I have a few question for those who are infuriated with KK's ice time utilization since he is apparently playing a ''fourth line role'' playing with our current top winger and armia who doesn't do bad for himself as well right now. Were you the same guys who were infuriated by the fact he was put with these two players in the first place before a puck even dropped in the regular season? I would like to remind everyone that 5-on-5, PP and PK are three different things. His ice time clearly show he plays third line minutes at even strenght.
How would you rate KK's production and overall work on the powerplay last year? 1 goal and 4 assists in almost 2 minutes per game of PP ice time. I'm not saying KK won't get better or I approve of Julien not using him on the PP. I would prefer he uses him over some of our other guys but it seems everyone is forgetting his utilization last year and the results he got in. Those are terrible results, probably close to be if not the worst on the team. I saw nobody on this pointing this out so far on the post I read so far. Why? I guess because he's young he's learning he deserves to be there because he was drafted at high spot, last year's everybody sucked anyway type of excuses. Without the excuses, again on a scale of A+ to E is he closer to A+ or E or the middle?
And would you use him on the PK even though you have proven guys on the PK like Danault and Thompson at C and KK's current faceoff% is 37,7%? You have 4 forwards to choose on the PK does he make the cut? If so why?
I would like to remind that our powerplay is T-12th at 25% without the top end talent that most others teams have and our PK has been bad so far and I don't think I would personally put KK on there. Oh and yes we are playing well overall and still winning games. It's been only 5 game as well.
Thompson has about the same ice time he got last year and will get about the same as his career average this year. So clearly to me he isn't the problem, so might as well turn this one into a KK vs Evil Danault right now like a bunch of other threads on this board anyway. Because only then, a lot of you be happy with the coaching staff.
For me, it's all about trying to win the Cup. Is Danault likely to be a top 2 centre on a Cup winning team? IMO, unlikely. Could he be a tough minute 3 line centre on a Cup winning team? Yeah, I could definitely see that. Would Thompson be a core piece on a Cup winning team? IMO, no. He might come up big and play a major role, but he's not a guy you'll be relying on. Does Kotkaniemi have the potential to be a top 2 centre on a Cup winning team? He's obviously not there right now, but yes I think he has the potential to be a legitimate top 2 centre on a Cup winning team.
As a fan, do I care about just making the playoffs with little chance of actually winning it all? Not really. I don't care about 1st and 2nd round exits.
For these reasons, I would prioritize trying to develop Kotkaniemi into a legitimate top 2 centre over fighting for a playoff spot with virtually no chance of actually winning the Cup.
This takes us to how Kotkaniemi is being developed. Personally, I think he should be given more minutes and opportunity to grow. Presumably management wants to grow Kotkaniemi into a legitimate top 2 centre as well and they have their own plan for him, which, right now, involves relatively few minutes and little PP time. Maybe their strategy will work, but, like many, I can't help thinking of Galchenyuk. Obviously Kotkaniemi and Galchenyuk are different players with different strengths and weaknesses, but both were drafted 3rd overall as centres with tonnes of promise. Galchenyuk didn't get a whole lot of ice time despite his production and was moved around from centre to wing, and, through his limitations, or managements' development plan, or a combination of both, he failed to live up to his advance billing. Because this is the same management team that failed to develop Galchenyuk (through his fault, theirs, or a combination of both), it's not exactly easy to give them the benefit of the doubt.