Post-Game Talk: #56 | FLYERS 4 at Golden Knights 1 | Sun., Feb. 11 2018, 8:00 pm ET

[hatcher]

Let the team take shape boys.

 

[Psuhockey]

I'm not quite sure I understand you're exact point, but I think it is a pretty safe bet to say that an organization has something to do with development of players. Yes, it's up to the player to perform, but he needs to be put into a position to be successful by their organization.

If you actually look at the stats, a lot of top players, top 6 wingers and top 4 defensemen, in the league spend very little time outside of juniors before making it to the NHL. That’s across all franchises and all level of draft picks. So the real development happens before these players even get to their NHL franchises. Once their, a lot of guys tend to peak at the same time in their careers 24-25 so does every team put them in the exact same course for that to happen? Or is that age a confluence of physical muscle develop and on ice experience?

The problem with the concept of development is it can’t be proved either way. If a guy fails to make it, was it because he was a bust or because he wasn’t developed? Did Hakstol develop Konecny or do a lot of players put it together towards the end of their 2nd season after accumulating some game experience?

And look at Detroit, once the poster child for successful slow development. Did they forget how to do it all of the sudden or did they stop drafting good players?

 

[deadhead]

A lot of top players are top draft picks, i.e. they've been identified as BOTH talented and close to being NHL ready (because if you're either less talented or less developed, you'll be drafted later).
There are very few top players who were later draft picks who played out of juniors, many spent 1-2 years in the AHL. There are always outliers, but just pull up a draft from 6-7 years ago.

Teams will live with growing pains of very talented players (gee McDavid, you were out of position again). However, a lot of talented players fail to develop because they're rushed to the NHL by teams wanting a marque talent to sell tickets or because they foolishly overestimate the readiness of a player, and then fail to provide structure and discipline (or fail to scout the player's character) to teach the player the fundamentals he needs to succeed over the long-run.

Development can be seen, does a player keep making the same mistakes? Do they improve skills where they are relative deficient? Do they master the fundamentals of the game?
Interviews with the players mention skills that they were specifically instructed to work on, both in juniors and the AHL.
That certainly suggests the team self-scouts and has a development plan tailored for each prospect.

 

[Psuhockey]

Teams will live with growing pains of very talented players (gee McDavid, you were out of position again). However, a lot of talented players fail to develop because they're rushed to the NHL by teams wanting a marque talent to sell tickets or because they foolishly overestimate the readiness of a player, and then fail to provide structure and discipline (or fail to scout the player's character) to teach the player the fundamentals he needs to succeed over the long-run.

You have no way of proving what you just said. The players could have been busts regardless. There are players who spend years in the AHL and even the NHL and just don’t have it. Look at Chicago. They “developed” Keith some will say in the AHL yet why haven’t they developed anyone else since? They have drafted plenty of defenders and gave them a ton of minutes in the AHL and I am sure things to work on yet they have nothing to show for it in over a decade. So what happened?

 

[Psuhockey]

Hey don’t take my word for it:

.
“Well, we got Auston (Matthews),” Babcock said, referring to winning the draft lottery in 2016.
“What if we don’t? I remember when we got to three, I was jumping up in the living room and then when we got to one, I had tears.
“People don’t understand. You need real players. You can do everything you want, put them in the right spots. You need real players. You need lots of real players if you’re going to be good in the end. If you’re going to put your name on the silver thing, you need a real group of players.

Babcock on Leafs’ rise: ‘Well, we got Auston…’
Babcock is also a big believer in “development” yet seems like he is saying it’s all about the players.

 

[deadhead]

What he's saying is you can polish a turd all you want . . .
But a lot of teams have ruined talented players.

You can't teach size, speed, body control etc. (though a good training program can help on the margin), and instincts are partially innate, but you can teach them not to do stupid things, to understand how different teams will attack and how to attack different defensive schemes, etc.

You can work on skill development, skating, etc.

 

[VladDrag]

If you actually look at the stats, a lot of top players, top 6 wingers and top 4 defensemen, in the league spend very little time outside of juniors before making it to the NHL. That’s across all franchises and all level of draft picks. So the real development happens before these players even get to their NHL franchises. Once their, a lot of guys tend to peak at the same time in their careers 24-25 so does every team put them in the exact same course for that to happen? Or is that age a confluence of physical muscle develop and on ice experience?

The problem with the concept of development is it can’t be proved either way. If a guy fails to make it, was it because he was a bust or because he wasn’t developed? Did Hakstol develop Konecny or do a lot of players put it together towards the end of their 2nd season after accumulating some game experience?

And look at Detroit, once the poster child for successful slow development. Did they forget how to do it all of the sudden or did they stop drafting good players?

So to be clear, you dont think NHL teams have anything to dovwith their prospect's development? That's what I am understanding.

If so, I am going to agree to disagree.