I was referring more to you jumping on anyone making reference to the WJC. Your stance on the WJC is well known - not saying you shouldn't talk about it, but you frequently respond to "at the WJC he..." with "but did you say anything about Byfield? Why do you put so much emphasis on a small tournament?" Instead of examining the overall point that players have good showings on the big stage and thus may be able to offer more than they are being credited for - such as Lias Andersson.
I don't recall anyone saying anything about Quinn Hughes at the WJC. Not saying it's false - just that I don't recall.
Caufield was rightfully eviscerated for his performance, and I was one of the bigger critics. And those criticisms carried over after an outstanding stretch of time when he played in the playoffs. Those criticisms include - Caufield is much more dependent on linemates for success, isn't a play driver, and was getting much more hype than what he was doing.
Last season, during the major slump Caufield went through, he was a complete non-factor for a chunk of the season. Once Martin St. Louis came in, and put him in a better position to succeed, he took off.
Of course, development isn't linear. He has a very good skillset, but he's an extremely streaky player who has high highs and low lows. His disappearing act at the WJC was emblematic of that.
I cannot disagree stronger that rookie tournaments mean more than the WJC. The WJC is the biggest stage where you win or go home. Players have to get their shit together much faster, which thus shows adaptability and individual skill, as opposed to playing against a collection of players where a small subset on each team is actually playing for an NHL roster spot, others for an AHL spot, and sometimes just fillers. I'm not saying it has zero value, but players who elevate their game on the big stage against their best peers in the world mean a LOT more to me than exhibition matches re-labeled as a tournament.
