Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part IV)

[euhchepas]

Mete, DLR, Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, Lekhonen, to name a few.

DLR and McCarron are the only ones who were rushed and it's not like they were very talented (upside was always bottom 6 foward)

Scherbak played AHL until he was too good for the league at 22
Juulsen was a top 4 defenseman this year until his injuries and only played when games didn't matter the year before, that's not being rushed... His upside is a defensive top4 dmen and he was already there at the start of the eason
Galchenyuk was clearly too good to go back to the OHL
Kotkaniemi was good enough to make the team
Lehkonen played in the NHL at 21 and had a great year

 

[jaffy27]

Mete, DLR, Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, Lekhonen, to name a few.

-Mete......hasn’t been derailed
-DLR......still in NHL playing a role which he was always gonna have
-Scherbak was not rushed
-McCarron.....sure, poor developing by Sly
-Juulsen....was not rushed or derailed
-Galchenyuk.....not rushed, he’s just got low IQ, at 24 still hasn’t figured it out
-KK...not rushed or derailed
-Lehkonen....not rushed or derailed

 

[Whitesnake]

Mete, DLR, Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, Lekhonen, to name a few.

How does that work really? Have you looked at other players from other teams? How do you make your analysis. See who didn't work out, and come to the conclusion that they were surely rushed? Was Patrice Bergeron rushed? Was McAvoy rushed? Was Carlo rushed? Was DeBrusk rushed? Was Pastrnak rushed? Was Heinen rushed? Was Donato rushed? How does that work actually?

What the whole rush thing anyway? This is so easy to say. What is the physics behind it? So that if you put a kid in the NHL too soon, he will AUTOMATICALLY stop progressing if he goes back to the minors because...he will go in a depression thinking he would never go back up again?

So what is the rule? 2 years AHL before you come up? 3 years? Yet should we look at every prospect form every team that followed that path and still didn't develop?

 

[FF de Mars]

How does that work really? Have you looked at other players from other teams? How do you make your analysis. See who didn't work out, and come to the conclusion that they were surely rushed? Was Patrice Bergeron rushed? Was McAvoy rushed? Was Carlo rushed? Was DeBrusk rushed? Was Pastrnak rushed? Was Heinen rushed? Was Donato rushed? How does that work actually?

What the whole rush thing anyway? This is so easy to say. What is the physics behind it? So that if you put a kid in the NHL too soon, he will AUTOMATICALLY stop progressing if he goes back to the minors because...he will go in a depression thinking he would never go back up again?

So what is the rule? 2 years AHL before you come up? 3 years? Yet should we look at every prospect form every team that followed that path and still didn't develop?

It succeeds from time to time; but you're always playing with odds.

 

[Whitesnake]

It succeeds from time to time; but you're always playing with odds.

The greats succeed. No matter what you throw at them. What doesn't succeed is the fillers. Yep. I agree. Yet, you don't build a great time with fillers.

I was watching Dubois EXTENSIVELY with Blainville. I was there. In the arena. Multiple games. And there's NO WAY I thought he would be a NHL'er from the get go. No freakin way. Guess what...he is and a great one. Why? 'Cause he is a great player that knew how to adapt and elevate his game. He was probably daydreaming in juniors and somehow needed much better teamates to showcase his stuff. Somehow, he would have also succeeded if he would have stayed 2 years in the AHL. And funnily enough, we would have heard how it proves that development in the AHL works. Bullcrap. To each their own. Yet again, you will NOT become a great top 6 forward or a great top 2 d-man or a great No1 goalie because you spend 4 years in the AHL. Does not work like that. You are who you are.

Yet, would Puuljarvi benefitted from being in the AHL? Maybe...coming from another country and all he needed more time to adapt. But he saw some time in tihe AHL and dominated there so I guess they thought he was ready for the next step. And it doesn't seem to be. But was the 28 games he played for the Oilers from the get go completely f***ed his career? And again...why?

 

[FF de Mars]

The greats succeed. No matter what you throw at them. What doesn't succeed is the fillers. Yep. I agree. Yet, you don't build a great time with fillers.

I was watching Dubois EXTENSIVELY with Blainville. I was there. In the arena. Multiple games. And there's NO WAY I thought he would be a NHL'er from the get go. No freakin way. Guess what...he is and a great one. Why? 'Cause he is a great player that knew how to adapt and elevate his game. He was probably daydreaming in juniors and somehow needed much better teamates to showcase his stuff. Somehow, he would have also succeeded if he would have stayed 2 years in the AHL. And funnily enough, we would have heard how it proves that development in the AHL works. Bullcrap. To each their own. Yet again, you will NOT become a great top 6 forward or a great top 2 d-man or a great No1 goalie because you spend 4 years in the AHL. Does not work like that. You are who you are.

I like most of what you say, but what do you mean by "the greats"? Every player has a different curve, some are more mature for their age, more focused; but, it doesn't make them greater than great in the long run.

 

[Whitesnake]

I like most of what you say, but what do you mean by "the greats"? Every player has a different curve, some are more mature for their age, more focused; but, it doesn't make them greater than great in the long run.

What I mean is that eventually the great ones will get to where they were suppose to. Whether it's from the get go. Whether it's through 2 years in the AHL. Yep, they do have different curve, but they will get there. I do not agree that as bad as Lefebvre is, and he was, that he transformed surefire top 2 in Tinordi into a ECHL'er. This is BS. But yes, it's possible that Tinordi should have been able to be a No7 somewhere. Not sure how that qualifies this a great pick in the 1st round though...but that's another story.

 

[montreal]

DLR and McCarron are the only ones who were rushed and it's not like they were very talented (upside was always bottom 6 foward)

Scherbak played AHL until he was too good for the league at 22
Juulsen was a top 4 defenseman this year until his injuries and only played when games didn't matter the year before, that's not being rushed... His upside is a defensive top4 dmen and he was already there at the start of the eason
Galchenyuk was clearly too good to go back to the OHL
Kotkaniemi was good enough to make the team
Lehkonen played in the NHL at 21 and had a great year

Scherbak was in the NHL during his age 20/21 season (if he was born 2 days later he would have spent the previous season in the WHL.

Galchenyuk is a tough case since he was dominating the OHL but they still should have done a better job with him at the NHL level. They should have done something to work on his skating.

Juulsen should have spent more time in the AHL to work on his offensive game.

Kotka did dominate in liiga but it was a risky move that they didn't need to take since they weren't going anywhere. Another year to work on getting stronger and then come over likely wouldn't have hurt but could have helped him a great deal.

There's also Beaulieu, Leblanc, Tinordi. They shouldn't have been in the NHL at 20, Leblanc was having a very good year in Hamilton so i can see why he was called up but they should have let him play more in the AHL to see if he could keep it up and he had a lack of strength that rushing him could have a problem going up against the best players in the world. Beaulieu showed good things offensively but was a mess in his own end, they should have worked with him more before exposing him to the NHL and then giving him the yo-yo treatment.

Hindsight of course is 50/50 and everyone is going to have their opinion of what should or shouldn't have been done. Either way whatever went wrong, it went very wrong as we didn't have this many problems with development pre the MB/Lefebvre era and now need to hope that things have changed for the better.

-Mete......hasn’t been derailed
-DLR......still in NHL playing a role which he was always gonna have
-Scherbak was not rushed
-McCarron.....sure, poor developing by Sly
-Juulsen....was not rushed or derailed
-Galchenyuk.....not rushed, he’s just got low IQ, at 24 still hasn’t figured it out
-KK...not rushed or derailed
-Lehkonen....not rushed or derailed

rushed doesn't mean derailed.

Juulsen didn't even play half a season in the AHL, at point in the first 20 some games he had points in just 2 games, why on earth would you promote a 20 year old that was injured at the start of his first pro season and while he was playing pretty good defensive hockey he was just started to put up some points and they called him up. It's 100% rushing him as they gave him less then half a season in the AHL to work on his offensive game.

Scherbak was rushed as he clearly wasn't ready for the NHL at 20/21 or even at 22 as they should have given him more time in the AHL since he was finally tearing it up but it was only 26 games into the season. He had so many holes in his game they should have been addressed first before thinking of the NHL. How is it not rushing him when he's clearly not ready?

DLR was rushed, what a joke to say he wasn't. The guy was playing on the 4th line in the AHL which means he wasn't playing much at all and then after he came back from the WJC's he was moved up and started to play well for a little so they called him up to the NHL at 19 instead of letting him work on his offensive game. That is 100% rushing him.

KK/Galchenyuk are tougher cases since they are so good at 16/17/18. I can see why they rushed Galchenyuk despite his poor defensive game and skating, since he was too good for the OHL and couldn't play in the AHL. Kotka they could easily have left for one more year to work on gaining strength and filling out a little more in his upper body. The Nucks had no problem doing this with an even better prospect.

What the whole rush thing anyway? This is so easy to say. What is the physics behind it? So that if you put a kid in the NHL too soon, he will AUTOMATICALLY stop progressing if he goes back to the minors because...he will go in a depression thinking he would never go back up again?

So what is the rule? 2 years AHL before you come up? 3 years? Yet should we look at every prospect form every team that followed that path and still didn't develop?

to me it's putting a kid in the NHL when they clearly aren't ready for it. Was Gallagher ready for the NHL at 20? He was one of their top scorers and was coming of back to back to back 40+ goal seasons in the WHL. Of course there were concerns over his size, skating back then if I recall correctly.

But it's not the point when it works, the point to me is that it's a very risky move that you don't need to take. It's very hard to know how anyone is going to handle the pressure, failures, or blows to their confidence. Once you lose your confidence it can be very hard to get back. That doesn't mean you can't rush players, especially if done right. You put them with your best players, you don't bench them after they make a defensive mistake or cost a goal that leads you to lose the game because your team isn't that good so it needs to try to win 2-1 type of grinding games and hope the goalie saves their ass. you don't put them in the press box for days on end after said mistake, you don't send them back to the AHL and hope they just shake off what just happened. You also shouldn't call up a kid just as they are starting to put together a string of good games in the AHL, ala DLR, Juulsen, McCarron and then yo-yo them.

To me I would rather they use more caution instead of putting every 1st/2nd round pick to the NHL at 18/19/20 outside of Scherbak who just missed the cutoff by 2 days of being another 20 year old rookie in the NHL at some point in the season. It's not to say that it's the sole reason for the development problems we have had, just that it seems unnecessary move that they may have started to change their position on since Fleury and Evans were their top prospects in the AHL this year and they didn't get called up so there's hope.

Clearly lots of things went wrong for the previous 6 years, people will blame different people, I have said a ton of times already that all involved share some of the blame but when you have a decent track record of success at drafting/development and then it goes to shit, you can at least see why some point the finger more at development/management for their hand in this but in the end it's a failure on everyone involved.

 

[montreal]

What I mean is that eventually the great ones will get to where they were suppose to. Whether it's from the get go. Whether it's through 2 years in the AHL. Yep, they do have different curve, but they will get there. I do not agree that as bad as Lefebvre is, and he was, that he transformed surefire top 2 in Tinordi into a ECHL'er. This is BS. But yes, it's possible that Tinordi should have been able to be a No7 somewhere. Not sure how that qualifies this a great pick in the 1st round though...but that's another story.

You are talking about 2 different things. First off how many great ones are there? And how many of them were drafted as late 1st rounders or later.

Tinordi was NEVER seen as a surefire top 2 and he's still in the AHL so he was never turned into an ECHLer. Tinordi should have been a bottom pairing to 7th D type or NHL/AHL tweener which is almost is. The fault on him missing is less to do with development and more to do with a mistake mixed with being unlucky as not everyone could have seen that in 2010 6'6 hulking blueliners would be out of favor years later.

The point should by why did so many fail to develop under a coach that had zero games of experience as a head coach before he was first hired and then why did the GM stick with him for so long when things were clearly not going well for several years.

 

[Mrb1p]

DLR and McCarron are the only ones who were rushed and it's not like they were very talented (upside was always bottom 6 foward)

Scherbak played AHL until he was too good for the league at 22
Juulsen was a top 4 defenseman this year until his injuries and only played when games didn't matter the year before, that's not being rushed... His upside is a defensive top4 dmen and he was already there at the start of the eason
Galchenyuk was clearly too good to go back to the OHL
Kotkaniemi was good enough to make the team
Lehkonen played in the NHL at 21 and had a great year

DLR was the best u20 player in his D+1 season in, better than guys like Burakovsky, Kempe, Nylander, Cehlarik, at the WJC, he outproduced guys like Simon, Jonnson, Hartman, Lekhonen... Considering he had a defensive role and always was ebtter defensively, theres no reasons he shouldn't have made it. He then came to the AHL, was jerked around in the NHL/AHL, played every position, wasted time not playing in the NHL, played an average of 11:30 for three years and then people wondered why he never got better ? Lol. There's absolutely no reasons this guy couldn't be at least a 4th liner in the NHL. He had the size, the phsyical package and the odd offense to be there, but he fell into the darkest development pit known to human history, aside from Edmonton (Edmonton does exactly the same thing, btw.)

McCarron is a guy that went in his d+2 season and posted essentialy the same numbers as Suzuki just did. Thats how good he was production wise. Now, obviously he never had quite that skillset, and he was carried by Domi and co, but again, just like DLR, the size, the physicality, the skills, the two-way play... There is nothing that indicated such a bust in his first two years of development. Then they decided they wanted him in the AHL at center, oh no wait, they wanted him in the NHL at W, oh no wait they didn't want him at all and now he's in the stand, oh no wait, he's in the AHL and Sly tells him he's not a skilled guy and he should just learn to grind, etc. Its just a total shitshow for these two. The facts are there, you either choose to acknowledge them or not.

Scherbak was brought up, they decided ot not play him ebcause he was not good enough, then they dropped him down and he was played at center, then he was brought up again and never given a chance.

Juulsen is good, but he could've used more seasoning to hone in on his offensive skills. His upside never was only a defensive Dman, thats revisionist history. He was/is super toolsy and could've been a solid two-way D, but they didn't let him simmer.

Galchenyuk was a victim of the dumb OHL rule, but why not let him play the whole year in the OHL ? He was dominating, getting better by the game and he didn't learn much in the NHL, as he is still the same player he was in juniors. Why is that ? Lack of coaching, obviously.

Kotkaniemi was good enough, true, but how do you know that is the right approach ? How do you know he wouldn't have completely destroyed Liiga like Pettersson did in the SHL ? I mean, you learn by playing, and he averaged 12 minutes a night and skipped his turn more often than not, thats not development hockey and thats rushing a prospect for PR purpose.

Maybe Lekhonen does better if he goes a year into the AHL ? Maybe he becomes more than a 3rd liner if he can actually learn to play offensively t?

-Mete......hasn’t been derailed
-DLR......still in NHL playing a role which he was always gonna have
-Scherbak was not rushed
-McCarron.....sure, poor developing by Sly
-Juulsen....was not rushed or derailed
-Galchenyuk.....not rushed, he’s just got low IQ, at 24 still hasn’t figured it out
-KK...not rushed or derailed
-Lehkonen....not rushed or derailed

Read above.

How does that work really? Have you looked at other players from other teams? How do you make your analysis. See who didn't work out, and come to the conclusion that they were surely rushed? Was Patrice Bergeron rushed? Was McAvoy rushed? Was Carlo rushed? Was DeBrusk rushed? Was Pastrnak rushed? Was Heinen rushed? Was Donato rushed? How does that work actually?

What the whole rush thing anyway? This is so easy to say. What is the physics behind it? So that if you put a kid in the NHL too soon, he will AUTOMATICALLY stop progressing if he goes back to the minors because...he will go in a depression thinking he would never go back up again?

So what is the rule? 2 years AHL before you come up? 3 years? Yet should we look at every prospect form every team that followed that path and still didn't develop?

It works by comparing the player to their peers, again, look above, lots of comparisons.

More of them though:
Lekhonen
still has the 4th best u17 Jr. A. season to date... Only behind, Aho, Granlund and Kakko.
Tied with Kakko in u17 scoring at the u18.
He still has the 7th best PPG season for u18 Liiga player ( 5th for raw points.), two goals off Laine

Now, granted he got injured, but his development has been a clusterf***, because they decided to not let him flourish on offensive lines, now he's reduced to a grinder.

 

[Walrus26]

DLR was the best u20 player in his D+1 season in, better than guys like Burakovsky, Kempe, Nylander, Cehlarik, at the WJC, he outproduced guys like Simon, Jonnson, Hartman, Lekhonen... ***SNIP***

I don't often find much to agree with you Mrb1p, but you are bang on with that post as far as I am concerned.

 

[Whitesnake]

It works by comparing the player to their peers, again, look above, lots of comparisons. More of them though:
Lekhonen still has the 4th best u17 Jr. A. season to date... Only behind, Aho, Granlund and Kakko. Tied with Kakko in u17 scoring at the u18. He still has the 7th best PPG season for u18 Liiga player ( 5th for raw points.), two goals off Laine Now, granted he got injured, but his development has been a cluster****, because they decided to not let him flourish on offensive lines, now he's reduced to a grinder.

Geez, it so doesn't work like that. Do you really think that you can take those stats and just think that they all translate exactly in the pros like they do in their junior years? HOw the heck did he fell to 55th pick if his stats were so Kakko or Laine like?

 

[Whitesnake]

DLR was the best u20 player in his D+1 season in, better than guys like Burakovsky, Kempe, Nylander, Cehlarik, at the WJC, he outproduced guys like Simon, Jonnson, Hartman, Lekhonen... Considering he had a defensive role and always was ebtter defensively, theres no reasons he shouldn't have made it. He then came to the AHL, was jerked around in the NHL/AHL, played every position, wasted time not playing in the NHL, played an average of 11:30 for three years and then people wondered why he never got better ? Lol. There's absolutely no reasons this guy couldn't be at least a 4th liner in the NHL. He had the size, the phsyical package and the odd offense to be there, but he fell into the darkest development pit known to human history, aside from Edmonton (Edmonton does exactly the same thing, btw.)

McCarron is a guy that went in his d+2 season and posted essentialy the same numbers as Suzuki just did. Thats how good he was production wise. Now, obviously he never had quite that skillset, and he was carried by Domi and co, but again, just like DLR, the size, the physicality, the skills, the two-way play... There is nothing that indicated such a bust in his first two years of development. Then they decided they wanted him in the AHL at center, oh no wait, they wanted him in the NHL at W, oh no wait they didn't want him at all and now he's in the stand, oh no wait, he's in the AHL and Sly tells him he's not a skilled guy and he should just learn to grind, etc. Its just a total ****show for these two. The facts are there, you either choose to acknowledge them or not.

Scherbak was brought up, they decided ot not play him ebcause he was not good enough, then they dropped him down and he was played at center, then he was brought up again and never given a chance.

Juulsen is good, but he could've used more seasoning to hone in on his offensive skills. His upside never was only a defensive Dman, thats revisionist history. He was/is super toolsy and could've been a solid two-way D, but they didn't let him simmer.

Galchenyuk was a victim of the dumb OHL rule, but why not let him play the whole year in the OHL ? He was dominating, getting better by the game and he didn't learn much in the NHL, as he is still the same player he was in juniors. Why is that ? Lack of coaching, obviously.

Kotkaniemi was good enough, true, but how do you know that is the right approach ? How do you know he wouldn't have completely destroyed Liiga like Pettersson did in the SHL ? I mean, you learn by playing, and he averaged 12 minutes a night and skipped his turn more often than not, thats not development hockey and thats rushing a prospect for PR purpose.

Maybe Lekhonen does better if he goes a year into the AHL ? Maybe he becomes more than a 3rd liner if he can actually learn to play offensively t?

So what you do is go through EliteProspects, do U20 in in the SHL and determine who was the best player? Do you know what guys like DLR and McCarron had that made them "better"? They were more physically ready than the other ones. So they could sustain the physicality of the game. It has NOTHING to do with being better offensively. That's why they looked like they were dominating....but when it's time to reach the pros, those qualities if you can't upgrade your skill level has its limits. And that's what we have seen with those 2 guys. Thte same reason why DLR and McCarron were able to look great against kids of their age is the same reason why they were put in the NHL sooner than later. Because of their ability to sustain physicality. And our inability to be a bigger talented team so we had to use every tall guy we had in our pool.....

Strange that listening to you Timmins just never make mistakes. It's all Sly. Yet, if you believe in Timmins yourself, how about you listen to him when he tells you that what's tough in drafting a guy is knowing how he'll project...not how they are doing right now.

Why would the draft be so tough if the only thing you should is look at the stats and pick from top to bottom?

Look at every draft. You will find TONS of stories of guys that SHOULD HAVE made it. And never did. Plenty. Were they all coached by Sly and Therrien?

 

[Mrb1p]

Geez, it so doesn't work like that. Do you really think that you can take those stats and just think that they all translate exactly in the pros like they do in their junior years? HOw the heck did he fell to 55th pick if his stats were so Kakko or Laine like?

Because he was slight ? Like 5'10 when he was drafted ?

Why did Aho make it to the 40th pick if he was so small, and had even better stats than Laine and Kakko ?

Oh wait, your argument doesn't work now, lol?

 

[Mrb1p]

So what you do is go through EliteProspects, do U20 in in the SHL and determine who was the best player? Do you know what guys like DLR and McCarron had that made them "better"? They were more physically ready than the other ones. So they could sustain the physicality of the game. It has NOTHING to do with being better offensively. That's why they looked like they were dominating....but when it's time to reach the pros, those qualities if you can't upgrade your skill level has its limits. And that's what we have seen with those 2 guys. Thte same reason why DLR and McCarron were able to look great against kids of their age is the same reason why they were put in the NHL sooner than later. Because of their ability to sustain physicality. And our inability to be a bigger talented team so we had to use every tall guy we had in our pool.....

Strange that listening to you Timmins just never make mistakes. It's all Sly. Yet, if you believe in Timmins yourself, how about you listen to him when he tells you that what's tough in drafting a guy is knowing how he'll project...not how they are doing right now.

Why would the draft be so tough if the only thing you should is look at the stats and pick from top to bottom?

Look at every draft. You will find TONS of stories of guys that SHOULD HAVE made it. And never did. Plenty. Were they all coached by Sly and Therrien?

When did I say timmins never made a mistake ? Drafting McCarron over Theodore is never a good decision. Drafting DLR over Bjorkstrand is never a good decision.

Also, I never said you should look at stats, but there's a certain reality in what I'm saying, and if you're honest with yourself, you'd agree with me if you watched these players in 2013, they looked good, if uninspiring.

 

[Whitesnake]

Because he was slight ? Like 5'10 when he was drafted ?

Why did Aho make it to the 40th pick if he was so small, and had even better stats than Laine and Kakko ?

Oh wait, your argument doesn't work now, lol?

Actually your argument doesn't work. Patrick Kane was slight. And yet, he was picked #1. Why? Because he had out of this world numbers. You are comparing Lehkonen to Kakko. A guy a lot of people sees as a #1 pick. And Laine, who only went No2 because a phenom was chosen before him. If Lehkonen is so close to these guys, small or not, he would have been picked top 10. As simple as that.

They are picked later 'cause it's all about how they project. Not what they do. And also because stats while important needs to be taken in context with so many other things.

 

[Mrb1p]

Actually your argument doesn't work. Patrick Kane was slight. And yet, he was picked #1. Why? Because he had out of this world numbers. You are comparing Lehkonen to Kakko. A guy a lot of people sees as a #1 pick. And Laine, who only went No2 because a phenom was chosen before him. If Lehkonen is so close to these guys, small or not, he would have been picked top 10. As simple as that.

They are picked later 'cause it's all about how they project. Not what they do. And also because stats while important needs to be taken in context with so many other things.

Youre not honest and it annoys me. I never compared Kakko to Lekhonen, I never said he should be as good, I merely showed that he has talent. Many things change from league to league, but Lekhonen doesn't have fourth liner talent.

 

[Whitesnake]

When did I say timmins never made a mistake ? Drafting McCarron over Theodore is never a good decision. Drafting DLR over Bjorkstrand is never a good decision.

Also, I never said you should look at stats, but there's a certain reality in what I'm saying, and if you're honest with yourself, you'd agree with me if you watched these players in 2013, they looked good, if uninspiring.

You want to look at stats, let's do it, when McCarron was picked, he was 11th in PPG scoring in the U17-U18 US team. Compher was close to PPG. Why not go with him?Geez Tyler Motte was better than him. John Hayden was slightly better than him. Motte was a 4th rounder. Hayden a 3rd rounder. Compher a 2nd rounder. So why did McCarron was chosen in the 1st? For his size. Solely. For the fact that we were so small and we went needs. McCarron just upgraded his U-17 numbers by only 10 points. In comparison, for example, a guy like Sonny Milano, who is STILL not a proven NHL'er, saw his number skyrocket from 47 to 86 points from U17 to U18. McCarron did not have the numbers to be picked in the 1st round. Yep, then he improved his numbers......but EVERY prospect maybe from the 1st to the 3rd round improve their numbers in their D +2. And I'm generous...you probably could count most of the picks in the 4th and 5th round too.

 

[Whitesnake]

Youre not honest and it annoys me. I never compared Kakko to Lekhonen, I never said he should be as good, I merely showed that he has talent. Many things change from league to league, but Lekhonen doesn't have fourth liner talent.

Why in the world would we want to refrain Lehkonen's offensive talent ESPECIALLY since he's responsible defensively? What kind of conspiracy theory do you want to put out there? Makes no sense man. Management is dumb but not dumb enough to make sure they would kill Lehkonen's talent for some obvious scary reason.....

 

[Whitesnake]

Youre not honest and it annoys me. I never compared Kakko to Lekhonen, I never said he should be as good, I merely showed that he has talent. Many things change from league to league, but Lekhonen doesn't have fourth liner talent.

On the left wing we have Drouin and Tatar. Should he replaces any one of them? As much as I dislike Drouin...he shouldn't. So yeah, Lehkonen should be on the 3rd line. Yet, not doing anything offensively, was he because he was paired with Kotka? Maybe. Surely. So he got shafted to the 4th line. Pretty sure nobody thinks he's a 4th liner for life. But he needs to step it up. And because he is good defensively, there is NO WAY that he gets shafted for the fun of it.

 

[CHwest]

What I mean is that eventually the great ones will get to where they were suppose to. Whether it's from the get go. Whether it's through 2 years in the AHL. Yep, they do have different curve, but they will get there. I do not agree that as bad as Lefebvre is, and he was, that he transformed surefire top 2 in Tinordi into a ECHL'er. This is BS. But yes, it's possible that Tinordi should have been able to be a No7 somewhere. Not sure how that qualifies this a great pick in the 1st round though...but that's another story.

You are right the great ones will succeed no matter what. But... confidence is a fragile thing for a lot of young men, I think a lot of the young players the habs brought up prematurely (in my mind) would have done better with a little seasoning. KK, Mete, Beaulieu ,especially Galchenyuk, off the top of my head would have been better served building there confidence in a lower league, where they would have been able to explore their talents a little more. I understand that in hindsight, Lefebvre was probably not the best things for these players, but if he was the reason they kept these players up then shame on them for not replacing him.

 

[Whitesnake]

You are right the great ones will succeed no matter what. But... confidence is a fragile thing for a lot of young men, I think a lot of the young players the habs brought up prematurely (in my mind) would have done better with a little seasoning. KK, Mete, Beaulieu ,especially Galchenyuk, off the top of my head would have been better served building there confidence in a lower league, where they would have been able to explore their talents a little more. I understand that in hindsight, Lefebvre was probably not the best things for these players, but if he was the reason they kept these players up then shame on them for not replacing him.

It is simply impossible to know. Yes, confidence is huge. But we have no idea how kids deal with that unless we know them or they tell us. No idea. I mean Charles Hudon got A LOT of AHL seasoning. Let say we bring him in early and he ends up like he is right now, you would have said the same thing....that he needed more seasoning. Yet....he had it. And he's still not good enough.

For me, it's just too simplistic to automatically say more seasoning = better for everyone. This league is now a league much younger than it once was. You will see more and more kids making a difference from the get go. People talk about confidence and yet isn't there something better than to say to a kid that he's already for the NHL and that he'll play a key role in it? HOw the heck is that bad for the confidence to say to Mete that he will be Weber's partner? How the heck is that bad for Kotka to say that he'll center the 3rd line for most of his 1st year.?

But most importantly, somebody, somewhere, will need to explain to me how the heck is that awful for a kid's progression that even though he started his career too soon in the NHL, that sending him back in the AHL is just killing his career. Doesn't the kid knows that the extraordinairy thing is not him being sent back, but it was him staying in the NHL from the get go? That he can take that as a superb idea of what he needs to improve to make it?

As fun as it is to bash Pacioretty and he deserved it, how come he was able to say to the Habs that if you are going to play me in a dfensive role in the NHL, send me back in thie AHL so that I'd get my offensive groove back? Is he the god of self-confidence?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Mete, DLR, Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, Lekhonen, to name a few.

- Mete, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, DLR were rushed.
- Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Lehkonen were not rushed.

 

[Whitesnake]

- Mete, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, DLR were rushed.
- Scherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, Lehkonen were not rushed.

But Mete and Kotka being rushed do not mean we destroy their development. Starting young is in no way related to f***ing somebody's development. Not necessarily. Some cases yes, some don't.

How many top 3 picks do NOT start their NHL career immediately after being drafted? Yes, Galchy might be a different beast, with him missing 1 full year...yet...do people think that more seasoning would have made him gain a defensive hockey IQ?

 

[Habs Halifax]

You want to look at stats, let's do it, when McCarron was picked, he was 11th in PPG scoring in the U17-U18 US team. Compher was close to PPG. Why not go with him?Geez Tyler Motte was better than him. John Hayden was slightly better than him. Motte was a 4th rounder. Hayden a 3rd rounder. Compher a 2nd rounder. So why did McCarron was chosen in the 1st? For his size. Solely. For the fact that we were so small and we went needs. McCarron just upgraded his U-17 numbers by only 10 points. In comparison, for example, a guy like Sonny Milano, who is STILL not a proven NHL'er, saw his number skyrocket from 47 to 86 points from U17 to U18. McCarron did not have the numbers to be picked in the 1st round. Yep, then he improved his numbers......but EVERY prospect maybe from the 1st to the 3rd round improve their numbers in their D +2. And I'm generous...you probably could count most of the picks in the 4th and 5th round too.

That draft year in 2013 sucked but I do agree McCarron was a bad pick regardless. That pick reeked of Bergevin trying to address the size issue we had. We had picks 25, 34, 36, 55 and the best pick we ended up with was Lehkonen at 55. The better players taken in this range are not a impressive list. Theodore being the best one and then Lehkonen.

The minute McCarron was not good enough to make the US WJC roster after he was drafted cause of his skating, I was very worried about this pick. Held on to the hope he could be a 3rd line RW, and then a 4th line depth player, and now I doubt he gets to be a full time NHL player (even after his decent AHL season last year).

There was nothing more we could of done to help develop him better IMO. He is who he is.