Under Developed Vs Bust

[Ash35]

Back a few years ago. If you were drafted in the first round you were probably playing in the NHL, if not in the first year of eligibility then definitely the second. If you didn't make it soon afterwards you were deemed a bust. If you were drafted in the later rounds you were given more time to develop since you were deemed a long shot anyway.

No one ever says that guys like Daigle, Stefan, Brendl, Tkaczuk were rushed into the league and that's why they didn't reach there potential. They simply couldn't make that next step.

On the other hand take a guy like Matt Frattin who is 27 now has tons of potential was never rushed and now that time is ticking on his career might be on his last shot. patience and Non NHL development hasn't seemed to help his make the jump.

I'm a believer that you don't set timelines and every player is different.. If you are projected as 2nd liner and you come into camp and outplay the guys in the top 6. You are on the team. I don't care how old you are. Same thing goes for projected 3rd liners.

Saying that if you are projected as a 2nd liner and you made the team as a 4th liner then yeah you need to go down and develop. Even if you make the team but after a while it looks like you aren't ready then you need to go down and develop.

If getting dropped because you aren't ready hurts your feelings to the point that it kills you confidence and your ability to continue your development then you are really not ready for the NHL.

When you are ready you are ready. It's a simple as that. You can spend all the time in the world in the Juniors or the AHL. Nothing is better for getting a player ready for the NHL then then actual NHL experience.

Click to read more...

 

[Joey Hoser]

Back a few years ago. If you were drafted in the first round you were probably playing in the NHL, if not in the first year of eligibility then definitely the second.

I don't recall that ever being the case.

But I agree with your general point. People just want to act like they are smart and mature and know what's best for every player. The right thing to do is watch them develop and play them wherever is appropriate for their current skill and level of development. Anyone who says "I want them to play x years here and y years there and then make the team in 20xx." is full of ****.

 

[Stephen]

Yeah I think what you decide to do with a prospect happens as a result of real evaluation, not simply a developmental formula that's based on the aversion of pain and disappointment.

If you have an NHL ready player like Aaron Ekblad at 18, you obviously let him play. If you find yourself with a Patrice Bergeron or Ryan O'Reilly at 18, you don't send them back to juniors for 2 years and make them apprentice for years in the AHL.

If you have an 18 year old top five pick that looks more like Kyle Turris than Patrick Kane, send him back.

 

[Mess]

Team strength and their goals plays a big part in a prospects opportunities.

A strong team believing they're a contender would be harder for a prospect to make the NHL sooner than a bottom 5 team playing their youth in hopes of drafting high.

So who you are drafted by and the competitive cycle they're currently in determines if they appeared "rushed" and underdeveloped or overripe when you arrive.

At the end of the day its the players own abilities and how they apply themselves to their own development on and off the ice that will determine their ultimate fate.

 

[studebaker17]

Team strength and their goals plays a big part in a prospects opportunities.

A strong team believing they're a contender would be harder for a prospect to make the NHL sooner than a bottom 5 team playing their youth in hopes of drafting high.

So who you are drafted by and the competitive cycle they're currently in determines if they appeared "rushed" and underdeveloped or overripe when you arrive.

At the end of the day its the players own abilities and how they apply themselves to their own development on and off the ice that will determine their ultimate fate.

Works the other way to if a team has a roster spot for a good young prospect like Tampa did with Stamkos, Boston did with Seguin, Doughty in LA ect. If a high end player is ready for the NHL then teams find room for them rather than just sending them back for what amounts to wasted time in junior if they're already to good or have nothing to challenge them.
I'm a firm believer in a player needs challenges to get better and if they already dominate junior in every way then you're stalling their development sending them back. Majority of players start to decline at 30ish so you're investing from 18 to 30 in them and hoping they hit their peak as soon as they can and benefit from as many productive years as you can. At least the way i see it. Marner in particular though can still benefit from another season in junior by adding some weight and playing a full year at center.

 

[Pookie]

One of the biggest variables impacting a player's prospects is the contract status of the guys ahead of him.

1 or 2 way contracts, waiver eligibility, etc all play a significant role in player movement decisions.

 

[HarryLime]

I agree every player is different. I'm not going to pretend to be a scout, so I usually trust scouting reports by guys like Bob Mckenzie who state whether or not that player is NHL ready

 

[Cor]

Frederik Under-Devlopedier

I like Frederik Bustier better

 

[Mikeyg]

Frederik Under-Devlopedier

I like Frederik Bustier better

I was the original creator of busty biggs on here =D classic

 

[NotSince67*]

On the other hand take a guy like Matt Frattin who is 27 now has tons of potential was never rushed and now that time is ticking on his career might be on his last shot. patience and Non NHL development hasn't seemed to help his make the jump.

I really hope you aren't insinuating in some sense Matt Frattin busted as a 4th round pick when his NHL experience is far above expectation for a 4th round pick. I think you really underestimate how hard it is to draft a regular NHL player.

I'm a believer that you don't set timelines and every player is different.. If you are projected as 2nd liner and you come into camp and outplay the guys in the top 6. You are on the team. I don't care how old you are. Same thing goes for projected 3rd liners.

Saying that if you are projected as a 2nd liner and you made the team as a 4th liner then yeah you need to go down and develop. Even if you make the team but after a while it looks like you aren't ready then you need to go down and develop.

I think this is a bit too much of a generalization to apply. I think you're right in that each player is different. As a result I think for some players coming in and playing 4th/3rd line minutes stunts their development and for some they continue to grow at the NHL level. I don't think a blanket statement is useful at all. For instance, look at Matt Stajan and Alex Steen. Stajan played out his draft for the Leafs and never really showed any progression by leaps and bounds, just sort of got better at the nuances of the role he played. Another is Luke Schenn who was at 18 an NHL player but never has really improved significantly from what he was at 18. Then there's Alex Steen who was a 3rd line centre and when he was traded looked like he would probably be an effective defensive 3rd line centre, much like Stajan was. But he continued to progress at the NHL level and his offense blossomed making him a pretty good 2nd line centre. So obviously for Steen playing a 3rd line role did not hamper his development at all.

I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm saying this is wayyyy too general of a blanket statement. Some players develop once they get into the NHL (like Duncan Keith, Anton Stralman, pretty much everyone on Ottawa's back end, and a lot of their team really) and some stagnate in their role once they get there and never progress. I don't think you can really predict who will do what or create a plan or will and won't. You just go by your gut about where guys would be best suited and let things play out. Sometimes it works in your favour, sometimes it doesn't.

 

[Gabriel426]

The thing is playing 4-8mins a game(NHL) will probably not do much for the prospect to grow. I think best case is the coach willing to let these young players play 15 or so mins a game for a string of 10 games, regardless of how well or bad they play before deciding if they are ready or not. Since you really can't evaluate a player based on 7mins a game, as some players will make mistake bc they don't get it, or bc they want to impress too much that they become over aggressive. Either way, that's how you judge talents. Kind of like baseball where teams will let their young pitcher have a few starts before sending them back instead of sending them or let players have over 100 at bats before judging if he can hit or not.
Development takes time, and most of all patience with their mistakes.
For the Leafs, I can see and agree what they are doing at least for this yr, signing players and trading them for picks by TDL. Don't know what will happen next yr since nobody knows how these kids will develop. What I would like to see them do is let these kids all play together toward the end of the season and see how they coup with playing and handling the media. But I can't see that happening if the Marlies are fighting for playoffs.

 

[NotSince67*]

Again, I think it's a bit of a generalization.

Players CAN develop playing a few minutes a night (4-7). Arguably, it was probably beneficial to Peter Holland to get eased into the NHL as a guy who projects as a third line player. For a guy like Gauthier, it's arguable that the benefits of getting him developed to playing a defensive role in the NHL and taking pressure off him to chip in offensive would help, or that playing in the AHL to maximize his offense could potentially bear little fruit but fail to challenge him to reach his potential as a defensive specialist.

It all really depends on the player. Rielly played pretty limited minutes as a defenseman (it's pretty hard to only play a D man less than 8 minutes, that's a tough task to shelter a player that much) and yet he's still managed to develop working his way up as a 6th man. Kadri was used primarily as a 3rd line centre and was up and down before realizing his potential as possibly a 2nd line centre when all is said and done.

Ideally, to me IMO, most 1st and second line guys should probably enter the league playing 10-12 minutes and bottom six players will likely benefit from playing time of any sort provided that they belong.

 

[PJJ]

Especially love that example of when Leafs fans complained that Schenn was rushed. Him staying in junior wouldnt of developed his skating, stick handling, shot, etc. to acceptable levels. He simply wasnt that great of a player to start.

Overrated for his grit that doesnt even make a productive difference in a game.

 

[NotSince67*]

TBH Schenn isn't even "bad", he's still a 25 year old defenseman Who's played 500 NHL games, likely to play at least 600+.

I think a lot of people mix that with disappointment he didn't "turn out" and that's understandable. But when you think that at 19 he was as good as a #6 NHL defenseman it's really just a stroke of improbability he's barely improved since he was 19.

I mean it is truly crazy how little his game has progressed since he was 19. If it had at all he'd be a solid NHL player, definitely a middle pairing guy.

 

[Nithoniniel]

TBH Schenn isn't even "bad", he's still a 25 year old defenseman Who's played 500 NHL games, likely to play at least 600+.

I think a lot of people mix that with disappointment he didn't "turn out" and that's understandable. But when you think that at 19 he was as good as a #6 NHL defenseman it's really just a stroke of improbability he's barely improved since he was 19.

I mean it is truly crazy how little his game has progressed since he was 19. If it had at all he'd be a solid NHL player, definitely a middle pairing guy.

Yeah Schenn took a big step this last season, found out how to play a more effective game. I'd say he's a rather solid bottom pairing guy right now, with room for improvement.

 

[Drew75]

It depends on how you define "Ready".

I fully agree that once a player is ready, and they earn a roster spot, they should be on the Team - regardless of their age.

However - "Ready" means being able to compete night in and night out, being able to play both sides of the puck, and being physically & mentally mature enough to succeed.

What is frustrating is when fans feel a player is "ready" because they can put up a highlight reel goal, even though they are a constant defensive liability not able to handle the speed and size of NHL players in their own zone.

What is ridiculous are those who complain at the Leafs overstocking UFA's and one way contracts, saying that they're not giving their 'kids' a chance. When Nylander is ready (meaning able to succeed in the system, play both sides of the puck at the NHL level), then he will be able to beat out a Holland, Kadri, or Matthias with his eyes closed. However - if a Winnik is going provide a better fit and complete game in the teams system than a Liepsic or Brown - then they will go with Winnik and allow the other two to keep getting better in the AHL.

I agree with play the kid when he's ready, but to think having youtube plays makes a kid ready, or complaining at not holding open spots for kids doesn't make sense.