal against.