Mikeyg
Registered User
- Dec 26, 2011
- 8,884
- 2,579
If that was the case, then Kadri would have been in the NHL asap instead of toiling away in the AHL. Coaches have to balance the short-term and long-term successes of their teams with the information and players they are given.
Coaches try to shelter their rookies for the sake of their development. It was obvious from the start of the season that the hottest thing in the desert was the tire fire this team was. Tippett did the smart thing in easing 19 year old Crouse into the lineup and gradually giving him PK duties. For a young, physically developing player, focusing more on tape and physical development is useful--that's one of the benefits of going the NCAA route.
In the first WJC, Crouse, Paul and Gauthier made up Canada's very successful fourth line. You're not expected to score tons in that scenario. However, as the next year shows, Crouse was able to produce when he was given minutes and quality linemates. In his second go-around, he was an assistant and was tied for second in scoring with Brayden Point behind only Marner and Strome.
Are you using AAA production and comparing him to Konecny? If we're going down that road, he outproduced Konecny in Midget so big whoop. But yeah, I guess he was so bad that he was only the 5th overall pick in the OHL draft. Right.
Context is important. His team was in the basement in goals production in his draft year--Spencer Watson was hurt and he was one of the few weapons on the team. The fact they were so successful the next year was due to the injection of talent: a full year of Watson, acquiring MDC and Descrocher helped Kingston change their system so they didn't have to grind out every game.
You're looking at his rookie season on an anemic team and coming to that conclusion. Not every rookie season goes the way of the Marners and the Matthews of the world.
FWIW Crouse outscored Colborne this year. Isn't it weird how playing with good players is good for your stats and playing with not so good players is not so good for your stats? I think this holds especially true for "passengers" like Crouse.
You're forgetting that he was the 11th pick, not first overall pick. And there's many instances of "passengers" being key players on very good lines and teams. The issue with your "production" argument is that the Coyotes have been a terrible offensive team ever since Whitney left. Last year, OEL was suffering from personal issues and wasn't himself, and Duclair took a nosedive in production. If things stay the same, Crouse is probably going to score around 20-28 points next year. Still wouldn't mean that he's a bust. But if he finds chemistry with the shiny new toy in Keller or with Dvorak and also gets to play more than 11min/game (which he should) he's gonna produce.
Alright cookie im doing this rapid fire style
On kadri: No that isn't right, wilson was still in win now mode, wasn't interested in developing players. The argument which supports my philosphy would be that kadri didn't have the necessary skill at that time to play in that top 6 capacity. Now, the difference between the 2 situations is that kadri's skill set and junior production give him a longer leash. It is foolish to believe that draft position doesn't impact future opportunities. As I said though, kadri's leash would certainly be longer than crouse's and that really isn't debatable. You also have to keep and mind that the context is much different. The coyotes of 2017 were very much an aimless team that really had nothing to play for after november, there was amble opportunity for crouse to play higher in the lineup. You can't really argue that the team had nothing to lose and also choose not to fully develop the potential within their rookie players.
On the rookie production:
I don't have time to do this, but if u look up the average ppg of top 15 forwards in their draft year (lets just say those who play at least 50 games) im sure he would be much lower than the mean. I don't understand how u think im equating him with matthews? matthews is one of the best rookies in the history of the game and he got what? a .8 ppg? simple math dictates that .15ppg would be 5 or so standard deviations away from that, so imho i'd say that qualifies as the low end, so i'm not sure what you are trying to say there.