Its not apparent that people returning from an injury face a period of rusty time? That is the biggest crock I've ever heard. You want quantitative justification? Do you understand basic human physiology?
He hasnt played in months and a large part of that time he wasnt able to train either. He isnt going to be in high physical condition. The camp isnt very long for Canada in the winter generally, last years was 4 days. So if he comes back just for camp hes going to have to go hard in camp for 4 days, a few exhibition games and then its game time. You think thats enough to get into game shape compared to guys who have had full rookie camps, prospect tournaments, NHL training camps and regular season play to this point then I guess thats you but I think he'll be rustier than those guys.
as for his last return from injury, how long did he skate before that return? Was he actually on the ice for a month before returning to the line up? Yes I'm making a hypothetical situation that he could be ready to go for camp only, if hes ready well before that than yes ew're not having this conversation.
You can choose not to worry about a player who hasnt played in months getting his first playing time in a short, physical tourney with little rest time but I think that could be tough on him. It would be a difficult decision weighing the risk vs reward of bringing him vs other players. I'm not even saying dont bring him, but your long paragraph about how he wont be rusty at all seems pretty ridiculous to me
This is the entire problem with your argument. It's entirely grounded in vague intuitions about human physiology. Basically, it's grounded in your feelings.
Sure, a player may inevitably
feel a bit rusty when getting back onto the ice. There's no necessary causal relation between that
feeling and a significantly reduced state of performance, much less an extended reduced state of performance. Players routinely have big games or stretches coming back from injuries. There are numerous examples of this, one of which I already offered up was Vilardi himself only last year. So, whether they
felt a bit rusty donning the skates again, whether they
felt a bit bloated taking the ice again is irrelevant to the actual claim that it is a necessary truth that he will have a period of significantly reduced performance, such that it would affect his performance aka manifest statistically. And you have to make an even stronger claim, because there are two weeks between camp and the tournament, that not only will he have a period of significantly reduced performance but that this state will be extended over weeks. That not only seems like it's not a necessary truth, it seems almost rarely to be the truth. But its the truth that your argument requires, and it's what you're trying to extend your argument to say.
So that is my gripe with your argument. You take something everyone can agree upon, "a player might feel rusty after not doing XYZ for a while" and try to extrapolate that argument to make claims about extended underperformance that are no way implicated by the actual claim that "a player might feel rusty". Players feel rusty all the time, and still manage to perform at an extremely high level. You start out trying to make it seem like you're making a scientific claim, but beyond the use of the word "physiology" there's little scientific content, little statistical content, and mostly just your gut feeling about things.
