Sandin Better Stay

[Martin Skoula]

I'm 100% on board with sending him down if he's just gonna get ****ed around with extremely low minutes in the NHL. Mike Babcock will wreck a young player's confidence on the drop of a hat. Not only that, but his insane micromanagement just puts undue stress on the top guys too.

There's nothing he's going to learn against bottom-6s that he can't learn in the AHL.

I almost thought Babcock had turned a corner when he announced Sandin made it. Almost.

 

[Critical13]

If they want Sandin to become an elite player, they have to play him with and against elite players

Not when he's 19 they don't.

Absolutely nothing wrong with getting use to the speed of the NHL against bottom 6ers. Most bottom 6ers in the NHL are elite AHL players. It's like playing in the AHL all star game every night.

Slowly get him involved in other aspects - maybe some PK time when we have injuries. The odd defensive zone start against top 6 line. Etc.

Babs did wonderfully with Dermott, Rielly and Gardiner. Why are we suddenly doubting him?

There's nothing he's going to learn against bottom-6s that he can't learn in the AHL.

I almost thought Babcock had turned a corner when he announced Sandin made it. Almost.

Not true. As mentioned above, move NHL 3rd liners are elite AHL players. In Toronto alone, Kap and Johnsson should be 3rd liners and they would both be top 10, maybe top 5 in scoring in the AHL.

Keep putting him against that type of competition until he's up to speed. Could take a full season.

I'm 100% on board with sending him down if he's just gonna get ****ed around with extremely low minutes in the NHL. Mike Babcock will wreck a young player's confidence on the drop of a hat. Not only that, but his insane micromanagement just puts undue stress on the top guys too.

He's averaging 11:00 TOI. Similar to Vaakainen last season, similar to Valimaki's first few games, etc.

He is not Dahlin or Heiskanen, he will need more time to adjust. I expect him to play around 15-17 minutes a night by January.

 

[thewave]

If they want Sandin to become an elite player, they have to play him with and against elite players

Yes because the young smalllish defender that lacks strength will learn the value of getting ripped apart for being bodied off the puck 3-4 times again. Soon they will call him Jake Gardiner 2.0 etc etc. Give him 9, send him down.

 

[biotk]

Not when he's 19 they don't.

Absolutely they do. I already went through every single top-4 D who debuted at either 18 or 19 years of age. They averaged 19:43 TOI per game their debut season. Several had low TOI their first season - they were all sent down. In both cases (playing the young D's a lot because they can handle it, or sending the young D's down for another season or two because they are not getting much TOI for whatever reason) other teams actually develop top-4 Ds. (and Toronto has done so as well: Rielly at 19 played almost 18 minutes a game. Kaberle as a 20 year old rookie played almost 19 minutes a game).

He's averaging 11:00 TOI. Similar to Vaakainen last season, similar to Valimaki's first few games, etc.

Your proving our point, not yours. Vaakainen was sent down by Boston after two games. Valimaki was sent down by Calgary after 22 games, but he should have been sent down earlier. Yet another example of Boston developing their young Ds responsibly.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Not when he's 19 they don't.

Absolutely nothing wrong with getting use to the speed of the NHL against bottom 6ers. Most bottom 6ers in the NHL are elite AHL players. It's like playing in the AHL all star game every night.

Slowly get him involved in other aspects - maybe some PK time when we have injuries. The odd defensive zone start against top 6 line. Etc.

Babs did wonderfully with Dermott, Rielly and Gardiner. Why are we suddenly doubting him?



Not true. As mentioned above, move NHL 3rd liners are elite AHL players. In Toronto alone, Kap and Johnsson should be 3rd liners and they would both be top 10, maybe top 5 in scoring in the AHL.

Keep putting him against that type of competition until he's up to speed. Could take a full season.




He's averaging 11:00 TOI. Similar to Vaakainen last season, similar to Valimaki's first few games, etc.

He is not Dahlin or Heiskanen, he will need more time to adjust. I expect him to play around 15-17 minutes a night by January.

it shouldn't take 3 months to build him up to regular 3rd pairing minutes

 

[biotk]

it shouldn't take 3 months to build him up to regular 3rd pairing minutes

It is shocking that something this obvious needs to be said. Seriously, this board is bizarro land.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Not when he's 19 they don't.

Absolutely nothing wrong with getting use to the speed of the NHL against bottom 6ers. Most bottom 6ers in the NHL are elite AHL players. It's like playing in the AHL all star game every night.

Slowly get him involved in other aspects - maybe some PK time when we have injuries. The odd defensive zone start against top 6 line. Etc.

Babs did wonderfully with Dermott, Rielly and Gardiner. Why are we suddenly doubting him?



Not true. As mentioned above, move NHL 3rd liners are elite AHL players. In Toronto alone, Kap and Johnsson should be 3rd liners and they would both be top 10, maybe top 5 in scoring in the AHL.

Keep putting him against that type of competition until he's up to speed. Could take a full season.




He's averaging 11:00 TOI. Similar to Vaakainen last season, similar to Valimaki's first few games, etc.

He is not Dahlin or Heiskanen, he will need more time to adjust. I expect him to play around 15-17 minutes a night by January.

Gardiner was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him. Rielly was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him.

Dermott was an elite AHL #1D that Babcock managed to develop into.. the most sheltered 3rd pairing defenseman in the NHL, and it only took him 2 years to do it. Wow, what amazing progress!

Can you name some other defensemen that Babcock developed? I genuinely can't think of a single one that he didn't inherit as an established top-4 guy.

 

[Apotheosis]

I want him to be playing 14-17 minutes as well. It's a waste if he's playing Polak type minutes. Let him get used to breaking the puck out and playing against NHL level competition.

 

[Critical13]

it shouldn't take 3 months to build him up to regular 3rd pairing minutes

January was a stretch, I was thinking more around 10-15 games, with some nights off.

He will get there. He will be playing more minutes than an average 3rd pairing defender by the end of the year in my opinion.

Like I mentioned before, I have no reason not to trust Babcock/Dubas here. They've done well with our other D.

 

[KuleminFan41]

Gardiner was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him. Rielly was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him.

Dermott was an elite AHL #1D that Babcock managed to develop into.. the most sheltered 3rd pairing defenseman in the NHL, and it only took him 2 years to do it. Wow, what amazing progress!

Can you name some other defensemen that Babcock developed? I genuinely can't think of a single one that he didn't inherit as an established top-4 guy.

You can use that logic with virtually any NHL coach though. You can't blame Babcock for inheriting teams the way they were, he took a hardly great Anaheim team to the cup finals in his rookie season and in Detroit he took over a team that was in "win now" mode. On one team, he got more out of them than he should, and the other, he took over a veteran team ready to win and did. It's hardly rational to criticize him for the jobs he got hired for

Rielly and Gardiner were slotted as top 4 defensemen because of how mediocre the defense core was at the time. Both players had at least 2 seasons without Babcock as their coach, but when he joined the club both players immediately got career highs under his guidance as coach.

Gardiner
Before
11-12 , 7 goals, 23 assists for 30 points in 75 games
13-14 , 10 goals, 21 assists for 31 points in 82 games
14-15 , 4 goals, 20 assists for 24 points in 79 games

After
15-16 , 7 goals, 24 assists for 31 points in 79 games
16-17 , 9 goals, 34 assists for 43 points in 82 games
17-18 . 5 goals, 47 assists for 52 points in 82 games
18-19 , 3 goals, 27 assists for 30 points in 69 games

Rielly
Before
13-14 , 2 goals, 25 asists for 27 points in 73 games
14-15 , 8 goals , 21 assists for 29 points in 81 games

After
15-16 , 9 goals, 27 assists for 36 points in 82 games
16-17 , 6 goals , 21 assists for 27 points in 76 games
17-18 , 6 goals , 46 assists for 52 points in 76 games
18-19 , 20 goals, 52 assists for 72 points in 82 games

To give Babcock little or no credit for them taking big leaps with him as coach, is incredibly ignorant . They both saw sizable jumpsin their point totals under Babcock and they're not the only ones either. While not defensemen , guys like Kadri , JVR, Bozak , and even Komarov had their best seasons under Babcock.

 

[Martin Skoula]

You can use that logic with virtually any NHL coach though. You can't blame Babcock for inheriting teams the way they were, he took a hardly great Anaheim team to the cup finals in his rookie season and in Detroit he took over a team that was in "win now" mode. On one team, he got more out of them than he should, and the other, he took over a veteran team ready to win and did. It's hardly rational to criticize him for the jobs he got hired for

Rielly and Gardiner were slotted as top 4 defensemen because of how mediocre the defense core was at the time. Both players had at least 2 seasons without Babcock as their coach, but when he joined the club both players immediately got career highs under his guidance as coach.

Gardiner
Before
11-12 , 7 goals, 23 assists for 30 points in 75 games
13-14 , 10 goals, 21 assists for 31 points in 82 games
14-15 , 4 goals, 20 assists for 24 points in 79 games

After
15-16 , 7 goals, 24 assists for 31 points in 79 games
16-17 , 9 goals, 34 assists for 43 points in 82 games
17-18 . 5 goals, 47 assists for 52 points in 82 games
18-19 , 3 goals, 27 assists for 30 points in 69 games

Rielly
Before
13-14 , 2 goals, 25 asists for 27 points in 73 games
14-15 , 8 goals , 21 assists for 29 points in 81 games

After
15-16 , 9 goals, 27 assists for 36 points in 82 games
16-17 , 6 goals , 21 assists for 27 points in 76 games
17-18 , 6 goals , 46 assists for 52 points in 76 games
18-19 , 20 goals, 52 assists for 72 points in 82 games

To give Babcock little or no credit for them taking big leaps with him as coach, is incredibly ignorant . They both saw sizable jumpsin their point totals under Babcock and they're not the only ones either. While not defensemen , guys like Kadri , JVR, Bozak , and even Komarov had their best seasons under Babcock.

This has nothing to do with Babcock having 0 track record of developing rookie defensemen. We should not be taking his approach as gospel and being ok with playing Sandin 10 minutes a night when there are mountains of evidence on other teams that it's not the right way to develop young D.

Rielly and Gardiner entering their primes and being surrounded with talent when Babcock came in is not evidence to the contrary.

In almost 20 years in the NHL, Babcock has not developed a single rookie defenseman into a legitimate top-4 option, he has only helped some established top-4 D polish and improve their games.

 

[thewave]

This has nothing to do with Babcock having 0 track record of developing rookie defensemen. We should not be taking his approach as gospel and being ok with playing Sandin 10 minutes a night when there are mountains of evidence on other teams that it's not the right way to develop young D.

Rielly and Gardiner entering their primes and being surrounded with talent when Babcock came in is not evidence to the contrary.

In almost 20 years in the NHL, Babcock has not developed a single rookie defenseman into a legitimate top-4 option, he has only helped some established top-4 D polish and improve their games.

Facts are facts

 

[Apotheosis]

You can use that logic with virtually any NHL coach though. You can't blame Babcock for inheriting teams the way they were, he took a hardly great Anaheim team to the cup finals in his rookie season and in Detroit he took over a team that was in "win now" mode. On one team, he got more out of them than he should, and the other, he took over a veteran team ready to win and did. It's hardly rational to criticize him for the jobs he got hired for

Rielly and Gardiner were slotted as top 4 defensemen because of how mediocre the defense core was at the time. Both players had at least 2 seasons without Babcock as their coach, but when he joined the club both players immediately got career highs under his guidance as coach.

Gardiner
Before
11-12 , 7 goals, 23 assists for 30 points in 75 games
13-14 , 10 goals, 21 assists for 31 points in 82 games
14-15 , 4 goals, 20 assists for 24 points in 79 games

After
15-16 , 7 goals, 24 assists for 31 points in 79 games
16-17 , 9 goals, 34 assists for 43 points in 82 games
17-18 . 5 goals, 47 assists for 52 points in 82 games
18-19 , 3 goals, 27 assists for 30 points in 69 games

Rielly
Before
13-14 , 2 goals, 25 asists for 27 points in 73 games
14-15 , 8 goals , 21 assists for 29 points in 81 games

After
15-16 , 9 goals, 27 assists for 36 points in 82 games
16-17 , 6 goals , 21 assists for 27 points in 76 games
17-18 , 6 goals , 46 assists for 52 points in 76 games
18-19 , 20 goals, 52 assists for 72 points in 82 games

To give Babcock little or no credit for them taking big leaps with him as coach, is incredibly ignorant . They both saw sizable jumpsin their point totals under Babcock and they're not the only ones either. While not defensemen , guys like Kadri , JVR, Bozak , and even Komarov had their best seasons under Babcock.

Rielly was always going to be great. Intentionally stifling offence for defence was an extreme and he was lucky it panned out. Gardiner's point totals skyrocketed once the big 3 era began. No coincidence.

 

[biotk]

You can use that logic with virtually any NHL coach though. You can't blame Babcock for inheriting teams the way they were, he took a hardly great Anaheim team to the cup finals in his rookie season and in Detroit he took over a team that was in "win now" mode. On one team, he got more out of them than he should, and the other, he took over a veteran team ready to win and did. It's hardly rational to criticize him for the jobs he got hired for

Rielly and Gardiner were slotted as top 4 defensemen because of how mediocre the defense core was at the time. Both players had at least 2 seasons without Babcock as their coach, but when he joined the club both players immediately got career highs under his guidance as coach.

Gardiner
Before
11-12 , 7 goals, 23 assists for 30 points in 75 games
13-14 , 10 goals, 21 assists for 31 points in 82 games
14-15 , 4 goals, 20 assists for 24 points in 79 games

After
15-16 , 7 goals, 24 assists for 31 points in 79 games
16-17 , 9 goals, 34 assists for 43 points in 82 games
17-18 . 5 goals, 47 assists for 52 points in 82 games
18-19 , 3 goals, 27 assists for 30 points in 69 games

Rielly
Before
13-14 , 2 goals, 25 asists for 27 points in 73 games
14-15 , 8 goals , 21 assists for 29 points in 81 games

After
15-16 , 9 goals, 27 assists for 36 points in 82 games
16-17 , 6 goals , 21 assists for 27 points in 76 games
17-18 , 6 goals , 46 assists for 52 points in 76 games
18-19 , 20 goals, 52 assists for 72 points in 82 games

To give Babcock little or no credit for them taking big leaps with him as coach, is incredibly ignorant . They both saw sizable jumpsin their point totals under Babcock and they're not the only ones either. While not defensemen , guys like Kadri , JVR, Bozak , and even Komarov had their best seasons under Babcock.

So what you are saying is that if we give Sandin to a different NHL coach to play top-4 minutes for the next 2 or 3 seasons, Babs will improve his results after that? Great stuff.

 

[93LEAFS]

So what you are saying is that if we give Sandin to a different NHL coach to play top-4 minutes for the next 2 or 3 seasons, Babs will improve his results after that? Great stuff.

He coached Kronwall pretty much his entire career until he came here. He had 27 NHL games prior to Babs. Its pretty clear Babs significantly contributed to developing Rielly, and getting Gardiner to the next level. Its not like the organizations he has worked for have been rolling in elite defence prospects. Red Wings drafted late pretty much his entire career, and every top 5 pick we've had since he's arrived has been a forward.

I get the Babcock bashing, but he's been pretty key in developing Rielly, and maybe Kronwall isn't elite, but he was a fringe #1 for a long time.

 

[93LEAFS]

This has nothing to do with Babcock having 0 track record of developing rookie defensemen. We should not be taking his approach as gospel and being ok with playing Sandin 10 minutes a night when there are mountains of evidence on other teams that it's not the right way to develop young D.

Rielly and Gardiner entering their primes and being surrounded with talent when Babcock came in is not evidence to the contrary.

In almost 20 years in the NHL, Babcock has not developed a single rookie defenseman into a legitimate top-4 option, he has only helped some established top-4 D polish and improve their games.

Umm Kronwall?

 

[hector morrison]

Gardiner was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him. Rielly was already an established top-4 defenseman by the time Babcock got to him.

Dermott was an elite AHL #1D that Babcock managed to develop into.. the most sheltered 3rd pairing defenseman in the NHL, and it only took him 2 years to do it. Wow, what amazing progress!

Can you name some other defensemen that Babcock developed? I genuinely can't think of a single one that he didn't inherit as an established top-4 guy.

The guy had Lidstrom(some say the best D in the game) all those years in Detroit...one a single cup!

 

[hector morrison]

He coached Kronwall pretty much his entire career until he came here. He had 27 NHL games prior to Babs. Its pretty clear Babs significantly contributed to developing Rielly, and getting Gardiner to the next level. Its not like the organizations he has worked for have been rolling in elite defence prospects. Red Wings drafted late pretty much his entire career, and every top 5 pick we've had since he's arrived has been a forward.

I get the Babcock bashing, but he's been pretty key in developing Rielly, and maybe Kronwall isn't elite, but he was a fringe #1 for a long time.

I think it's more like Rielly showing Babs what he is capable of.

 

[ottomaddox]

Many years ago I used to say "Sundin better stay".


No such luck.


- Nordiques Fan

 

[Martin Skoula]

Umm Kronwall?

Ok, so we have one example over a 20 year career and he started with 13 minutes in a season he split with the AHL, and then immediately got 20+ minutes for the rest of his career.

I still don't see a single shred of evidence that playing guys in ultra-sheltered 10 minutes a night has ever worked in developing a top-4 D.

If Sandin isn't going to be getting normal minutes, send him down.

 

[KuleminFan41]

This has nothing to do with Babcock having 0 track record of developing rookie defensemen. We should not be taking his approach as gospel and being ok with playing Sandin 10 minutes a night when there are mountains of evidence on other teams that it's not the right way to develop young D.

Rielly and Gardiner entering their primes and being surrounded with talent when Babcock came in is not evidence to the contrary.

In almost 20 years in the NHL, Babcock has not developed a single rookie defenseman into a legitimate top-4 option, he has only helped some established top-4 D polish and improve their games.

Johnathan Ericsson was a rookie , stanley cup winner and became Detroit's #2 defensemen under Babcock. But you can't ignore the facts here, Babcock during his time in Detroit, were not built for bringing in rookie defensemen and you can't punish him for that. Babcock had the likes of Lidstrom, Kronwall, Schneider , Chelios, Lilja, Rafalski, and Stuart as part of his defensive cores in Detroit. Its clear those teams were built to win now and management had no patience for developing many players, let alone defensemen. However, the last 2 seasons he ended up playing Danny Dekeyser(rookie) , Marchenko(rookie) and Brendan Smith and still made the playoffs. It's quite odd that you're blaming Babcock for not developing defensemen, despite not being in position to do so, while giving Detroit and Ken Holland a total pass for not actually drafting defensemen good enough to crack their veteran line up.

Here's a fun fact about Detroit. Under Babcock, they drafted 20 defensemen, 16 of them played less than 100 games, while 14 of them played 0. Since 2012, Detroit drafted 9 with only 1 playing in the NHL having played 46 games. That's plenty of time for them to develop away from Babcock and under another coach. Detroit has hardly drafted defensemen nearly as well as forwards because during that time, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Larkin, and Athanasiou have all emerged as regular NHL'ers . This isn't a new trend either, looking back at the previous 10 drafts before Babcock, they drafted Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen , Hudler, Filpula, Kopecky ,and Fleischman as forwards while drafting , Kronwall ,Quincey , and Ericsson as defensemen . But some how, thats Babcock's fault? That's just absurd.

So what you are saying is that if we give Sandin to a different NHL coach to play top-4 minutes for the next 2 or 3 seasons, Babs will improve his results after that? Great stuff.

The point is that Babcock deserves credit for developing the players he helped develop. You can't ignore that Gardiner and Rielly got better under Babcock simply because you dislike Babcock. Especially when Gardiner is older than Rielly by 4 years.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Johnathan Ericsson was a rookie , stanley cup winner and became Detroit's #2 defensemen under Babcock. But you can't ignore the facts here, Babcock during his time in Detroit, were not built for bringing in rookie defensemen and you can't punish him for that. Babcock had the likes of Lidstrom, Kronwall, Schneider , Chelios, Lilja, Rafalski, and Stuart as part of his defensive cores in Detroit. Its clear those teams were built to win now and management had no patience for developing many players, let alone defensemen. However, the last 2 seasons he ended up playing Danny Dekeyser(rookie) , Marchenko(rookie) and Brendan Smith and still made the playoffs. It's quite odd that you're blaming Babcock for not developing defensemen, despite not being in position to do so, while giving Detroit and Ken Holland a total pass for not actually drafting defensemen good enough to crack their veteran line up.

Here's a fun fact about Detroit. Under Babcock, they drafted 20 defensemen, 16 of them played less than 100 games, while 14 of them played 0. Since 2012, Detroit drafted 9 with only 1 playing in the NHL having played 46 games. That's plenty of time for them to develop away from Babcock and under another coach. Detroit has hardly drafted defensemen nearly as well as forwards because during that time, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Larkin, and Athanasiou have all emerged as regular NHL'ers . This isn't a new trend either, looking back at the previous 10 drafts before Babcock, they drafted Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen , Hudler, Filpula, Kopecky ,and Fleischman as forwards while drafting , Kronwall ,Quincey , and Ericsson as defensemen . But some how, thats Babcock's fault? That's just absurd.



The point is that Babcock deserves credit for developing the players he helped develop. You can't ignore that Gardiner and Rielly got better under Babcock simply because you dislike Babcock. Especially when Gardiner is older than Rielly by 4 years.

I'm not saying it's Babcock's fault he only developed 2 passable top-4 D in 20 years, I'm saying he doesn't have much experience developing young D.

Other teams do. Teams successful at developing young D take almost the same approach without fail: let the guy play real minutes and send him down if it's clear he isn't ready.

It's insane to suggest that the guy with minimal experience developing D is smarter than the rest of the league and forcing guys like Dermott and Sandin to play hilariously sheltered low minutes is better than what successful teams do.

If the priority is trying to win games in October, send Sandin down and bring up someone safe and physical to play those easy 10 minutes. If the priority is to develop Sandin, play him in real minutes or send him down.

 

[Duffman955]

Sandin needs to earn his minutes. So far hes been dogshit therefore his minutes are limited.

 

[93LEAFS]

Ok, so we have one example over a 20 year career and he started with 13 minutes in a season he split with the AHL, and then immediately got 20+ minutes for the rest of his career.

I still don't see a single shred of evidence that playing guys in ultra-sheltered 10 minutes a night has ever worked in developing a top-4 D.

If Sandin isn't going to be getting normal minutes, send him down.

Dermott seems to be tracking well. I agree that if he is going to play 10 minutes a game he should be sent down, but I would also say we shouldn't go over board after just 2 games. If his ice-time distribution is the same in 2 weeks I'll join the angry mob, but I don't think 2 games is worth getting too angry over. Danny DeKeyser looked like a top 4 D-man with Babs, and still is used as one but his play has fallen off since.

People want to point to the lack of D he's developed, but which big-name prospect D has he actually failed to develop. Red Wings always played vets for most of his career, and their top 2 D were pretty cemented. I mean, Smith didn't become anything, but that's really the only prominent example I can think of. Of the young D he's worked with in Toronto, I feel he's done a pretty good job. 2 games of Sandin's usage isn't going to change my opinion on that.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Dermott seems to be tracking well. I agree that if he is going to play 10 minutes a game he should be sent down, but I would also say we shouldn't go over board after just 2 games. If his ice-time distribution is the same in 2 weeks I'll join the angry mob, but I don't think 2 games is worth getting too angry over. Danny DeKeyser looked like a top 4 D-man with Babs, and still is used as one but his play has fallen off since.

People want to point to the lack of D he's developed, but which big-name prospect D has he actually failed to develop. Red Wings always played vets for most of his career, and their top 2 D were pretty cemented. I mean, Smith didn't become anything, but that's really the only prominent example I can think of. Of the young D he's worked with in Toronto, I feel he's done a pretty good job. 2 games of Sandin's usage isn't going to change my opinion on that.

Honestly I haven't seen much, if any, improvement in Dermott's game in the NHL. He went from a high end #1 in the AHL to the most sheltered 3rd pairing D in the NHL over a span of 3 seasons. That's painfully slow development.

We don't even know what he looks like against regular competition yet. We don't know how he looks in the top-4 with a talented partner. We just know he can out-possess the other team's weakest players if Babcock can control the matchups and usage.

It would be one thing if we threw Dermott in the deep end on RD with Rielly and he failed for 5-10 games and we dropped him down.

Now what's the play? We have absolutely no idea if Dermott can replace Muzzin's minutes or not, we can just make guesses based on the sheltered evidence we have.

Good D typically don't spend 2-3 years on the 3rd pairing before becoming good D, I have yet to be provided with any evidence to the contrary.