Poll: Does Babcock keep Larkin on Leafs?

[The Zermanator]

People have claimed many times now on the prospects forum (a lot of it comes from the recent Larkin vs. Nylander stuff) that Larkin would be in the A if he were on the Leafs, largely because of Babcock.

I said no way, 95% chance he's on the Leafs. His size, polished d game, and speedy offense are Babcock's [mod: greatest desire] and he'd want to take more personal control over Larkin's development.

What do you guys think? Is Larkin on the Leafs right now? Or Marlies?

Click to read more...

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Depends pretty sure it's either Lou or Shanny's call seriously doubt that Babs would've a say I say Marlies definitely.

 

[Frk It]

I agree with them.

On the flip side, if Babcock was coach here guarantee Larkin's not on the team, or at least damn sure not on line 1.

Blashill campaigned for him, and I think that went a long way.

 

[Laser Rayzor]

If it were solely up to Babs then I think he'd be given a 3rd line role, Larkin just screams of a Babs type of guy to me. That being said he'd probably have a pretty short leash and would have to play a defense first grinding game for Babs to keep him up.

 

[Claypool]

The only reason he's on the team is because Helm and Datsyuk are injured. It has nothing to do who is the coach. Not sure why people are arguing about this.

 

[HisNoodliness]

I think babs would have him in the A regardless of the team. I think Larkin is exactly what Babcock wants but he's not willing to trust a kid especially one so young, especially this early in the season. I know that Blash told Kenny he wants Larkin and I don't see Babcock campaigning for a kid.

 

[Laser Rayzor]

The only reason he's on the team is because Helm and Datsyuk are injured. It has nothing to do who is the coach. Not sure why people are arguing about this.

Leafs fans are arguing that if Larkin were on the Leafs Babs would insist he go to the AHL just like he did with Nylander.

IMO they don't yet understand the preferential treatment Babcok gives to Babs types of players (Larkin, Abby..etc) over skill guys (Nylander, Nyquist, Tatar..etc)

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

The only reason he's on the team is because Helm and Datsyuk are injured. It has nothing to do who is the coach. Not sure why people are arguing about this.

Agreed. Also, Mike Babcock is not our coach anymore and Dylan Larkin was drafted by us and not Toronto. Who gives a crap whether he would have Larkin on his NHL roster?

 

[Frk It]

Agreed. Also, Mike Babcock is not our coach anymore and Dylan Larkin was drafted by us and not Toronto. Who gives a crap whether he would have Larkin on his NHL roster?

True, good point. We should let them worry about that crap.

 

[Flowah]

If it were solely up to Babs then I think he'd be given a 3rd line role, Larkin just screams of a Babs type of guy to me. That being said he'd probably have a pretty short leash and would have to play a defense first grinding game for Babs to keep him up.

I agree with this. Might have a different role, but he's a Babs kinda player. 200 foot game, fast, not too cute, shoots a lot. Everything Babs has always stressed.

Although, maybe Babs wouldn't have fought hard for him to stay. Seems a bit like Blashill did and that might have made the difference. Maybe Babs just says "I want to keep him" but leaves it at that and doesn't push Kenny hard for it. But if that were true, I think it'd still mean Babs wanted him. Just a difference of personality really.

 

[Claypool]

Leafs fans are arguing that if Larkin were on the Leafs Babs would insist he go to the AHL just like he did with Nylander.

Who cares.

 

[InjuredChoker]

marlies. 20 (+) mins with them in a winning team is better for his development than the train wreck they have in the NHL this season.

 

[Frk It]

I also think Holland was more open to the idea being Larkin is a hometown kid and the story is great for business and PR to have a Detroit kid make the team. Creates a positive buzz and excitement for the team in a big way.

Wouldn't be the same thing in Toronto.

 

[TheRatPoisoner]

Hard to say since the Leafs are in a vastly different situation than the Wings. Part of me buys into the whole theory that the front office would like to keep him out of a losing environment.

Voted Leafs though. Larkin's style and skill set are pretty much taylor made for real gud hockey.

 

[The Zermanator]

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2015/10/dylan_larkin_earns_spot_on_red.html

Direct quote from the Wings head coach:

"I'd say his play had to be such that he grabbed the job," Blashill said. "I think if he didn't grab the job, the easier thing to do would be to put him in GR and see where we're at and see how his play goes. But we just felt, I specifically felt, that he makes us better. And to an exponential amount that we felt it was that important that he started on the team.

"You could ask people around the league and lots of people would say the safer thing would be to put him in GR, but we just feel like he's earned that spot."

Blashill 'specifically felt he makes the team better'...'was important he started on team, to an exponential amount', etc. He acknowledges that the easier choice (roster-wise obviously) would be to send him to GR. But their hands were forced.

I'm getting a strange feeling that some around here are underrating Larkin relative to how the Wings brass see him.

Agreed. Also, Mike Babcock is not our coach anymore and Dylan Larkin was drafted by us and not Toronto. Who gives a crap whether he would have Larkin on his NHL roster?

Who cares.

Well, no one around here is actually in any way involved in the running of these franchises. So everything is speculative anyway.

I agree with them.

On the flip side, if Babcock was coach here guarantee Larkin's not on the team, or at least damn sure not on line 1.

Blashill campaigned for him, and I think that went a long way.

Couldn't disagree more with this. This 'Babcock hates the kids' narrative has grown too big. Yes, Babcock holds kids to a high standard. But he wanted Ouellet up full-time last season, he wasn't an obstacle for Tatar and Nyquist. He benched his golden boy Cleary and rode the kids in large part to the playoffs the last two seasons. Holland's hoarding of third line type depth, plus our plethora of NHL ready prospects, is what's keeping kids down. And Larkin is our best prospect, by far.

Babcock would have wanted Larkin up whether he was still with the Wings, or in TO.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Leafs. North American, high effort, two way, forechecks well, stays out of penalty trouble. He's pretty much Babcock's dream.

I think it's become clear in the last few years that Holland is the one holding young players back, not Babcock. It's happening in Toronto now because their plan is to imitate Holland as closely as they can.

 

[The Zermanator]

Leafs. North American, high effort, two way, forechecks well, stays out of penalty trouble. He's pretty much Babcock's dream.

I think it's become clear in the last few years that Holland is the one holding young players back, not Babcock.

Hell, with Bozak and Kadri his only obstacles, he'd have a shot at being their 1C before November starts.

 

[Frk It]

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2015/10/dylan_larkin_earns_spot_on_red.html

Couldn't disagree more with this. This 'Babcock hates the kids' narrative has grown too big. Yes, Babcock holds kids to a high standard. But he wanted Ouellet up full-time last season, he wasn't an obstacle for Tatar and Nyquist. He benched his golden boy Cleary and rode the kids in large part to the playoffs the last two seasons. Holland's hoarding of third line type depth, plus our plethora of NHL ready prospects, is what's keeping kids down. And Larkin is our best prospect, by far.

Babcock would have wanted Larkin up whether he was still with the Wings, or in TO.

Here's the thing, though.

Strongly believe Babcock wouldn't have used him on line 1. And I strongly believe because Blashill IS willing to that persuaded Holland.

Babcock probably would have used him on line 3, and Holland would have said line 1 in Grand Rapids is better for his development. Babcock might have made a little comment to the media with XO, but Larkin would have got on a bus TO GR anyways.

I don't disagree Larkin is not a Babcock type player, but I don't think he would be as trusting with a 19 year old as Blashill has been.

So ultimately I think that makes the difference here in Detroit. Over in Toronto? Psh, who cares. That's a tire fire.

 

[Heaton]

Here's the thing, though.

Strongly believe Babcock wouldn't have used him on line 1. And I strongly believe because Blashill IS willing to that persuaded Holland.

Babcock probably would have used him on line 3, and Holland would have said line 1 in Grand Rapids is better for his development. Babcock might have made a little comment to the media with XO, but Larkin would have got on a bus TO GR anyways.

I don't disagree Larkin is not a Babcock type player, but I don't think he would be as trusting with a 19 year old as Blashill has been.

So ultimately I think that makes the difference here in Detroit. Over in Toronto? Psh, who cares. That's a tire fire.

Didn't Babcock have Nyquist on the top 2 lines during all of his call ups? Babcock wanted a ton of young players, Holland just wouldn't give them to him.

 

[Frk It]

Didn't Babcock have Nyquist on the top 2 lines during all of his call ups? Babcock wanted a ton of young players, Holland just wouldn't give them to him.

Pretty sure he started on 3rd line. Tatar started on 3rd line (after press box, mind you). Sheahan started on 3rd line. So forth, etc. I think you get the point.

Outside of major, major injuries all the young forwards I can remember did.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

Am I the only one who remembers when Babcock wanted Abdelkader and Ericsson on the team and Holland sent them down and Babs called them the best players he'd ever had to send down?

 

[Claypool]

I think it's become clear in the last few years that Holland is the one holding young players back, not Babcock.

Babcock hates younger, less experienced players. Where have you been?

 

[The Zermanator]

Am I the only one who remembers when Babcock wanted Abdelkader and Ericsson on the team and Holland sent them down and Babs called them the best players he'd ever had to send down?

Here's the thing about Babcock. He keeps everyone on a short leash, or at least 90% of players. The ones he doesn't are the Datsyuk/Zetterberg types, where a leash isn't necessary. Or Cleary.

But everyone else is kept on a pretty short leash, i.e. if you make regular mistakes you're gonna see fewer opportunities. Naturally, rookies will commit the most mistakes therefore it gives the appearance that Babcock has no patience for young players. But if you can limit mistakes, and contribute where you're placed in the lineup, then Babcock will be all over you.

Larkin is the type of player who makes very few mistakes, even as a rookie. Babcock would want him on the team, in Detroit or Toronto.

Babcock hates younger, less experienced players. Where have you been?

That's simply not true.

 

[Flowah]

Pretty sure he started on 3rd line. Tatar started on 3rd line (after press box, mind you). Sheahan started on 3rd line. So forth, etc. I think you get the point.

Outside of major, major injuries all the young forwards I can remember did.

He was. Back a few years ago where he got like 18 games in the regular season, put up 7 points and had a few games in the playoffs before we got bounced in the first.

Played with Andersson on the third line.

 

[Frk It]

That's simply not true.

They were being sarcastic.