Prospect Info: Noah Juulsen Part II

[Mrb1p]

I like Juulsen but I'm not sure he breaks camp with the Habs. He still seems to struggle a bit at times and he is waiver exempt which could allow the Habs to send him down and play some other guys. I definitely feel like Mete has earned a spot but Juulsen I'm less certain about. I feel like maybe someone could play just as well as him and he plays another half-season in Laval and come back up even stronger. What are your thoughts on this? Is Juulsen making the team?

Yes, he needs to go back and become a better offensive player.

 

[Talks to Goalposts]

I think this is where we would disagree. Subban didn't have the the experience, sure, but he had the raw talent of those players. Markov was better, no doubt, but it was Markov's experience that separated him from Subban. I don't think Gorges was ever better than Subban, I actually remember Subban covering up Gorges weakness in his own end. I don't even remember Hamrlik and Subban on the same team. Maybe for a season?

He's wrong. Subban was Montreal's best defenseman from the moment he got called up to play. He was kept lower on the depth chart in his rookie season as part of Martin's caution about rookie players, but he easily had the highest overall effectiveness as a player.

During his callup period he did quite well against playoff Crosby/Malkin. By mid-season of his rookie year he was carrying an ancient Hal Gill on a fairlystrong 1st pairing.

Frankly, I don't think a healthy Markov of that vintage would have been better overall than rookie Subban. Stronger offensively due to his PP skills, but rookie Subban was the stronger 5 on 5 player than a health Markov from that time frame.

 

[cphabs]

He's wrong. Subban was Montreal's best defenseman from the moment he got called up to play. He was kept lower on the depth chart in his rookie season as part of Martin's caution about rookie players, but he easily had the highest overall effectiveness as a player.

During his callup period he did quite well against playoff Crosby/Malkin. By mid-season of his rookie year he was carrying an ancient Hal Gill on a fairlystrong 1st pairing.

Frankly, I don't think a healthy Markov of that vintage would have been better overall than rookie Subban. Stronger offensively due to his PP skills, but rookie Subban was the stronger 5 on 5 player than a health Markov from that time frame.

Markov developed, played, and succeeded within our rosters, drama, politics, negotiations, and ups/downs for the LAST 20 f***ING YEARS!!! Never said a f***ing word about anything! Just encouraged the team and franchise to do better. Subban? He made it 6 years before being summarily traded.

 

[yianik]

Markov developed, played, and succeeded within our rosters, drama, politics, negotiations, and ups/downs for the LAST 20 ****ING YEARS!!! Never said a ****ing word about anything! Just encouraged the team and franchise to do better. Subban? He made it 6 years before being summarily traded.

Yep. And MB dumped Markov into the trash bin as if he was a bag of mouldy wieners.

 

[Nedved]

Markov developed, played, and succeeded within our rosters, drama, politics, negotiations, and ups/downs for the LAST 20 ****ING YEARS!!! Never said a ****ing word about anything! Just encouraged the team and franchise to do better. Subban? He made it 6 years before being summarily traded.

i'm still upset with how markov left the habs. it's a shame, he was our most reliable and underrated d man for years. great player.

 

[montreal]

Good post...

While I go back and forth on whether the AHL is truly a developmental league.

I want to highlight the part of your post I bolded.

Not every player, can develop every skill...

Michael McCarron, no matter how much PP time, 1st line TOI, strong linemates, etc...

He's never going to develop into a top line scoree.

Not every skill or ability is "develop-able".

So the Habs can send down Juulsen the entire year, flood him with PP TOI, he can put up a ton of points.

That doesn't necessarily mean that will translate to the NHL.

You have been following prospects longer than I have to know that is true.

Now correct me if I'm wrong...the attributes that got Juulsen drafted were;

- he was a safe prospect, not a huge upside, but an almost sure-thing to be an NHL dman
- his skating, decision making
- projectable frame...his dad is huge and while Noah was/is skinny, his frame suggests he should be a pretty strong and physical player when be reached maturity.

I don't recall reading that his offensive instincts were off the charts or that he projected to be a big point producer, much less a PP QB in the NHL.

The AHL is a development league, I don't see how that's in question. It's always been a feeder league to the NHL, something like over 80% of all NHLers came through the NHL although I'd have to look up that stat it's what I recall hearing at some point.

The point of sending a player to the AHL, well it will vary from player to player of course but you aren't sending them there to be something they aren't. So of course you aren't sending McCarron to the AHL to turn him into a 1st line scorer. But for a kid that has a career .12 ppg in the NHL, you can send him to the AHL to work on his offense to get his confidence going and hopefully he turns into a 4th liner that can put up 10-15 pts a year.

Juulsen was seen as a safe bet to be an NHLer. It was his defensive game, smarts but not his skating which wasn't seen as a problem but more average. But he had a big shot and was a solid point producer on a defensive first team. He put up 52 pts in his drat year, the next year the team struggled and his numbers dropped and then his final season he had some injuries but was on pace for 50 pts. Now that is troubling that he never was able to reach his draft year totals.

The problem with him in the NHL when he's played so little in the AHL is that you might limit him if he's not able to produce much in the way of offense. If he were to play a full year in the AHL under a hopefully much better coaching staff he would get to work on his offensive game and build confidence which imo is very important. He's likely never going to have 1st pairing production, but if he plays in the NHL and struggles to produce it could impact his confidence he might end up with the production of a 3rd pairing D and then you don't know if he'll be able to build off that or not.

We don't know the answers here since each player is his own, he might be able to rise above if he struggles or it could mess with his confidence and he never gets going. We just don't know, but my point has been why risk it? What harm would it do to take your time with your best prospects vs rushing them to the NHL?

 

[417]

The AHL is a development league, I don't see how that's in question. It's always been a feeder league to the NHL, something like over 80% of all NHLers came through the NHL although I'd have to look up that stat it's what I recall hearing at some point.

The point of sending a player to the AHL, well it will vary from player to player of course but you aren't sending them there to be something they aren't. So of course you aren't sending McCarron to the AHL to turn him into a 1st line scorer. But for a kid that has a career .12 ppg in the NHL, you can send him to the AHL to work on his offense to get his confidence going and hopefully he turns into a 4th liner that can put up 10-15 pts a year.

Juulsen was seen as a safe bet to be an NHLer. It was his defensive game, smarts but not his skating which wasn't seen as a problem but more average. But he had a big shot and was a solid point producer on a defensive first team. He put up 52 pts in his drat year, the next year the team struggled and his numbers dropped and then his final season he had some injuries but was on pace for 50 pts. Now that is troubling that he never was able to reach his draft year totals.

The problem with him in the NHL when he's played so little in the AHL is that you might limit him if he's not able to produce much in the way of offense. If he were to play a full year in the AHL under a hopefully much better coaching staff he would get to work on his offensive game and build confidence which imo is very important. He's likely never going to have 1st pairing production, but if he plays in the NHL and struggles to produce it could impact his confidence he might end up with the production of a 3rd pairing D and then you don't know if he'll be able to build off that or not.

We don't know the answers here since each player is his own, he might be able to rise above if he struggles or it could mess with his confidence and he never gets going. We just don't know, but my point has been why risk it? What harm would it do to take your time with your best prospects vs rushing them to the NHL?

No harm...but if they prove capable of playing in the NHL, and not just holding their heads above water.

Then they should play in the NHL.

 

[Tyson]

I like Noah Juulsen, it appears we have a late first rounder who may pan out. I am not sold however that he is ready for full time NHL duty. Tonight will be telling

 

[montreal]

No harm...but if they prove capable of playing in the NHL, and not just holding their heads above water.

Then they should play in the NHL.

don't agree at all. To me it's a question of what's best, having one of your best prospects just hold his own in the NHL or progressing in the AHL playing a ton and building off that. So I have no doubt that Juulsen can hold his own in the NHL but what I worry is will it limit the likelihood that he reaches his full upside potential.

There shouldn't be a case of if you can play in the NHL you should, to me it should always been what's best for their longterm development.

 

[417]

don't agree at all. To me it's a question of what's best, having one of your best prospects just hold his own in the NHL or progressing in the AHL playing a ton and building off that. So I have no doubt that Juulsen can hold his own in the NHL but what I worry is will it limit the likelihood that he reaches his full upside potential.

There shouldn't be a case of if you can play in the NHL you should, to me it should always been what's best for their longterm development.

I think what's best for their long term development, is to be challenged at the highest possible level that their ability dictates they should be at (other factors like maturity are also obviously at play here)

I agree with you, if he's barely surviving in the NHL, then no, he shouldn't be there.

But if he's already among your better Dmen, wouldn't sending him down when he doesnt deserve it, be just as detrimental as keeping him up when he can't keep up?

What does that do to his confidence or belief in his own ability?

What does that do to his confidence in the organization?

Analogy time:

If you had a child who showed he was more gifted than the other students in his class, wouldn't you want him to be in an advanced class so that he's challenged?

I personally think this is one of the biggest issues that's plagued the Habs the last decade or so.

We get young players, but they're never challenged, they're always sheltered for whatever reason.

Galchenyuk? DLR? Scherbak?

Never challenged....

Subban? Gallagher? Lehkonen?

Challenged essentially from day 1

 

[montreal]

I think what's best for their long term development, is to be challenged at the highest possible level that their ability dictates they should be at (other factors like maturity are also obviously at play here)

I agree with you, if he's barely surviving in the NHL, then no, he shouldn't be there.

But if he's already among your better Dmen, wouldn't sending him down when he doesnt deserve it, be just as detrimental as keeping him up when he can't keep up?

What does that do to his confidence or belief in his own ability?

What does that do to his confidence in the organization?

Not if you talk to him, tell him why you are sending him down, what he needs to work on and why they think this is the best move for him. He's 21 and has played 31 games in the AHL, it would be different if he were lighting it up in the NHL. He was doing great and just made it impossible to send him down then so be it. But when you have a guy that isn't putting up points, playing better then no talent hacks like Benn, Alzner, that's not saying much.

 

[417]

Not if you talk to him, tell him why you are sending him down, what he needs to work on and why they think this is the best move for him. He's 21 and has played 31 games in the AHL, it would be different if he were lighting it up in the NHL. He was doing great and just made it impossible to send him down then so be it. But when you have a guy that isn't putting up points, playing better then no talent hacks like Benn, Alzner, that's not saying much.

That's fair...

I'd just rather look at it from a case by case basis.

Some young players need to be challenged...

Others need to be coddled or sheltered.

Up to management to determine which individual player needs which treatment.

Brendan Gallagher at 19yrs old was ready for the NHL....

Nick Suzuki at 19yrs oold, isn't quite there yet.

 

[1909]

Ideally, mete and Juulsen would start in Laval this year...

But we would have to endure this D-lineup while waiting for Weber to come back

Reilly-Petry
Schlemko-Benn
Alzner-Ouellet
Després - Lernout ????

 

[417]

Ideally, mete and Juulsen would start in Laval this year...

But we would have to endure this D-lineup while waiting for Weber to come back

Reilly-Petry
Schlemko-Benn
Alzner-Ouellet
Després - Lernout ????

Ideally?...not sure you're using that word the way it's intended.

Ideally...given the rest of our Dmen, they would start in Montreal.

 

[montreal]

That's fair...

I'd just rather look at it from a case by case basis.

Some young players need to be challenged...

Others need to be coddled or sheltered.

Up to management to determine which individual player needs which treatment.

Brendan Gallagher at 19yrs old was ready for the NHL....

Nick Suzuki at 19yrs oold, isn't quite there yet.

it is case by case but it's not like Juulsen was setting the NHL on fire. He was on pace for 11 pts last year, now 23 games is a small sample size but still it's not like he was producing much. If he was that's a different story.

 

[1909]

Ideally?...not sure you're using that word the way it's intended.

Ideally...given the rest of our Dmen, they would start in Montreal.

Ideally for the proper development of the two kids.

 

[417]

it is case by case but it's not like Juulsen was setting the NHL on fire. He was on pace for 11 pts last year, now 23 games is a small sample size but still it's not like he was producing much. If he was that's a different story.

That's an extremely small sample size...

But in another thread, I saw you post that Louis Leblanc as a 20yr old showed good things in the NHL, you said he was on pace for 20pts over a full season.

Juulsen as you said, as a Dman, was on pace for half of that.

What made Leblanc's 42 game cameo more impressive than Juulsen's 23 game cameo?

Leblanc, as a forward no less, playing in a top 6 role if I recall correctly...

Managed 7 more pts in 19 more games compared to Juulsen.

 

[417]

Ideally for the proper development of the two kids.

As long as CJ is ready to live with their mistakes and he won't bench them after every error...

Then IMO, the NHL is the best place for them to play in.

However, if both of them show they're not ready or if the coaching staff isn't willing to live with their mistakes like they seem OK to live with guys like Benn or Alzner's mistakes.

Then by all means...send him down to the AHL

To me, the biggest development-killer...

Is coaches who bench young players at the slightest mistake...

Yet have completely different standards for veterans...

That's what kills young players confidence and makes them play on their heels.

 

[PhysicX]

Ideally for the proper development of the two kids.

I believe Mete is at that level, where only the toughest competition will advance his development to reach his full potential. Increase his ice-time and gradually add to his responsibilities. Gauge whether he's effectively responding to a heavier workload and let him develop and thrive in the NHL. I believe he's on the path to become a very solid defenseman in this league.

 

[Sorinth]

I think what's best for their long term development, is to be challenged at the highest possible level that their ability dictates they should be at (other factors like maturity are also obviously at play here)

I agree with you, if he's barely surviving in the NHL, then no, he shouldn't be there.

But if he's already among your better Dmen, wouldn't sending him down when he doesnt deserve it, be just as detrimental as keeping him up when he can't keep up?

He could be among our best defenceman and still barely surviving in the NHL but that's a different discussion.

What you're ignoring however is that players will adjust their game, so even guys who are playing decently like Mete last year or DLR during his early callups. They were so focused on playing conservative mistake free hockey that they miss out on the development that comes from playing a more offensive but risky style.

As an example DLR would've been better served playing in a league where he could be an offensive player, so that he could work on and develop the offensive side of his game.

 

[PhysicX]

As for Juulsen, these final games will dictate what will happen with him. As 417 says, if Juulsen stays with the club, you treat him like you would treat Alzner or Benn. If CJ wans to penalize him for mistakes, well he better show the same leniency/harshness towards every defenseman.

 

[DangerDave]

That's an extremely small sample size...

But in another thread, I saw you post that Louis Leblanc as a 20yr old showed good things in the NHL, you said he was on pace for 20pts over a full season.

Juulsen as you said, as a Dman, was on pace for half of that.

What made Leblanc's 42 game cameo more impressive than Juulsen's 23 game cameo?

Leblanc, as a forward no less, playing in a top 6 role if I recall correctly...

Managed 7 more pts in 19 more games compared to Juulsen.

Also need to factor in the team he was playing on. The habs offense was anemic last year which will drastically reduce a dmans production. Juulsen moves the puck well. If he were on the lightning his pace would probably be double that of what he got last year.

 

[417]

What you're ignoring however is that players will adjust their game, so even guys who are playing decently like Mete last year or DLR during his early callups. They were so focused on playing conservative mistake free hockey that they miss out on the development that comes from playing a more offensive but risky style.

I don't think I'm ignoring anything...I see both sides of the argument.

I just think its case by case basis.

Nick Suzuki, while talented, clearly looked overwhelmed even during preseason.

Noah Juulsen does not look overwhelmed vs NHL competition...now that doesnt mean that he plays mistake free hockey.

But what triggers me is the things he does well as a player, he does them in the NHL. He doesnt look like to me, like the moment is too big for him. Hes not trying to be an offensive, puck rushing Dman like I often saw Karl Alzner do last year.

As an example DLR would've been better served playing in a league where he could be an offensive player, so that he could work on and develop the offensive side of his game.

When DLR started with the Habs, he played 12-15 mins a game...he looked solid.

Then, for whatever reason, they just stopped using him and when they would, he'd play 6-7 mins, healthy scratch, etc.

DLR would of been better served by continuing to benefit from the same confidence the coach showed early in his career...

When their confidence in him dwindled...

So did his game.

This is a common theme...

Therrien/Julien have both shown a ton of faith in Gallagher, Lehkonen, Mete...

Therrien/Julien have both shown little to no faith in Galchenyuk, DLR, McCarron, Scherbak

Draw your own conclusions from that

 

[Baksfamous112]

He could be among our best defenceman and still barely surviving in the NHL but that's a different discussion.

What you're ignoring however is that players will adjust their game, so even guys who are playing decently like Mete last year or DLR during his early callups. They were so focused on playing conservative mistake free hockey that they miss out on the development that comes from playing a more offensive but risky style.

As an example DLR would've been better served playing in a league where he could be an offensive player, so that he could work on and develop the offensive side of his game.

As the year went by, Mete was joining the rush more often than any other D and you could see he was taking more calculated risks as the season went on... so I’m not sure what you’re talking about

 

[A55P2]

I'm with 417's arguments. Mete and Juulsen already looks ready and much better than our other d-men. If you watch the games you can see that they rarely make mistakes and get more confident in their offensive side each games. Their pair was the best one all pre-season and even last season they were very good by the end of the season.

Some here have the tendency to take things as a type of "rule", hence the need to develop players through the AHL to maximise their potential. If feel that it's probably safer to develop them in the AHL, but it doesn't mean they can't develop in the NHL or develop faster. Saying otherwise feels like following a formulae to me, which I think is a bit simplistic when talking about hockey.