I agree with most of what you are saying so sorry to cherry pick just this, but...
Yeah, I think sending Timmins down was a bit drastic. Especially since the team went out of it's way to make such a big deal about how he unanimously made the team. To send him down after just 2 games when it's not like he played like **** or something was.... drastic. I really still don't understand why we did it, other than we were sort of caught by surprise at Cole's injury progress...
Still I'd rather see Timmins in than Barbs.. I get that may not be a short term benefit, but I want this team to have strong defensive depth come 2020.
I'd rather Timmins than Barbs too. I think to me it's obvious that the coaching staff expected to see certain things out of Timmins, and he didn't show them (either in games or practise or both). But hey, maybe he's looked great with the Eagles and we can just switch him and Makar
1) I think you are overrating Barberio and underrating what Makar has been bringing. And 2) It might be a decision they make in the future, but I think that dialing back his responsibilities is the first step of a couple they can do first. Sending him down right now seems drastic to me.
Also, I don’t think you can compare Timmins growth curve with Makar’s. They are two different players that are having different progressions and should be treated differently.
I'm not comparing Timmins and Makar's growth curve. I was just trying to show that sending a kid down to the A is not a drastic move - it's normal.
As for Barbs vs Makar, maybe Makar is wayyy better already, but I don't think so. I don't know how we can quantify that though.
Also, see below:
Makar is almost PPG as a defenseman, he won't be sent down. He is still a rookie learning to play in the NHL, give it time.
I agree we should give it time. My original post said "if he keeps playing this way..."
Also, "he won't be sent down" is not an argument against "he should be sent down". I'm not making a prediction here.