g00n
Retired Global Mod
- Nov 22, 2007
- 30,632
- 14,727
this is really not worth arguing over. I just have to ask what your definition of a system developed player is? If Bondra doesn't qualify and Beagle doesn't qualify, who does?
Already talked about this in several posts, including how hard it would be to assess around the league unless one has deep knowledge of draft/prospects/rosters for all teams, and what my definition is.
It should not be hard to figure out a basic framework definition regardless so let's not regress the conversation. If you have a player who shows progress within a system/franchise that's congruent with the nature of that progress, and he reaches or exceeds his projected potential from when you acquired him, isn't it reasonable to say he's been "developed" by your system?
I would argue that Beagle was developed as a defensive bottom 6 by our various defensive minded coaches over the years. But that's not what we're talking about. I would agree that several defensemen have been developed by the Caps and Bears, but that's not what we're talking about.
Maybe all top 6 forwards just hit the league at a certain level and stay that way.