evolutionbaby
Registered User
- Jan 7, 2012
- 820
- 225
Babcock's departure leads to Larkin signing
- Thread starter evolutionbaby
- Start date
InjuredChoker
Registered User
Ricelund
̶W̶e̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶t̶e̶a̶m̶
Henkka
Registered User
Hah. Would be pretty funny if Babcock was the "reason", when next 19-year-old will play for the Red Wings.
Last guy who did this was Jiri Hudler at October-December 2003, the last season before Babcock days.
Last guy who did this was Jiri Hudler at October-December 2003, the last season before Babcock days.
Hah. Would be pretty funny if Babcock was the "reason", when next 19-year-old will play for the Red Wings.
Last guy who did this was Jiri Hudler at October-December 2003, the last season before Babcock days.
I am not challenging you in particular Henkka, but your last comment about Hudler stimulated the thought line here. I wouldn't mind catching a few opinions on this:
Aside from Nyquist, which players/prospects were held in the AHL (UNDISPUTEDLY) too long?
Smith looked good in 11-12 but a sample of 14 games isn't enough and he has been "meh" ever since.
Tatar in 12-13 may be an example, but I am convinced his playoff run in Grand Rapids is a BIG part of his development.
Conversely, it stands to reason that Jurco may have came up too soon.
Pulkinnen was given a chance, and couldn't do much with it.
Lastly, Dekeyser, Mrazek, (Filppula?) and Sheahan seemed to come up at just the right time. I would argue Tatar as well (for reasons mentioned above).
Shaman464
No u
Pulkkinen's advance stats say he used his 4th line minutes better than anyone else on the league.
eye tests show he was easily knocked off the puck and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn
HomersWorld
Registered User
- Mar 8, 2012
- 665
- 90
I still wonder if Mrazek and Sheahan would be up (Sheahan especially) if the team wouldn't have been decimated by injuries two seasons ago or if Howard/Gustavsson weren't injured again this year. I sometimes feel like the team lucked into having Sheahan in the regular lineup.
We can speculate all day, but ultimately, he came up, we got healthy, and they chose to keep him in the NHL. Nyquist on the other hand shuttled back and forth several times. Even if you want to speculate, he does not fit the Nyquist mold of "indisputably too much time in the AHL". For this reason, I include him in the group that came up at just the right time
Shaman464
No u
Chances: Then your eyes were pretty wrong. Compared to players like Nyquist he was a regular linebacker.
Sirloin: So? The advanced stats take into account power play production and ES production.
comparing him to nyquist isn't much considering they were both knocked off the puck pretty easily. they both need to bulk up a bit
Frk It
Mo Seider Less Problems
- Jul 27, 2010
- 36,244
- 14,753
Well, nothing is undisputed. Some people don't even think Nyquist was there too long, which I think is hilarious.
But in my opinion: Nyquist, Tatar, Kindl, Smith, Ouellet, Marchenko
And if Smith was allowed to continue his call-up where he looked great, that would have completely changed his development. So saying he hasn't looked as good after the fact is kind of irrelevant IMO. I think the stagnation certainly didn't help in the AHL.
Babcock wanted Ouellet on the team last year. Here we are again where he is going to spend the majority of a season in the AHL. If it looked like he was actually progressing offensively more down there, I would be in favor of it, but he's clearly not. I don't see the benefit of him being there. I don't love the ceilings of Marchenko or Ouellet, but both guys are capable bottom pair guys in the NHL right now IMO and will get very limited action this year.
Kindl they said almost made the team as like a 19 year old then went on to play 230 games in Grand Rapids. I think the bigger issue there was once he got to Detroit, how Babcock would bench him for any mishap, but I don't think the overripening philosophy helped at all there either.
Nyquist and Tatar is self-explanatory.
Would bet my paycheck Sheahan would have stayed in GR til his exemption ran out. Lucky for him that we got crushed by injuries and he made the most out of his call-up. That was never the plan for him.
Henkka
Registered User
But he had team-highest Fenwick on those ES minutes.
Easy to knock of the puck or not, but still he had that team-highest Fenwick. Got his shots through.
And his ES G/60 was 3rd highest. It wasn't just hitting the glass with wide shots.
Last edited:
Heaton
Moderator
I see the trend of blaming Babcock for Holland's decisions is still going full force by the media. Holland still has signed a crazy logjam of forwards, there is no chance Larkin plays full time on the Wings, he's at least a year away, and probably two.
Henkka
Registered User
If Larkin is a TOP12 player at playoff-time, he joins the team. Regular season goes at Griffins, we already know that.
Is it? I mean, the quote from Larkin is pretty direct. He seems to make a pretty strong implication that the coaching change brings new opporunity. Here it is right from the source.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=778241
He outlines it as one of the reasons he signed. Of course, "older players who might be on their way out"... cue Dan Cleary signing. Could also be referencing Franzen's likely LTIR status. Weiss buyout. Cole not coming back.
My point is that he was obviously more than an 4th liner, so comparing him to 4th liner's is flawed, no?
I have a couple issues:
1) Smith/Tatar. It kind of seems you are trying to have it both ways. You say Smith going back to the AHL lead to a stagnation. However, you aren't acknowledging that when Tatar went back to the AHL, he found a level he had never before demonstrated in the AHL. If you are including the time back in the AHL for Smith as part of the development (or lack there of), then you should be consistent and do the same with Tatar. If you do include that extra AHL time with Tatar, its clear another level of development occurred in that playoff run. Simply put: You are including that extra time in the AHL as part of the development curve for one player, and not the other.
2)XO/Marchenko. I think its a little to early to determine with these too. We don't yet know what kind of players they are, so its hard to say the time they spent in the AHL was too much/not enough.
3) Sheahan. Both Tatar and Nyquist got their first opportunity due to injuries. They still went back to the AHL. Once Sheahan got his opportunity, neither he nor Management looked back. The fact that management never looked back, is exactly why I include him. Bottom line is, despite having waiver eligibility at the start of 2014-2015, he played in the NHL. This was Management's decision, they chose to have him on the roster.
Heaton
Moderator
That probably would've been the case even if Babcock stayed, so it still points to a sensationalist title.
The Zetterberg Era
Ball Hockey Sucks
The way it has been for a while, amazing how many ignore that.
Well the Larkin himself said it was a reason... The title applies, now Holland certainly remains a roadblock, but it was Babcock not Holland who was quoted with the tie goes to the veteran. Holland talks an awful lot about the NHL is a Men's league, Larkin plays a Man's game though, so he could see some time at some point this year.
I think the bigger difference is to date at his other stops when Blashill gets a player he plays them in their believed role to date. When Tvrdon comes up from Toledo, he goes straight up the lineup, same with Frk and Nestrasil to some extent. We will have to see how he operates at the big level, Babs seemed a little more willing to do this treatment with the D than the Forwards at least lately.
His quote about older players (if you actually read it) is referring to him wanted to learn under guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk before they retire, not because a roster spot might open up.
And yes, the headline is misleading. It's implying that Larkin didn't want to play for Babcock or that Babcock would have blocked him making the NHL at an early age, which obviously isn't true. He saw an opportunity to play for a coach that'll likely become a head coach by next season and he gets to make an impression.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice catch on ninja edit. You know what you did.
Babcock leaves. Larkin signs the next day. Larkin says in press release from the NHL that he saw an opportunity with a new coach. These are all facts.
Lil Sebastian Cossa
Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
- Jul 6, 2012
- 11,436
- 7,446
Nice catch on ninja edit. You know what you did.
Babcock leaves. Larkin signs the next day. Larkin says in press release from the NHL that he saw an opportunity with a new coach. These are all facts.
Even so, it's still a needlessly inflammatory headline. The difference was between Larkin signing as a 19 year old and signing as a 20 year old. It's not like he was going to refuse to play for the Wings if Babcock was there.
Heaton
Moderator
Nice catch on ninja edit. You know what you did.
Babcock leaves. Larkin signs the next day. Larkin says in press release from the NHL that he saw an opportunity with a new coach. These are all facts.
It's a fact like my tiger repelling rock repels tigers since there's no wild tigers in Michigan. Look, I hope some people are right and Babcock was a major issue in terms of letting younger kids play. I just don't think Holland was the guy always getting the short end of the decision stick while Babcock was forcing kids to stay in the minors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSVqLHghLpw
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: ECQF: Game 6 - Toronto Maple Leafs Vs Boston Bruins, 8 p.m. ET, TBS- Latest: Mickey Marner
-
-
