Why Marc Bergevin Needs to Integrate an Average of Two Rookies Per Year

[LyricalLyricist]

The notion that you need 2 rookies fully integrated and kept per year is strange.

In either case Carr & Andrighetto are 2 of 66 NHL rookies with 17 games or more this season.

Isn't that with the norm?

 

[Sorinth]

Revisiting this six months later, it is clear that I was overestimating Bergevin, something argued by Talk to Goalposts at the time:


We're now 3.5 years into the Bergevin era. The number of young players integrated is:
Brenden Gallagher - fully integrated
Alex Galchenyuk - minutes still being held back
Nathan Beaulieu - grudgingly
Devante Smith-Pelly - 4th liner on the bubble

Cases can be made for Daniel Carr and Mike Condon. In the case of Carr, it's very plausible that Bergevin will go dumpster-diving for a 33 year-old 3rd liner and then send Carr down to the minors. Condon might not be back next year, as Bergevin is implicitly insulting him in the media.

This is a failing of this administration. They don't like youth.

I'm not sure you can put Smith-Pelly because he was a regular player before we traded him. Though Sekac should be counted as he became a regular for us.

Pateryn is in a similar position to Condon, they made the team but it wouldn't be a surprise if next year neither were with the big club.


I don't think it's a case of not liking youth, it's just they can't settle on a guy. We end up seeing a regular rotation where players get 5-10 games and then get sent down to give someone else a shot. This happens regardless of how good/bad they play.

If for example we had simply kept Andrighetto up instead of needing to try Thomas, and Carr, and De La Rose ... he would probably have nearly a full season under his belt. Instead he's got less than 30 games. We saw it with Beaulieu as well.

I get that Bergevin wants to give them all a taste, but it's a terrible way to develop players. It is really tough on your confidence when you play well but get sent down anyways, so in the end you play like your on eggshells because at any moment you'll be back riding the bus in the AHL, especially if you make a defensive mistake.

 

[Sorinth]

Excluding this year, the young guys who debuted under Bergevin (13 total) have combined for 775 games played.

400 of those were the Gally's, and a whole host of others were short term injury replacement (487 man games lost to injury over that time).

 

[DAChampion]

I'm not sure you can put Smith-Pelly because he was a regular player before we traded him. Though Sekac should be counted as he became a regular for us.

That's basically it. I'm showing subjective judgment here, that I think is justified. DSP may not fit the criteria, but Sekac does, so it's a swap if one young player for another and works.

Pateryn is in a similar position to Condon, they made the team but it wouldn't be a surprise if next year neither were with the big club.

I don't think it's a case of not liking youth, it's just they can't settle on a guy. We end up seeing a regular rotation where players get 5-10 games and then get sent down to give someone else a shot. This happens regardless of how good/bad they play.

If for example we had simply kept Andrighetto up instead of needing to try Thomas, and Carr, and De La Rose ... he would probably have nearly a full season under his belt. Instead he's got less than 30 games. We saw it with Beaulieu as well.

I get that Bergevin wants to give them all a taste, but it's a terrible way to develop players. It is really tough on your confidence when you play well but get sent down anyways, so in the end you play like your on eggshells because at any moment you'll be back riding the bus in the AHL, especially if you make a defensive mistake.

Right -- there may be 20 or 25 young players who have been "rookies" under Bergevin, so that statistic sounds good. In this case, it's not meaningful.

 

[Runner77]

I don't think it's a case of not liking youth, it's just they can't settle on a guy. We end up seeing a regular rotation where players get 5-10 games and then get sent down to give someone else a shot. This happens regardless of how good/bad they play.

If for example we had simply kept Andrighetto up instead of needing to try Thomas, and Carr, and De La Rose ... he would probably have nearly a full season under his belt. Instead he's got less than 30 games. We saw it with Beaulieu as well.

I get that Bergevin wants to give them all a taste, but it's a terrible way to develop players. It is really tough on your confidence when you play well but get sent down anyways, so in the end you play like your on eggshells because at any moment you'll be back riding the bus in the AHL, especially if you make a defensive mistake.

The fact of not settling on a guy is more a matter of patience and coaching approach. Therrien has a short leash when it comes to rookies and has a nasty habit of reacting harshly once they commit mistakes, often with in-game consequences. I don't know what the propensity is for most other NHL coaches, how much they are willing to trust call-ups. I don't know that it has as much to do with Bergevin, since we've seen call-ups get a game and sit, get limited minutes on few games, just sit to rot, see their TOI given to a less skilled player or to players not immediately catering to a team need, etc.

I didn't get the chance to comment on the thread prior to now, so I'll add my kudos to Champion for a job well done.