Players that have been hurt by...

[Leafs87]

I think Bobby Ryan could have made it to the NHL earlier, although I don't think it really hurt his development so much. I'm a firm believer that the call up is probably the most part of a players development, one way or the other.

 

[D0ctorCool]

I'd say John Tavares. Obviously he's a major talent, but I feel like his last year of Junior was completely unnecessary. He had the size and ability to play in the NHL and I bet he'd be ahead of where he is now if he was able to play in the NHL one year earlier. Going to the Islanders didn't boost his development either, but that's another story.

 

[BIitz]

Had a post about this topic in the Rielly thread over on the leaf board, but I'll sum it up.

This is a common problem around here. Potential isn't a guarantee, it's an estimate. You're no more likely to reach it if you spend your whole teen years in JR than you are if you make the team. A prospect isn't "ruined" because they don't reach their potential. If every player reached their potential each team would have 4 #1 C's and 6 #1 D's, but it doesn't work like that. Their potential should be seen as a ceiling, not a floor.

How is this factual evidence? How is their factual evidence that playing someone too early ruined their future either? Kris Russel certainly looked good in JR, how come he never turned out to be good in the NHL? There are countless players who's career could, hypothetically, could have been ruined from being sent back. There comes a point in the "blue chip" prospect stage where they can't learn anything at the JR level; And having seen more than half of Riellys games last season, I can say that's the case for him.

Prove to me that a career has been ruined by calling someone up too early. And at the same time, prove to me and extra year in JR never ruined a kid. You can't.

You can read the whole post, 289, in the Rielly thread on the Leaf board.

 

[The Macho King]

Honestly, I think it's hard to tell either way. A lot of prospects who stay down never make the jump, so you don't really think about them much afterwards. Some guys are close to ready, so teams keep them up, and for one reason or another they can't adapt to the NHL game. Fans view development from a very results-oriented approach, but just because a player busts doesn't mean their development was mishandled. You're drafting 18 year old kids. It's far from an exact science.

But answering the OP, the correct response is obviously Jonathan Drouin.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Good topic. I've had this conversation with a few leaf fans when discussing Morgan Riellys 2013-14 season. We could never think of anyone off the top of our heads but we can all think of hundreds of kids who were rushed.

That's because if a player is placed on an NHL roster prematurely and doesn't pan out we say "ah see he was rushed" whereas if a player isn't placed on a roster even after he's probably earned it and doesn't pan out we say "wasn't much of a player anyways". It's almost impossible to conclude that rushing or stalling a players development is why they didn't pan out. It's very possible that some highly touted youngsters get sent back to junior, develop bad habits and become lazy which flatlines their development. We have just no way of knowing for sure.

 

[Joey Moss]

Rob Schremp.. should have been with the Oilers in 2008 but the team was already so young with Cogliano, Gagner and Nilsson.