Speculation: Where do you think Leo Carlsson should play next season?

[Gliff]

What are you trying to say?

That I don't want you to be a common denominator lol. Atleast Laf didn't factor into this example

 

[tomd]

The first thing to watch for is whether or not he signs a contract with the Ducks before training camp.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Okay, please stop acting like your point can be proven. It is anecdotal at best.

The point is that they're usually ready to make the jump, and it's not wrong. And by the way, complaining (erroneously) that an argument is anecdotal and then arguing against it with cherrypicked anecdotes is the not the own you think it is, man. Nor is calling Elias Lindholm a "questionable" NHL success, Jesus.

 

[Gliff]

The point is that they're usually ready to make the jump, and it's not wrong. And by the way, complaining (erroneously) that an argument is anecdotal and then arguing against it with cherrypicked anecdotes is the not the own you think it is, man. Nor is calling Elias Lindholm a "questionable" NHL success, Jesus.

For reference I took every top 10 pick the played in a Euro mens league in their draft year over the last 10 years. That isn't cherrypicking.

And yes, I question if the development path Lindholm was a positive or negative. He was a 40 point player in the first 5 season in the NHL. For a 5th overall pick that is pretty bad.

My whole point is no player is the same and past results are not a reliable source for how Carlsson should be handled. There are examples or every outcome.

Anyways, I'm not going to agree to disagree and not continue into a pissing match.

 

[Dryish]

I know the thread is about the question should not will, but for expectations to be realistic I think it bears mentioning that Verbeek's been quoted, several times, saying he wants prospects to take it slow developing into the players they can be. Bringing Leo in immediately would be going against that philosophy quite flagrantly.

Obviously that, too, begs the question of whether top 3 overall picks are a different kind of prospect, and in many ways they probably are, but regardless.

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

Anyways, I'm not going to agree to disagree and not continue into a pissing match.

Welp, there goes my morning.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

For reference I took every top 10 pick the played in a Euro mens league in their draft year over the last 10 years. That isn't cherrypicking.

Lol!

And yes, I question if the development path Lindholm was a positive or negative. He was a 40 point player in the first 5 season in the NHL. For a 5th overall pick that is pretty bad.

Anyways, I'm not going to agree to disagree and not continue into a pissing match.

Those Sedins, what might have been if only they'd been left to marinate longer. Yes, off you go.

I know the thread is about the question should not will, but for expectations to be realistic I think it bears mentioning that Verbeek's been quoted, several times, saying he wants prospects to take it slow developing into the players they can be. Bringing Leo in immediately would be going against that philosophy quite flagrantly.

Obviously that, too, begs the question of whether top 3 overall picks are a different kind of prospect, and in many ways they probably are, but regardless.

It only goes against his philosophy (which I don't think really is his philosophy tbh) if Leo's not ready to continue his development here. People are ruling that out sight unseen.

 

[Gliff]

Lol!

Those Sedins, what might have been if only they'd been left to marinate longer. Yes, off you go.


It only goes against his philosophy (which I don't think really is his philosophy tbh) if Leo's not ready to continue his development here. People are ruling that out sight unseen.

Funny, since the Sedins went back to Sweden in their D+1. Looks like we agree.

You're more focused on being right or trying to get me in a gotcha then having a conversation.

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

I know the thread is about the question should not will, but for expectations to be realistic I think it bears mentioning that Verbeek's been quoted, several times, saying he wants prospects to take it slow developing into the players they can be. Bringing Leo in immediately would be going against that philosophy quite flagrantly.

Obviously that, too, begs the question of whether top 3 overall picks are a different kind of prospect, and in many ways they probably are, but regardless.

Not necessarily. If he's ready, he's ready. No sense in shipping him off to Europe if that's the case.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Funny, since the Sedins went back to Sweden in their D+1. Looks like we agree.

You're more focused on being right or trying to get me in a gotcha then having a conversation.

I'm not trying to get you in anything, I'm pointing out that to the extent your argument isn't empty of content beyond basic truisms (all players are different), it's nonsense. That's not a basis for a conversation but that isn't my fault. You don't understand what cherrypicking is and you don't understand your own definition of what a "successful development path" is so you don't get why I used the Sedins, and guessed wrong.

Stick to everyone's different, that's your butter zone.

 

[Deuce22]

Lol!

Those Sedins, what might have been if only they'd been left to marinate longer. Yes, off you go.


It only goes against his philosophy (which I don't think really is his philosophy tbh) if Leo's not ready to continue his development here. People are ruling that out sight unseen.

Thank you for pointing out that there is a difference between what a GM says and what he does. I've been arguing since mid-Murray that when a GM says something, isn't doesn't mean he's going to do it. Much of media PR is spin and posturing.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Thank you for pointing out that there is a difference between what a GM says and what he does. I've been arguing since mid-Murray that when a GM says something, isn't doesn't mean he's going to do it. Much of media PR is spin and posturing.

I understand what you're saying but I think this is different, I think in this case people are just overemphasizing what he said as if he was articulating a bedrock philosophy whereas I think he was just stating a preference, which is probably every GM's preference. That's not really spin or posturing.

 

[Deuce22]

I understand what you're saying but I think this is different, I think in this case people are just overemphasizing what he said as if he was articulating a bedrock philosophy whereas I think he was just stating a preference, which is probably every GM's preference. That's not really spin or posturing.

Point taken. What I am saying (in general) is that fans telling everyone that this is what is going to happen because Generic GM said such and such is bogus. We really don't know yet what Verbeek is going to do with his prospects because he hasn't been on the job long enough to establish any kind of sample size. Preference is a good way to describe it, I think. No GM is going to say "I'm going to rush every prospect to the NHL because they are better than what this crappy roster has on it." So say something meaningless to not sound like an idiot.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Point taken. What I am saying (in general) is that fans telling everyone that this is what is going to happen because Generic GM said such and such is bogus. We really don't know yet what Verbeek is going to do with his prospects because he hasn't been on the job long enough to establish any kind of sample size. Preference is a good way to describe it, I think. No GM is going to say "I'm going to rush every prospect to the NHL because they are better than what this crappy roster has on it." So say something meaningless to not sound like an idiot.

I see what you're saying in this case. I've gone back and forth with you and others over the years about GMs lying and I recognize its relevance here, but I won't retreat from my position because I think it's important to hold people in authority accountable for lying. So to me, saying "meh, GMs spin things and lie all the time" shouldn't be true and largely isn't true. If your GM is a liar, that's a character issue, not a job hazard.

And I think you can draw a distinction between lying and spin (because of course I do think GMs spin things) by, at its most basic, understanding whether a statement has a truth value in the logical sense, and if so, whether the context is such that you should take it literally.

If the position is don't take any of it literally or truthfully because certain people have license (or forgivably take license) to lie, I don't accept that. I don't think any of us should accept that or even expect it.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

If he’s going to Ducks training camp, not sure how he can go to the SHL, since their season starts in Sept.

.

I think Lundy did that. It's definitely possible but just seems quite messy

Yeah, it can be done, but it would be a lot for the kid to do both. My gut tells me he will go pro next season, whether it's AHL or NHL not sure.

The SHL is a pro league. The CHL and NCAA are not pro leagues.

The most important info to Stephens reporting is that Carlsson would be back in Sept for training camp. That really does mess up Orebro if Carlsson is supposed to be their 1C, unless Orebro and PV have an agreement to return Carlsson after training camp. If Carlsson is here in Sept, then I would expect him to remain on NA soil - kinda treat him like an NCAA draftee such that once signed, then he cannot go back to the NCAA.

If we're talking about developing Carlsson as a center, then we need to rule out being in the NHL. We have McTavish as an example of a player who has played wing for two seasons, but center at international events. Because McTavish pucked out at the WJC-18 as a center is why Anaheim was giddy to snatch him up. Two seasons ago, McTavish got an NHL-9 game stint and it was all on the wing. But when he was sent to the AHL on a conditioning stint due to injury, he was playing center. Problem was that a CHL prospect under 20-years old cannot play in the AHL (outside of COVID exceptions).

People forget that McTavish already had a man's body when he was drafted 3rd OA and did play pro in the NL-B. I credit McTavish's playmaking, body use, and improved hockey sense due to playing in Europe. In a recent podcast where Carlsson and Leonard were interviewed before the draft, one of the panelist shared info on just how difficult it is to play in the SHL. Carlsson developed and thrived in the SHL for two seasons, but at wing. He went from 5'8 to 6'3 in like nothing in the past two seasons. I don't understand why many keep crapping on Orebro's development of Carlsson in an environment that's already established (players, coaches, development). We trusted Orebro's development to make Carlsson a #2 OA pick.

Back to McTavish. McTavish didn't take the league by storm last year as his first, official rookie season in the NHL in his D+1. In fact, McTavish faded around game 50. Mac had a very long season with very little down time to develop his body. The SHL has a regular season of 52 games in the same amount of months the NHL plays 82 games. I'd like Leo to continue this physical development in the SHL than NHL/AHL for at least one more season and as a top-6 center on a very good team, but I don't that will occur if Leo is in Anaheim in Sept.

 

[KickHisAssZegrass]

Send him back to the SHL where he's got the chance to realistically compete for #1C and dominate the WJC.

I think he'll be ready to step in the NHL and be a calder candidiate the following season.