Larkin with Babs

[The Zermanator]

Asked this in the last PGT but I think it's pretty much dead there now.

Babcock was the coach for nearly a decade. Hypothetically, he re-signed in Detroit instead of Toronto. He's still the coach. How does Larkin fare under Babcock? Does he start in GR? Tear it up then get sent up quickly? Does he struggle under Babcock's coaching style? How long is his leash? Etc.

Note: This isn't a Blashill vs Babcock question. Blash shouldn't even be mentioned, he was never the coach in this scenario.

Click to read more...

 

[Bench]

Conventional wisdom would tell us Larkin would have had a harder time getting regular minutes to start under Babcock. Babcock's track record with rookies wasn't always favorable.

That said, he never had a talent like Larkin emerge through the system. It's possible Larkin's rise was unavoidable in any regime. Things moved too slow for Nyquist, Tatar, and Smith you could argue, but none of them screamed 19-year-old franchise player like our boy D-Boss.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Pretty sure abdelkader got 2 goals in a game in the playoffs and didn't get much ice time or got scratched. So yeah. Larkin wouldn't get ice time. But he would eventually get it because he's a boss. A d boss

 

[Reddwit]

I think Babcock would've wanted him on the team to start, but I don't think he'd be as "immune" to relegation as Larkin is. As much as I like Larkin, he has his Tatarian moments where he gets a little careless with the puck or overhandles it. Last night, he made a weak pass up the middle that, thankfully, just made it past the blue line to put Florida offsides. Thats the kind of thing that Babs would jump on as a "teaching moment" and Larkin probably would've found himself bumped down the line afterwards.

I just think Babcock would have began molding him into a two-way guy from the start. While he never had a prospect like Larkin under him, I can't think of any player under his tenure who didn't first "earn" their minutes with physical and/or defensively conservative performances or low-risk minutes for those who clearly never were going to be two-way/physical specimens. Instead, it seems (not that I know what's going on behind the scenes) like he's being handled in a more hands-off approach (to the extent possible with a teenage NHLer), and has had the opportunity to make his mistakes without the anxiety of being benched.

 

[Reddwit]

Conventional wisdom would tell us Larkin would have had a harder time getting regular minutes to start under Babcock. Babcock's track record with rookies wasn't always favorable.

That said, he never had a talent like Larkin emerge through the system. It's possible Larkin's rise was unavoidable in any regime. Things moved too slow for Nyquist, Tatar, and Smith you could argue, but none of them screamed 19-year-old franchise player like our boy D-Boss.

Not sure that Larkin did either. He looked great from the beginning, but I don't think people were sure it was going to last. Certainly not like it has. Its impossible to know, but part of me thinks the second Larkin made an egregious mistake or two in his own zone, he'd find his minutes cut and end up in a "learning role," lets call it - getting limited minutes so he can "see how the game is played" from those who are safer with the puck.

 

[GoAwayDanCleary]

I think he would be in a pretty similar position.

Babs drools over players like Larkin

 

[crashnburnluder]

I think the news of Kronwall and Zetterberg going up to Babcock and saying they want him here and he needs to be here would have gotten him on the team, just not sure if Babcokc starts him game 1 with Z

 

[TheOtherOne]

Larkin made himself impossible to keep down in a way no other player under Babcock ever had. There's no way he would have done anything but love the kid and his ridiculous work ethic.

Has Larkin ever took a single shift off that Babcock could have pointed to and said "look kid, you need to mature a bit more"?

No.

 

[opivy]

I think he would be in a pretty similar position.

Babs drools over players like Larkin

Every coach in the history of hockey wants a player with hands, speed, IQ and a motor.

 

[TheMule93]

Didn't Babcock come in before Datsyuk and Zetterberg were leading the team? Or did that happen at the same time? I said this somewhere else but I didn't watch hockey back then. Either way, dats and Z were already "driving the bus" I guess.

 

[Dotter]

Conventional wisdom would tell us Larkin would have had a harder time getting regular minutes to start under Babcock. Babcock's track record with rookies wasn't always favorable.

That said, he never had a talent like Larkin emerge through the system. It's possible Larkin's rise was unavoidable in any regime. Things moved too slow for Nyquist, Tatar, and Smith you could argue, but none of them screamed 19-year-old franchise player like our boy D-Boss.

I agree.

Larkin would be fighting with Jokim Andersson for ice time under Babcock. I loved Babs relentless coaching style, but man am I glad he's gone now. I have a feeling TML fans will turn their backs on Babcock in a few years.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Didn't Babcock come in before Datsyuk and Zetterberg were leading the team? Or did that happen at the same time? I said this somewhere else but I didn't watch hockey back then. Either way, dats and Z were already "driving the bus" I guess.

Same time pretty much

 

[Fugu]

He would have started in GR, and then gotten some call-ups. If he immediately impressed and wowed, he might have stayed up.

 

[Flowah]

I agree.

Larkin would be fighting with Jokim Andersson for ice time under Babcock. I loved Babs relentless coaching style, but man am I glad he's gone now. I have a feeling TML fans will turn their backs on Babcock in a few years.

After decades of irrelevance he's going to lead them into the playoffs consistently once their roster shapes up. I hope that buy him at least a little bit of gratitude from the fanbase.

 

[ricky0034]

I feel like Babcock would have been unwilling to put him in the top 6 to start the year off and Holland would have sent him down to Grand Rapids as a result

Then he would have done extremely well in the AHL,eventually gotten a shot and ran with it and by now would be in pretty much the same position he's in currently

The Wings would probably have a couple more losses from not having him up from the start though

 

[aar000n]

He would be in grand rapids still. Remeber bumblecock had cleary and sammy in the lineup over tartar and nyquist. Until he was FORCED by injuries to bring them up.

 

[FlashyG]

Babcock probably wouldn't have put him on the top 2 lines to start the season which would have resulted in him being sent to Grand Rapids.

Larkin would have had to force his way into the line-up, but given the talent he's shown he probably would have done that by this point in the season.

 

[Pavels Dog]

What's the point of even speculating? We'll never know.

The only realistic reason I see for Babcock doing something different than Blashill and leaving Larkin in GR is that Blash had the benefit of coaching Larkin in the AHL playoffs, so he knew him a bit better than Babcock would have. That probably impacted Blashill's decision to push for Larkin on the opening night roster.

But Babcock has pushed for young players on the roster plenty of times too. I think people forget that roster decisions are not only up to the coach. Larkin starting in the NHL probably had more to do with Datsyuk being injured more than anything else.

 

[ap3x]

Has Larkin ever took a single shift off that Babcock could have pointed to and said "look kid, you need to mature a bit more"?

No.

Well, we all know Babs. One bad turnover may be enough to suddenly find yourself on another line, 'cause he wants to teach you a lesson. Especially in regard to younger players.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Well, we all know Babs. One bad turnover may be enough to suddenly find yourself on another line, 'cause he wants to teach you a lesson. Especially in regard to younger players.

That hasn't really been true and I don't know where that myth comes from. Tatar made so many terrible turnovers his first time in the NHL, never was healthy scratched or benched. Jurco also got a lot more opportunity under Babcock than he has under Blashill.

 

[ap3x]

Hyperbole. Considering how much he valued his vets, it for sure felt like that sometimes, though.

 

[jerrymac]

If Babcock were to make him earn his ice time and maybe play some time in GR like some are suggesting, who would have had his roster spot?

 

[joe89]

I'll go out on a limb and say that he wouldn't be in Calder consideration because of starting the year in the AHL.

Long term? No difference.

 

[DeYarmond Edison]

As much as I criticized Babcock for his lineup decisions, I don't think there's anyway he doesn't give Larkin top minutes out of the gate.

 

[obey86]

That hasn't really been true and I don't know where that myth comes from. Tatar made so many terrible turnovers his first time in the NHL, never was healthy scratched or benched. Jurco also got a lot more opportunity under Babcock than he has under Blashill.

The year he scored 19 goals, Tatar was healthy scratched for like 7 straight games to start the season.