Relative to 'expectations' this might be the most disappointing season since AHL arrived back in Utica.....once again the lack of depth in the organization was the reason for the playoff demise in both VanCity and Utica.
Prospects who came into camp with lots of tire-pumping, basically fell flat in Utica. And once again the blueline was hollowed by injuries. But the goaltending situation was the biggest headache. The Comets went through five guys; Demko, Kulbakov, Leighton, Mazanec and Bachman, and not sure anybody really grasped the mettle.
So it's back to drawing board for the both the Canucks and Comets. Benning seems to be signing a boatload of guys out of college ranks, but whether they make the AHL team any better in the long run is hard to judge.
But this organization just has to assume that guys are going to be felled by injuries and try to build up the depth. Easier said than done I guess.
Not only is it the most disappointing relative to expectations, but this is the worst performance by a Comets team since they re-entered the AHL in 2013-14 as the Canucks' affiliate. This is the first time they aren't going to have finished with more wins than losses (given the way the standings are kept where OT and shootout wins are lumped in with regulation time wins while OT and shootout losses are shown separately.)
The injury bug has certainly hurt again.
Certainly even those of us who accept that starring in lower competition doesn't mean success in the AHL are probably surprised that each and every one of Palmu, Dahlen, Lind and Gadjovitch failed to succeed in Utica. Normally you'd expect at least one of them to come through.
I think there is more that has to be done about it than to "build up the depth" though.
1. You specifically mentioned the goalie situation. Kulbakov largely managed to hold the fort well enough early on. He faded later and the Canucks promoted their AHL goalie without having a replacement for him.
That's partly along the lines of building up the depth, but in this case the situation was clear. Bachman was already out for the season. The Canucks created the goalie problem by not having a replacement for Demko. Not only did they not build the depth, they actively tore it down.
If they were going to promote Demko even when he'd been out most of the season and on return was still working to get to the level of the previous season, then it must have been predictable that he'd be promoted. If that's the case, there was plenty of time to plan for his eventual promotion and flexibility to do it when they were sure of having a replacement for him.
It goes without saying that the replacements they came up with for Demko were almost certainly going to result in the Comets being weaker, but not having anyone to replace him didn't go well.
2. Bad Goalie was merely the most prominent and clear among those pointing out that the Comets were not a well built team, this year or in the past.
This time imo the biggest problem at the beginning of the season was a shortage of of AHL centres. Later on as system health improved that situation also improved, though it was then exacerbated by playing Gaunce at wing much of the time and only playing one genuine AHL center while playing potential centers on as additional wingers.
It's a big jump from junior to the AHL and it might have helped those players to have someone on their line knowing what he was doing and able to do it.
While Cull has his detractors and those detractors point to some legitimate issues, it's hard to blame him for putting one legitimate AHL line together so as to get some scoring. (It's easier to blame him for playing someone who was probably a capable AHL center at LW much of the season.)
There have been similar issues with the defence.
3. Ryan Johnson has been quoted as wanting guys with a burning desire to get to the NHL ahead of the ability to do it and, in another equally puzzling quote, saying the vets shouldn't be better than the prospects. (I didn't see that latter quote and am relying on other posters who have commented on it.)
If that is really his view, then I think it is wrong and a major flaw in the Canucks' development system.
Much as people don't want the kids to get no ice time because of the good veterans, it is even worse for many prospects to just flounder because the quality of linemates is hideous, passing and receiving passes an adventure and there is nobody to learn from.
Many people complain that the prospects aren't developing well in Utica. Most years there hasn't been much of anything to develop. This year I think we saw not only that the prospects were overrated, but that the team wasn't good at developing them.
It wasn't because of their lack of ice time. The ice time they got was in spite of their play, not because they'd earned it. When the team is built with the simplistic notion of staying out of the way of the kids' advancement, so making sure the veterans aren't very good, what happens? It isn't hard to see some basic results as we've all seen and experienced the problems that come with playing with poor players, though in the case of many of us it was in lower levels in minor hockey. This is high level and the differences between players much less than at lower levels, but the ideas aren't entirely different. Some of the simpler ways of developing bad habits are:
-when you don't get a pass when you go to the right place on the ice, you try going to other places in hopes they'll work better-or just stop looking for passes in situations where a good player will get you the puck
-when your pass isn't received, isn't converted on nor is the puck passed back to you when it should be, you start to make your own plays, leading to hogging the puck
-when your linemate or defensive partner is out of position, on defence, you try to cover for him and eventually when you are covering for someone continually you don't concentrate on being in the right position yourself
Generally the idea is that things that work with players you can count on don't work so well when you are playing with people that can't be counted on and that results in bad habits being formed or continued.
In my view the Comets current development ideas will only work for those few who are good enough to play without development, or are at least good and smart enough to develop regardless of their teammates.
I believe the idea that the way to develop young players is to provide crap for them to work with and learn from needs to change before the Comets can be successful, both at winning and developing young players. I believe the way the Canucks build their minor league team is flawed, beyond just dealing with the lack of depth.