Injury Report: Jesperi Kotkaniemi (Part IX)

[admiralcadillac]

So if you acknowledge he was ultimately responsible, what relevance is it that he deferred to Timmins?

If you aren’t absolving him, what is your specific point?

He wanted Reilly. He didn’t get Reilly. Your words. He had complete control. The nuts and bolts of the process aren’t really relevant.

But they are relevant though

 

[Tighthead]

But they are relevant though

How are they relevant if you aren’t trying to deflect blame from Bergevin?

You have stated that he wanted Reilly and didn’t get him.

You acknowledge he is solely responsible.

You maintain that you present this fact without any attempt to absolve Bergevin or deflect blame.

So why does it matter how he arrived at the result? It’s still his full responsibility.

 

[DAChampion]

Based on what? Cause we couldn't develop McCarron, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Hudon, DLR, Scherbak? Development is mostly on the player and Rielly would of been fine if we drafted him. This lack of development problem we have is overblown IMO.

Sometimes it's just a bad pick or we have too much hope for grade B prospects. If our grade A youth like Kotkaniemi, Mete, Juulsen, Poehling, Brook, Suzuki all disappoint like the players above, I'll join your bandwagon

Lol -- they need to *all* disappoint.

 

[DAChampion]

You seriously believe stuff like this?

In the real world, development counts for a lot, which is acknowledged by nearly all actual experts.

Go stream the documentary "In Search of Greatness" and get back to me. It includes length interviews with Wayne Gretzky and Jerry Rice.

 

[DAChampion]

How are they relevant if you aren’t trying to deflect blame from Bergevin?

You have stated that he wanted Reilly and didn’t get him.

You acknowledge he is solely responsible.

You maintain that you present this fact without any attempt to absolve Bergevin or deflect blame.

So why does it matter how he arrived at the result? It’s still his full responsibility.

We don't need to blame Bergevin for everything, as bad he is overall.

Bergevin had an opinion, sure, but he did the right thing deferring to his head scout. At the time, Timmins was highly regarded, it is also good for staff morale to respect the judgment of employees.

Sometimes, the right decisions lead to bad results. That may have happened here, but in those cases we should be less quick to criticize. Hockey management is overall a probabalistic process, sometimes bad process leads to good results and good process leads to bad results.

The combined drafting and development sucked for a decade, approximately. They had the wrong process and took too long to fix things. But they made some substantial changes last summer. We should know if they're sufficient within two years or so, in my opinion.

I'll note that it's also not just Timmins. A lot of experts would have selected Galchenyuk over Rielly, this wasn't Timmins going off the wall. Galchenyuk was also ranked the number 1 prospect in the league soon after the draft.

Rielly benefited from a better development environment, he did not play in the NHL until 2013-14, and he was not made second fiddle to Desharnais. He was allowed to grow.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Lol -- they need to *all* disappoint.

Not really all of them but the point is having the same hope towards Grade B guys vs Grade A guys. Development is mostly on the player and most times, it's a bad pick. I asked before and will ask again... what player did we fail in developing?

 

[417]

In the real world, development counts for a lot, which is acknowledged by nearly all actual experts.

And assuming you're one of these experts...

Could you elaborate on what is so exceptionally different from the way the Toronto Maple Leafs have developed their players and how the Montreal Canadiens have?

Maybe you could tell me what Toronto did differently to make sure Morgan Reilly developed correctly vs what Montreal would have done had they drafted Morgan Reilly?

Go stream the documentary "In Search of Greatness" and get back to me. It includes length interviews with Wayne Gretzky and Jerry Rice.

Hey maybe you are right...

Maybe Wayne Gretzky wouldn't of been Wayne Gretzky if he had been drafted by say...the Hartford Whalers.

That developmental staff in Edmonton is responsible for making Wayne Gretzky who he is

 

[the valiant effort]

I think it's worth wondering if Rielly would have panned out here under Therrien. In his first couple of seasons he brought so much less to the table without the puck then a guy like Subban who was obviously too good to not force the coach's hand. Jacques "Dinosaur" Martin had no problem sending P.K. over the boards in all situations right from the moment he arrived in the 2010 playoffs. It's conceivable that Rielly might have never been given enough rope under Therrien or the AHL crew to emerge near his potential. In Toronto, Rielly was allowed to sink or swim, and while he is still not much of an actual defender he definitely doesn't lack for confidence and isn't a liability.

 

[Tighthead]

We don't need to blame Bergevin for everything, as bad he is overall.

Bergevin had an opinion, sure, but he did the right thing deferring to his head scout. At the time, Timmins was highly regarded, it is also good for staff morale to respect the judgment of employees.

Sometimes, the right decisions lead to bad results. That may have happened here, but in those cases we should be less quick to criticize. Hockey management is overall a probabalistic process, sometimes bad process leads to good results and good process leads to bad results.

The combined drafting and development sucked for a decade, approximately. They had the wrong process and took too long to fix things. But they made some substantial changes last summer. We should know if they're sufficient within two years or so, in my opinion.

I'll note that it's also not just Timmins. A lot of experts would have selected Galchenyuk over Rielly, this wasn't Timmins going off the wall. Galchenyuk was also ranked the number 1 prospect in the league soon after the draft.

Rielly benefited from a better development environment, he did not play in the NHL until 2013-14, and he was not made second fiddle to Desharnais. He was allowed to grow.

I don’t mind the deferral in strict terms.

But if you are the person in charge, and you punt a critical decision, you don’t get to hedge and say “I wanted something different”.

You stand by the decision and you own it 100 per cent. You do not MMQB your subordinates.

 

[417]

We don't need to blame Bergevin for everything, as bad he is overall.

Bergevin had an opinion, sure, but he did the right thing deferring to his head scout. At the time, Timmins was highly regarded, it is also good for staff morale to respect the judgment of employees.

Sometimes, the right decisions lead to bad results. That may have happened here, but in those cases we should be less quick to criticize. Hockey management is overall a probabalistic process, sometimes bad process leads to good results and good process leads to bad results.

The combined drafting and development sucked for a decade, approximately. They had the wrong process and took too long to fix things. But they made some substantial changes last summer. We should know if they're sufficient within two years or so, in my opinion.

I'll note that it's also not just Timmins. A lot of experts would have selected Galchenyuk over Rielly, this wasn't Timmins going off the wall. Galchenyuk was also ranked the number 1 prospect in the league soon after the draft.

Rielly benefited from a better development environment, he did not play in the NHL until 2013-14, and he was not made second fiddle to Desharnais. He was allowed to grow.

Stop it...

Up until the 2017-18 season...there's no one who thought Morgan Reilly was a better draft pick then Alex Galchenyuk.

Show me posts where you thought the Toronto Maple Leafs were doing a great job developing Morgan Rielly when he was a combined -66 his first 4 years in the NHL.

Please.

 

[417]

I think it's worth wondering if Rielly would have panned out here under Therrien. In his first couple of seasons he brought so much less to the table without the puck then a guy like Subban who was obviously too good to not force the coach's hand. Jacques "Dinosaur" Martin had no problem sending P.K. over the boards in all situations right from the moment he arrived in the 2010 playoffs. It's conceivable that Rielly might have never been given enough rope under Therrien or the AHL crew to emerge near his potential. In Toronto, Rielly was allowed to sink or swim, and while he is still not much of an actual defender he definitely doesn't lack for confidence and isn't a liability.

And he sunk...several times.

The narrative on Rielly didn't start changing until the talent level on the team got much better.

This talk about how the Leafs developed Rielly is such bull****

Rielly got better as the talent around him got better.

 

[the valiant effort]

And he sunk...several times.

The narrative on Rielly didn't start changing until the talent level on the team got much better.

This talk about how the Leafs developed Rielly is such bull****

Rielly got better as the talent around him got better.

I didn't really state the Leafs developed him better, I inferred that by not "punishing" him for sinking he didn't regress. Call it dumb luck for the Leafs, call it whatever you want, I just don't think it's an ignorant question to wonder if the AHL guys or Therrien might have ruined him.

 

[Tighthead]

I didn't really state the Leafs developed him better, I inferred that by not "punishing" him for sinking he didn't regress. Call it dumb luck for the Leafs, call it whatever you want, I just don't think it's an ignorant question to wonder if the AHL guys or Therrien might have ruined him.

I’ve always thought good young defencemen need to play a lot as mistakes are going to come. I think bad teams are a good landing spot for them. It’s hard for a coach who is under pressure to win to put up with mistakes.

I know Sergachev has put up decent numbers on a good team in sheltered minutes; long term I’m not sure he wouldn’t be better off playing 26 minutes a night on a top pairing in Edmonton or Vancouver.

 

[ProspectsSTC]

Ah silly me, I thought this was a thread about Kotkaniemi

 

[DAChampion]

The Habs will have to allow Kotkaniemi to both fail and succeed on his own terms, otherwise he will not turn into the best player that he can be.

 

[Teufelsdreck]

Pt's by no means certain that he'll nr the No. 1 center. He'll have competition from youthful teammates. The Bruins hsve no one to replace Bergeron or Krejci, so no dynasty for them. The Habs will take over the Atlantic division in a year or two as soon as they fix their D situation.

 

[ProMath]

The Habs will have to allow Kotkaniemi to both fail and succeed on his own terms, otherwise he will not turn into the best player that he can be.

I think they will allow him. They can still shelter him next year. If Domi repeat (likely) and Danault repeat (very likely, could do better) it will give a lot of rope for Kotkaniemi. The kid is smart, they will live with his mistakes because he seems the kind of player that learn from them. (See Drouin for the opposite...sadly)

Just wish for no sophomore season. If he does well and Domi/Danault regress...you give him more responsibilities.

 

[Andrei79]

Any word on how his offseason training is going ? Is he working on his skating and power ?

 

[24Cups]

Kotkaniemi is going to need at least another year of patient growth, both physically and getting used to the NHL game. He exceeded expectations in his first year and despite some growing pains, showed interesting glimpses of the player he will become. Think about a compatriot in Sasha Barkov, it took him 3 or 4 years to piece it all together.

 

[Intangir]

I expect Mint to struggle a little bit early in the season this year as it is his sophomore year and the slump is real. I would like for him to eventually become a strong #1 center for us, but we'll have to be patient there and not demote him to the fourth line and let him rot there, or banish him to the wing for seasons on end.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Any word on how his offseason training is going ? Is he working on his skating and power ?

Nothing yet, I expect TheAthletic to provide an article on this matter during the summer. I do recall that he left Montreal only 2-3 weeks ago following his knee rehab.

 

[Tighthead]

I’m sure I’m the only one thinking this way but I would be fine with having KK play the first half of the season or so in Laval.

 

[417]

I’m sure I’m the only one thinking this way but I would be fine with having KK play the first half of the season or so in Laval.

Is that because you're expecting him to have a terrible offseason, show up to camp out of shape, completely blow it at training camp?

Because otherwise...there's no logic in that, with all due respect.

 

[Habs]

God help us if Leks is mentoring him in the off season.

 

[Paddyjack]

I’m sure I’m the only one thinking this way but I would be fine with having KK play the first half of the season or so in Laval.

It may happen if KK struggles at training camp. He is a good friend with Mete, and Mete benefited from that time in Laval, so he may not be too depressed to start there. If we somewhat land Duchesne this summer, I would start KK down and keep a centre line of Duchesne-Domi-Danault.