I've been thinking about this on and off since I saw the thread, and I wonder if the "overripe" philosophy for defenseman is why ours haven't really panned out.
There was some discussion earlier in the thread, but I've started to wonder if the extra time in the AHL hampers defensemans development. The NHL and AHL games are much different. Things happen faster st the NHL level, and they're much more crisp. Not only that in the AHL games I've watched it's decidedly less structured than games at the NHL level.
Things players can get away with in the AHL they might not be able to in the NHL, and the extra time spent in the leagues may actually form bad habits that are hard if not impossible to break at the next level.
I suppose the counter to that is that if they really were that exceptional they should set the AHL on fire, but it's something to consider.
There is undoubtedly an element of truth in this, but the importance of the NHL team still being competitive undermines how often it would be utilised as a strategy. No doubt, should you draft a can't miss top 5 d-man, its best to throw them into the deep end, because the short term hit for the team is a) lower and b) without doubt worth it in the long term.
It gets a lot harder with players like Sproul, Oullette or Kindl (or even a left-field example like Almqvist), who all have NHL ready elements to their game, but also have elements that are not only patently barely pro level ready at best, but which may never improve to the level to be worth taking the short term performance hit to nurture.
People talk about bringing Kindl up sooner, and sure, it may not have done any harm to his development, but his greatest limitations weren't going to be addressed by earlier exposure. Kindl has the size, skating and passing ability to be an NHL d-man, and his shot's not bad either, but his lack of physical aggression and at times genuine fear of being hit were never going to cut it. With a bit more of the rather less cerebral Smith's courage and aggression he could have easily been a top 4 man, but no amount of exposure at NHL level will change that element. Smith coughs up the puck through a lack of thought/awareness and top level skill. Kindl usually coughed it up out of borderline cowardice. We can hope Smith develops more composure with age, but bravery isn't suddenly going to appear for the Czech, which is a shame, because when he played tougher and braver he looked a good option. But I've never seen a wings d-man with size be so afraid of contact.
Sproul should have got more of a look sooner, but suffered the misfortune of being drafted by a team whose tactical ethos became more overtly defensive to cope with a lack of high end talent on the roster beyond the Eurotwins. Had he been drafted 4 years earlier, he would have played a fair bit while being babysat by Lidstrom. In the same way that when briefly paired with Lidstrom in his debut season, Brendan Smith went 0.5PPG and looked a top 4 d-man, showing a level of play only subsequently surpassed in the playoffs.
Indeed this is a bit problem the wings have had. While they had Lidstrom at his peak and with Rafalski, or Chelios and Stuart at his best, the only early d pick they made was smith. By the time smith was ready to step up, and Kindl showed real form at AHL level, not to mention subsequent drafts, there has been no top level d-man to pair them with. With defence by committee its a lot harder to plug in an inconsistent and raw younger guy and allow him to make mistakes but still put him in a position to thrive.
Had the Suter signing come of, you can guarantee that smith and Sproul would have seen more ice-time as you have some offsetting. Smith in particular seems to elevate his play with better defensive partners. With Kindl, KFQ, Ericsson and to a degree Marchenko, Smith looks like a 6/7 at best. Alongside Lids, Kronner or Green he looks like a top 4 guy (albeit one prone to the odd brain fart).
Its the same reason why Nyquist did so well in his break out season. Sure he had an unsustainable shooting %, but he also had quality, experienced and smart line-mates.
Just putting youngsters into the line-up only works if they are exceptional. Those that aren't top 15 picks generally need to be introduced to the team alongside quality experienced and smart line-mates.
Accordingly, despite the captain's legs and back going, putting larkin with Z, particularly up until xmas was ideal, as Hank was smart enough to utilise Larkin's strengths well. Putting Larkin with Helm and Glendenning would have been a speedy line but bad for Larkin.
That said, all this is dependent on chemistry which is hard to predict. Lids made everyone near him better. Z helps all his line-mates, though in recent seasons his usefulness has tailed off badly after January. Dats on the other hand, despite being a genius, only really meshed well with those smart enough to anticipate his play and those tough enough to create him space via self sacrifice. Had he been two years older or not missed half a year with a broken leg, Mantha would have been a nice fit to play with him.
I guess this is partly why the wings were so high on Nielsen. A smart player with a track record of boosting his linemate's output.
