Tomas Jurco (Re-signed to two year deal, post #301)

[GoAwayDanCleary]

Mark my words - Jurco will score 50 points this year.

That's pretty much a leap in the dark isn't it? I mean I don't know how you can believe that after his performance last year. Hopefully you're right, but I'd be happy with anything over 30 with a lot more shots.

 

[sean3250]

When it comes to Jurco, I highly doubt he shoots at a 3.3% clip this year. That's extremely low. If Jurco's shooting percentage goes back up to 9% or 10% (which should be reasonable) his points will go up.

Jurco just finished his 22 year old season, and he's proven to at least be an NHL player even if it's on the 4th line. Let's give him some time and a chance to continue developing even if that has to be down in GR.

If Jurco is able to secure 3rd line minutes, and maybe even a little PP2 time I could easily see him scoring anywhere from 30-35 points. I think everyone here would be happy with a season like that from him.

I will say that his back issue is worrisome, hopefully he can fully recover and put that behind him. Recurring back issues is a pretty big red flag for an athlete in his early 20's.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Nice long discussion based on article George Malik translated from slovakian language with a Google translator.

Happens every summer.

 

[Chex LeMeneux]

That doesn't really address my point though. Is it possible to have a situation where the best use of a prospect is actually something that's detrimental to a teams system?

If you've got a guy who doesn't want to play defense (this isn't about Jurco specifically, just hypothesizing generally) but you've got a team system that requires defensive commitment, are you 'misusing' that player by asking them to emphasize a part of their game they either don't want to/can't/aren't good at?

Sure you are. That player would be most effective in an open system with fewer defensive responsibilities... but in order to maximize that player you'd have to exempt them from the system. Moving back to Jurco specifically, I think it's established he has some solid offensive skills. The question of the moment is whether he can still apply those offensive skills when his role is less than wholly offensive.

Best use or effective use? I don't expect any coach to cater strictly to a prospect's "best use". I do expect that coach to find a way to put a prospect in a position where he isn't detrimental to the system, but is also able to utilize the skills that made him effective. I don't believe Babcock was very good at doing that, at least with a few of the guys. He took some of these guys so far out of their comfort zone, it's no wonder they struggled.

To answer your question more directly, I don't want Jurco to ignore his defensive responsibility. I don't want any of our prospects doing that. More importantly, I don't think that's what Jurco is complaining about here either. Not to say you're implying that, but others here are. Nowhere in that quote did Jurco say he doesn't want to play defense. If he is, he's gonna be very disappointed when Blashill takes over.

As for that last sentence, that's a very good question, and no one can answer it at the moment. The point I've been trying to argue is, at least give him something to work with. If that something is 3rd line minutes, fine. If he can't cut it there, he goes back to Grand Rapids. Putting this in perspective, Jurco was a 22 year old skilled player in his first full season on a fourth line with players who have very limited offensive instincts. He had limited minutes in a role that was, by necessity, defensively oriented and in the past had been told to avoid the fancy dangles. On top of that he's contending with back issues and (likely) a complete lack of confidence. And people are seriously mad at him for not creating his own offense/producing under those circumstances? Cut the guy some slack.

This is the time honored chicken or the egg debate with regards to role and responsibility. Do you give the role first or do you make the player earn up into it? You seem to believe in the former. If a guy is an X, when you call him up make him an X and see if he can do it. I (and I think the Wings organization) believe in the latter, for the most part. When the guy comes up if he succeeds in a small role then give him a larger one. As he continues to succeed expand the responsibility until he starts breaking, then back him off a notch.

I can't say for sure, but I believe this philosophy largely falls on Babcock. Who knows if this continues under Blash. Here's the problem though, going back to the Smith example, because quite frankly it was the most egregious, if you want a guy to show you that he deserves more responsibility, you don't put him in a position to fail. You don't ask a guy who has historically been an offensive defenseman to play on the PK and with a partner that is equally defensively inept. Of course he won't impress you, at best he'll be mediocre. Again, I'm not saying gift anything to anyone, just don't try to make a prospect something he's not and use that as justification to avoid increasing his responsibility.

22.85% EV 41 GLENDENING,LUKE - 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 20 MILLER,ANDREW
14.27% EV 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 15 SHEAHAN,RILEY - 21 TATAR,TOMAS
7.28% EV 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 14 NYQUIST,GUSTAV - 40 ZETTERBERG,HENRIK
6.58% EV 18 ANDERSSON,JOAKIM - 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 20 MILLER,ANDREW
4.81% EV 17 CLEARY,DANIEL - 43 HELM,DARREN - 26 JURCO,TOMAS
4.58% EV 13 DATSYUK,PAVEL - 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 21 TATAR,TOMAS
3.22% EV 43 HELM,DARREN - 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 21 TATAR,TOMAS
3.03% EV 43 HELM,DARREN - 26 JURCO,TOMAS - 49 NESTRASIL,ANDREJ

I don't know. Looks like he got a decent percentage of his time with some top tier offensive players. Approaching 40% of your ES IT (if you go all the way down the list) with Datsyuk, Z, Tatar, Nyquist.

Had he been more successful with that time he'd have gotten more of it. He wasn't, so he didn't. I suppose you can make the claim that the trigger to reduce that quality IT was pulled too soon, but at some point we have to realize we're dealing with a finite resource here. If you keep running Jurco out there that's a quality lineup spot that Abdelkader, Nyquist, Tatar, D or Z or Sheahan isn't getting.

One thing that massively skews that 40% figure is that 14% of it was spent on the kid line at the beginning of the season, and that whole line was ineffective. I'll agree, he probably should have done more with Z/Nyquist and Pav/Tatar, but what is that about 4-6 games with one, 2-4 with the other give or take. Depending on exactly what point in the season he played with those guys and if those minutes were even consecutive, there could have been any number of reasons he didn't produce. Not gonna argue that point too emphatically though, as it requires a lot of research that I don't feel like doing right now.

I'm not worried about it per se, mostly because it's not like it's worked in the NHL lately anyway so even if Blashill did implement it that kind of system would likely be unimplemented in a reasonably short term.

I suppose my concern, then, is that if Blashill's system is so similar to Babcock's and Jurco didn't like Babcock's... why would he like Blashill's more? Was it just a matter of being a larger part of it in GR as opposed to a bit player in the same environment in Detroit? I can't possibly imagine how that's going to substantively change in 2016 given the roster in front of Jurco, so I'm left to wonder if he's just going to be continually dissatisfied with his role.

And that is precisely why people are making way too big a deal out of those comments. He knows Blashill. He knows that Blashill still demands responsible defensive play. So unless someone honestly believes Jurco and Blashill are BFFs and he'll let Jurco get away with bloody murder, I don't understand how people misconstrue these comments as Jurco saying "I don't want to play defense".

 

[Actual Thought*]

This notion that Babcock held back all of our prospects is flat out absurd. Why have so many players flourished under Babcock while so few haven't? Because those few lack character. That's why. A character guy with Jurco's supposed skill surely would have answered his coach by scoring more than 3 goals.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

"Plus, you having any issue with him not saying something YOU expect him to be saying is exactly what I was arguing against."

So, I can have a preference but if I express it you're going to argue with me about my preference?

"Then it is a problem" is the key word here. Alarm bells. Problem. In context of the Red Wings.

Obviously. I'm confused why you think that's an issue which requires argument, though. If you're correct (and I think you are), that there is no one right answer why would you argue about someone elses answer?

I'm not arguing you preferring someone respond in a certain way, I am arguing you thinking his response that does not conform to what you prefer is a problem. Alarm bells. In context of the Red Wings.

"Translation, context, there are a lot of explanations for that absence, but it could also be that Jurco's the next coming of Dick Axelsson or something."

Was that comment of mine unclear? I don't think that comment means there's an underlying problem, either. But it could. We'll see if that tone carries through subsequent interviews or not and see.

Which I disagree with. I think that is the part that you are not grasping, here. If Jurco doesn't pan out in the future, I very much doubt this was a tell-tale sign of that happening.

I think you're splitting hairs here. You've made your real point, namely that when someone has a different expectation of conduct than you do you'll argue with them about it. That's what I think is actually happening here.

Do you believe that there could be an underlying problem with the way Jurco handled that interview? If you do, then I'm not sure how you could come to this conclusion. If you don't, then I am not sure why you mentioned "alarm bells" in the first place or put him in the same sentence as Axelsson.

 

[Actual Thought*]

"Then it is a problem" is the key word here. Alarm bells. Problem. In context of the Red Wings.



I'm not arguing you preferring someone respond in a certain way, I am arguing you thinking his response that does not conform to what you prefer is a problem. Alarm bells. In context of the Red Wings.


Which I disagree with. I think that is the part that you are not grasping, here. If Jurco doesn't pan out in the future, I very much doubt this was a tell-tale sign of that happening.


Do you believe that there could be an underlying problem with the way Jurco handled that interview? If you do, then I'm not sure how you could come to this conclusion. If you don't, then I am not sure why you mentioned "alarm bells" in the first place or put him in the same sentence as Axelsson.

When was the last time Pav or Z did an interview in which they implied everything was all about them and their lack of production was the fault of somebody else?

Maybe translation was an issue and Jurco's words were actually "I just want to help my team and I need to work harder to do what is needed whatever role I am in" or "I didn't do enough to help my team in order to earn a larger role". It just seems odd that the translation ends up being the exact opposite of what anyone would like to hear from a player who underachieved. Usually when a player makes these kinds of me, me, me comments it is because they don't take personal responsibility because they lack character. Players like that are typically not very good team mates.

 

[hot dog]

When it comes to Jurco, I highly doubt he shoots at a 3.3% clip this year. That's extremely low. If Jurco's shooting percentage goes back up to 9% or 10% (which should be reasonable) his points will go up.

Jurco just finished his 22 year old season, and he's proven to at least be an NHL player even if it's on the 4th line. Let's give him some time and a chance to continue developing even if that has to be down in GR.

If Jurco is able to secure 3rd line minutes, and maybe even a little PP2 time I could easily see him scoring anywhere from 30-35 points. I think everyone here would be happy with a season like that from him.

I will say that his back issue is worrisome, hopefully he can fully recover and put that behind him. Recurring back issues is a pretty big red flag for an athlete in his early 20's.

I have a hard time seeing Jurco get PP time without injuries. We just are too deep up front. Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Nyquist, Tatar, Pulkkinen, Richards, Green, Kronwall, and the ghost of Franzen are all definitively ahead of him. He has a ways to go to usurp Sheahan and Abdelkader. I also think it's unlikely Blashill only uses two defensemen on the PP, so at least one of Smith/Dekeyser will have to be beat out as well.

Regardless, I agree with the rest of your post. He'll have a better season statistically.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

When was the last time Pav or Z did an interview in which they implied everything was all about them and their lack of production was the fault of somebody else?

So unless they have interviews like Datsyuk or Zetterberg, they have problems? Is this what we are basing it on?

Maybe translation was an issue and Jurco's words were actually "I just want to help my team and I need to work harder to do what is needed whatever role I am in" or "I didn't do enough to help my team in order to earn a larger role". It just seems odd that the translation ends up being the exact opposite of what anyone would like to hear from a player who underachieved. Usually when a player makes these kinds of me, me, me comments it is because they don't take personal responsibility because they lack character. Players like that are typically not very good team mates.

Okay, so you know from experience.

You seem to know a lot about Jurco and how he carries himself despite never meeting the guy.

 

[Frk It]

When was the last time Pav or Z did an interview in which they implied everything was all about them and their lack of production was the fault of somebody else?

Maybe translation was an issue and Jurco's words were actually "I just want to help my team and I need to work harder to do what is needed whatever role I am in" or "I didn't do enough to help my team in order to earn a larger role". It just seems odd that the translation ends up being the exact opposite of what anyone would like to hear from a player who underachieved. Usually when a player makes these kinds of me, me, me comments it is because they don't take personal responsibility because they lack character. Players like that are typically not very good team mates.

He's also 22, man. Who he is right now isn't who he will always be. He is going to mature and develop as a person still.

Cleary was immature and selfish at his age. Almost cost him his career. And then he grew up and became a great teammate and had a long career. So it's definitely possible for guys to mature and grow up. That's if there is even an issue with Jurco.

 

[Inspiration]

This notion that Babcock held back all of our prospects is flat out absurd. Why have so many players flourished under Babcock while so few haven't? Because those few lack character. That's why. A character guy with Jurco's supposed skill surely would have answered his coach by scoring more than 3 goals.

Is it possible that Jurco's 3 goals were a result of his unsustainably low 3.3% shooting percentage and not some glaring character flaws? Did Nyquist's character get worse when he shot 13.8% this year after shooting 18.3% last year?

This whole thread has gone completely off the rails; some really bizarre logic is being thrown around.

 

[Henkka]

Is it possible that Jurco's 3 goals were a result of his unsustainably low 3.3% shooting percentage and not some glaring character flaws? Did Nyquist's character get worse when he shot 13.8% this year after shooting 18.3% last year?

Yep, an unlucky year. At last season Jurco had 8 goals in only 36 games.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...11&type=individual&sort=icorsi60&sortdir=DESC

With combined 2-year stats Jurco will fit in as a TOP9 player. And from our TOP9 players, he got most ice-time at 4th line against tough compeition. Still he managed well in advanced stats. At ES_points/60 he's 9th best from current team and 6th best with ICorsi/60. You combine these and he's 8th best forward from our team from last 2 seasons. And he did this younger age as anyone since Jiri hudler 10 years ago. There's a lot of potential in him to expect more.

Last 2-season data:
ES_5 vs.5 points/60 * iCorsi/60 = Value

1. Tatar 29.8
2. Nyquist 29.3
(3. Richards 27.1)
4. Zetterberg 26.6
5. Datsyuk 25.6
6. Pulkkinen 23.8
7. helm 21.5
8. Jurco 21.4
(Alfredsson 20.8)
9. Franzen 19.9
10. Abdelkader 18.4
11. Sheahan 17.6
(Weiss 10.1)

 

[Actual Thought*]

So unless they have interviews like Datsyuk or Zetterberg, they have problems? Is this what we are basing it on?



Okay, so you know from experience.

You seem to know a lot about Jurco and how he carries himself despite never meeting the guy.

All I know is how he played and what he said.

He's also 22, man. Who he is right now isn't who he will always be. He is going to mature and develop as a person still.

Cleary was immature and selfish at his age. Almost cost him his career. And then he grew up and became a great teammate and had a long career. So it's definitely possible for guys to mature and grow up. That's if there is even an issue with Jurco.

This is absolutely fair. I just see a flag whenever a player blames others or makes excuses when they fail to perform.

Is it possible that Jurco's 3 goals were a result of his unsustainably low 3.3% shooting percentage and not some glaring character flaws? Did Nyquist's character get worse when he shot 13.8% this year after shooting 18.3% last year?

This whole thread has gone completely off the rails; some really bizarre logic is being thrown around.

Players have bad years, goal droughts, injuries, ect... I understand that. It is that he blamed others for it instead of putting it on himself to perform better while assuming that Blashill will automatically give him a larger role because he knows him. Based on his performance I am not sure he is in the top 14 forwards and he is talking about deserving a larger role. He should be worried about just making the team out of camp.

 

[Henkka]

All I know is how he played and what he said.


This is absolutely fair. I just see a flag whenever a player blames others or makes excuses when they fail to perform.

http://kuklaskorner.com/tmr/comment...n-paper?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Jeff Blashill became a new HC of the team, who lead you to Calder Cup Glory in 2012-13 in GR. What does it mean for you ?

It's a very positive piece of news for me. In Jeff's team, I was a top 6 player and a game changer as he could rely on me. So, I assume the new coach should trust me. However, This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead. I will definitely have a greater chance to establish myself now, than It was under Babcock, who wanted me to be a different kind of player than I really am.

Authoritative coach Mike Babcock, who's headed to Toronto this summer, viewed you only as a 4th liner on this team. You got on ice for 6 to 7 minutes per game. How did you bear with this ?

I had to focus on not making a mistake and my task was only to not allow a goal. I wanted to play in the NHL eversince I was a little boy, that' why I had to swallow it. As you could have also seen at the Worlds in Czech Republic, I didn't get enough room to play my brand of offensive hockey in Detroit. That's why I'd rather forget this past season, as It was the worst one in my career. I want to enjoy myself on the ice again and show that I'm a creative player, who can generate something and who can score.

Still i can't find a whiner from there. Just a guy who is ready to compete again for a spot under new (old) coach.

 

[Actual Thought*]

http://kuklaskorner.com/tmr/comment...n-paper?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter




Still i can't find a whiner from there. Just a guy who is ready to compete again for a spot under new (old) coach.

Jeff Blashill became a new HC of the team, who lead you to Calder Cup Glory in 2012-13 in GR. What does it mean for you ?

It's a very positive piece of news for me. In Jeff's team, I was a top 6 player and a game changer as he could rely on me. So, I assume the new coach should trust me. However, This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead. I will definitely have a greater chance to establish myself now, than It was under Babcock, who wanted me to be a different kind of player than I really am.

He thinks he is a top 6 player on this team? He thinks because Blashill is coach he will automatically get into the top 6? I should hope not.
He was a "game changer" in the AHL. He was anything but at the NHL level.
I would love to hear him say he learned a lot working on his defensive game last year and hopes to build upon it with his offensive potential while becoming a more complete player.

Instead he says it was Babcock's fault because he didn't know I am a top 6 player.

He was on the fourth line because he didn't play himself into the top 6 or even 9. Babcock and his staff saw him practice. They saw him train and they saw him play. If he had earned a top 6 role he would have gotten one. If he earned more minutes he would have gotten them. For whatever reason he failed to do that.

 

[Heaton]

Jeff Blashill became a new HC of the team, who lead you to Calder Cup Glory in 2012-13 in GR. What does it mean for you ?

It's a very positive piece of news for me. In Jeff's team, I was a top 6 player and a game changer as he could rely on me. So, I assume the new coach should trust me. However, This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead. I will definitely have a greater chance to establish myself now, than It was under Babcock, who wanted me to be a different kind of player than I really am.

He thinks he is a top 6 player on this team? He thinks because Blashill is coach he will automatically get into the top 6? I should hope not.
He was a "game changer" in the AHL. He was anything but at the NHL level.
I would love to hear him say he learned a lot working on his defensive game last year and hopes to build upon it with his offensive potential while becoming a more complete player.

Instead he says it was Babcock's fault because he didn't know I am a top 6 player.

He was on the fourth line because he didn't play himself into the top 6 or even 9. Babcock and his staff saw him practice. They saw him train and they saw him play. If he had earned a top 6 role he would have gotten one. If he earned more minutes he would have gotten them. For whatever reason he failed to do that.

Your own question was answered in the unbolded portion.

This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead

 

[Actual Thought*]

Your own question was answered in the unbolded portion.

This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead

So when Blashill informs him that he isn't a top 6 guy? Is it then Blashill's fault?

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

So when Blashill informs him that he isn't a top 6 guy? Is it then Blashill's fault?

There is a pretty big difference between one person doing something to you based on performance and two people doing it, that is life and true of more than hockey.

Also worth noting when Jurco was struggling at the beginning of his rookie AHL season Blashill moved him around the lineup, up and down. Difference was he communicated what he was doing and the areas to improve on while doing it.

But to worry even after Jurco himself has said he needs to earn stuff that Blashill won't do that isn't really true. It hasn't been true of how he handled these guys in the minors. Just because they like him doesn't mean he coaches with no teeth. He benched Tatar for lazy turnovers, cut Jurco's ice time in half when he was giving him nothing and has virtually always played the D-man he thinks is going the best the most minutes be it a more celebrated guy like Ouellet or for most of the backhalf of last season Jensen.

The reason these former Griffins are ecstatic and want to skate through a wall for him isn't because he has never been punitive with ice time or had a tough word for them. It is because he did a great job of manufacturing relationships with them and getting them to buy and believe into what he was selling. Now that job is a little tougher at the NHL level, because everyone has tons of talent, but I think you're going to see somebody that really cares for his players and especially after a decade of somebody who at times really doesn't that should be refreshing and really get the dressing room up.

Now over time it could become a trouble spot if they all bend rules. But we have not seen if that will be the case. Blashill will have a shelf life too, all coaches do in my opinion.

 

[Frk It]

There is a pretty big difference between one person doing something to you based on performance and two people doing it, that is life and true of more than hockey.

Also worth noting when Jurco was struggling at the beginning of his rookie AHL season Blashill moved him around the lineup, up and down. Difference was he communicated what he was doing and the areas to improve on while doing it.

But to worry even after Jurco himself has said he needs to earn stuff that Blashill won't do that isn't really true. It hasn't been true of how he handled these guys in the minors. Just because they like him doesn't mean he coaches with no teeth. He benched Tatar for lazy turnovers, cut Jurco's ice time in half when he was giving him nothing and has virtually always played the D-man he thinks is going the best the most minutes be it a more celebrated guy like Ouellet or for most of the backhalf of last season Jensen.

The reason these former Griffins are ecstatic and want to skate through a wall for him isn't because he has never been punitive with ice time or had a tough word for them. It is because he did a great job of manufacturing relationships with them and getting them to buy and believe into what he was selling. Now that job is a little tougher at the NHL level, because everyone has tons of talent, but I think you're going to see somebody that really cares for his players and especially after a decade of somebody who at times really doesn't that should be refreshing and really get the dressing room up.

Now over time it could become a trouble spot if they all bend rules. But we have not seen if that will be the case. Blashill will have a shelf life too, all coaches do in my opinion.

Some great perspective TZE, thank you for sharing this.

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

Here's my hot take on Jurco's season and what he needs to prove

 

[SoupGuru]

I'm curious to see what Blashill is like as an NHL coach. I mean, you paid in the minors to develop players. Feel them out, find their strengths, give them confidence, etc. The NHL isn't a development league.

Jurco might be surprised that Blashill might not be as eager to work with him on finding the right minutes to play.

As far as Jurco not feeling like he was given enough room to play his game... well... welcome to the NHL, kid.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Jeff Blashill became a new HC of the team, who lead you to Calder Cup Glory in 2012-13 in GR. What does it mean for you ?

It's a very positive piece of news for me. In Jeff's team, I was a top 6 player and a game changer as he could rely on me. So, I assume the new coach should trust me. However, This doesn't mean that I'm gonna play a lot automatically. I have to deserve and work on my position within the team under his lead. I will definitely have a greater chance to establish myself now, than It was under Babcock, who wanted me to be a different kind of player than I really am.

He thinks he is a top 6 player on this team? He thinks because Blashill is coach he will automatically get into the top 6? I should hope not.
He was a "game changer" in the AHL. He was anything but at the NHL level.
I would love to hear him say he learned a lot working on his defensive game last year and hopes to build upon it with his offensive potential while becoming a more complete player.

Instead he says it was Babcock's fault because he didn't know I am a top 6 player.

He was on the fourth line because he didn't play himself into the top 6 or even 9. Babcock and his staff saw him practice. They saw him train and they saw him play. If he had earned a top 6 role he would have gotten one. If he earned more minutes he would have gotten them. For whatever reason he failed to do that.

Yep, Mule started out on the 4th line and became a star. Heck, Dan Cleary went from camp tryout to a guy on a scoring line who potted multiple 20 goal seasons. Jurco doesn't have the skill of a Thomas Tatar or Gus Nyquist, let alone Pavel Datsuyk or Henrik Zetterberg. I honestly don't think Jeff Blashill can magically give him their skill level, particularly since he's pretty well developed at this point as he'll be 23 next season and has just about 100 games in the NHL.

So if he's gonna score he's going to need to play the type game that Mule and Cleary played, ie paying the price in the high rent areas in front of the net. If he's not willing to do that he's going to have a short NHL career.

Totally up to him.

 

[haulinbass]

Yep, Mule started out on the 4th line and became a star. Heck, Dan Cleary went from camp tryout to a guy on a scoring line who potted multiple 20 goal seasons. Jurco doesn't have the skill of a Thomas Tatar or Gus Nyquist, let alone Pavel Datsuyk or Henrik Zetterberg. I honestly don't think Jeff Blashill can magically give him their skill level, particularly since he's pretty well developed at this point as he'll be 23 next season and has just about 100 games in the NHL.

So if he's gonna score he's going to need to play the type game that Mule and Cleary played, ie paying the price in the high rent areas in front of the net. If he's not willing to do that he's going to have a short NHL career.

Totally up to him.

I'm not sure about that. Jurco has better hands than Nyquist or Tatar. The only player on the Wings with better is Datsyuk. It is a matter of if Jurco can find his game and utilize his tools because he certainly has them. The very few and far in between dekes Jurco pulled in the NHL were amazing. In tight dekes along the boards that were Datsyuk like. Datsyuk is the only person I have ever seen deke somebody out while being flat footed and that's what I seen Jurco do a couple times. For some reason I feel like I'm the only person that has seen these around here and will never forget them. Can't forget about how great of a backhand he has which not many players have. He has the skills thats for sure. Jurco would likely be outpacing Nyquist and Tatars AHL stats by now if he was in the AHL still.

I still have high expectations for him to become a top sixer. I won't rule him out for another season or two. I will be very disappointed if he doesn't become a great 3rd liner who can contribute and fill in the top six during injuries.

 

[Frk It]

I'm not sure about that. Jurco has better hands than Nyquist or Tatar. The only player on the Wings with better is Datsyuk. It is a matter of if Jurco can find his game and utilize his tools because he certainly has them. The very few and far in between dekes Jurco pulled in the NHL were amazing. In tight dekes along the boards that were Datsyuk like. Datsyuk is the only person I have ever seen deke somebody out while being flat footed and that's what I seen Jurco do a couple times. For some reason I feel like I'm the only person that has seen these around here and will never forget them. Can't forget about how great of a backhand he has which not many players have. He has the skills thats for sure. Jurco would likely be outpacing Nyquist and Tatars AHL stats by now if he was in the AHL still.

I still have high expectations for him to become a top sixer. I won't rule him out for another season or two. I will be very disappointed if he doesn't become a great 3rd liner who can contribute and fill in the top six during injuries.

I'm not sure Jurco has better hands than Tatar. If he does he hasn't figured out how to use them at the NHL level yet. He may end up with better hands, but I don't think you can say he is ahead of Tatar now.

I think AA will have the best hands eventually, personally. Better than Tatar, Nyquist, or Jurco. At least as far as 1-on-1 highlight reel stuff.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I'm curious to see what Blashill is like as an NHL coach. I mean, you paid in the minors to develop players. Feel them out, find their strengths, give them confidence, etc. The NHL isn't a development league.

Jurco might be surprised that Blashill might not be as eager to work with him on finding the right minutes to play.

As far as Jurco not feeling like he was given enough room to play his game... well... welcome to the NHL, kid.

That is a very good point. I'm not so sure Blashill will be more patient with Jurco than Babcock was. In the AHL a big part of his job was to develop the kids and make them NHL ready. In the NHL his only job is winning games. It doesn't matter how young or how much potential someone has, the guy that contributes more towards winning hockey games will always get more icetime in the NHL, at least if you're a team that wants to win.