HFBoards - View Single Post - Questions about how the kings develop players

Grady41 · 01-28-2004, 09:45 AM

This post is sparked by Zizka recent recall but its also a nagging thought I have had for awhile on how the kings develop players at a developmental level.

Once they "graduate" so to speak from the AHL Andy Murray seems to do okay. Frolov didn't get much special team time last year. This year Andy had him on the PK he didn't get much (any) PP time till recently but who is to say that AM timetable for Frolov to start on the PP wasn't till next year. IMO once the injuries hit he should have moved his timetable up (as he has done the last few games) but this is more about how we develop players in the AHL something AM doesn't have control of for all I know.

1st Gleason was serving as our 7th defensemen that is not right. He is a rookie they need to play be it here our down in Manchester. I can understand the occasional benching to rest or get a point acrossed to light a fire. But Gleason was sent down then called up to sit on the bench for a couple games?

Makes no sense to me.

So we call up Zizka*
2 WTF!!!! I thought our policy was to call up the best player from manchester which has clearly not been Zizka. Muir is an older d-man who can sit on the bench with the best of them. I wouldn't mind seeing Seeley or even Rullier called up as it looks like they have been Manchester better D-men. This point really bugs me as it looks as it looks to me they just lie about this policy (Rosa)

3
A friend of mine thought that perhaps Manchester needs to keep their best players in order to have a run at things.
My opinon on that though is that the AHL is a developing leauge. Which really means that its about the talent learning so their standing be damned. If players like Kelly and Rosa and Muir are nothing more than ringers I feel this is a hindrence to the development of our prospects and thus the future of the Kings. If their not ringer then we really aren't being fair to them.
So I don't see why we have this policy if we don't use it. **** and pillage Manchester if it makes the kings a better team. In Baseball the september call ups are at the same time as the AAA championships so triple A team often gets screwed out of several good players for the greater good of their MLB clubs

Waivers really when we got a d-man like Kuznetsov how much of a chance is their that he is taken on waivers? Example: so say we call up Rosa or something and he plays good a player then comes off the IR, and we have to make room don't want to send Rosa down cause he is playing well. (and by playing well I mean putting up points) Then why wouldn't we send down Chartrand or Sim or Tripp. Chartrand and Sim play hard but that if you send them down even if they get clamied then in my mind you have already replaced them with better players(if say Rosa Is playing well). So I don't see why waiver are even an issue.
Other side: we call up Rosa or something and he plays bad a player then comes off the IR, and we have to make room send Rosa down then. if Rosa plays bad whos going to take him and if they do. For me to consider it a loss they would have to go to their other team and instantly pull an Armstrong (putting up points once everybody has written you off) But it would also lead me to ask questions what did the other team do that we didn't are they using him the same way we did. Armstrong for example was never thrust into a top six role before he would start the same way he did when we got him as an AHL "ringer" maybe called up to player on the 4th line as he was last year.

In general it would lead me to this

This kind of leads me to evaluating talent. How good are we at this the last 2 years we have shipped of too D men who played very little for us to teams in packages deals. Lilja and Strbak have played solidly for their new teams. Did we give up on these guys too fast. I understand it was a numbers game with Strbak They wanted to give him time to play and adjust to the North American style but didn't wan't to risk it at the NHL level so he wasn't going to play anyway but I think that came back to bite us a little bit and it might be partially due to poor evaluating.

* The hope that Zizka was being showcased that I believe we all shared would have been nice but to showcase him we would acutally have to play him.

ARRRGGGGGGGH I can't figure out why he is up with the Kings right now

I am sorry this is long.

Any thoughts on how we develop players? What am I missing? Right? or Wrong?

once again I am sorry this is long.

01-28-2004, 09:45 AM	#1
Grady41 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 172 vCash: 500	Questions about how the kings develop players This post is sparked by Zizka recent recall but its also a nagging thought I have had for awhile on how the kings develop players at a developmental level. Once they "graduate" so to speak from the AHL Andy Murray seems to do okay. Frolov didn't get much special team time last year. This year Andy had him on the PK he didn't get much (any) PP time till recently but who is to say that AM timetable for Frolov to start on the PP wasn't till next year. IMO once the injuries hit he should have moved his timetable up (as he has done the last few games) but this is more about how we develop players in the AHL something AM doesn't have control of for all I know. 1st Gleason was serving as our 7th defensemen that is not right. He is a rookie they need to play be it here our down in Manchester. I can understand the occasional benching to rest or get a point acrossed to light a fire. But Gleason was sent down then called up to sit on the bench for a couple games? Makes no sense to me. So we call up Zizka* 2 WTF!!!! I thought our policy was to call up the best player from manchester which has clearly not been Zizka. Muir is an older d-man who can sit on the bench with the best of them. I wouldn't mind seeing Seeley or even Rullier called up as it looks like they have been Manchester better D-men. This point really bugs me as it looks as it looks to me they just lie about this policy (Rosa) 3 A friend of mine thought that perhaps Manchester needs to keep their best players in order to have a run at things. My opinon on that though is that the AHL is a developing leauge. Which really means that its about the talent learning so their standing be damned. If players like Kelly and Rosa and Muir are nothing more than ringers I feel this is a hindrence to the development of our prospects and thus the future of the Kings. If their not ringer then we really aren't being fair to them. So I don't see why we have this policy if we don't use it. **** and pillage Manchester if it makes the kings a better team. In Baseball the september call ups are at the same time as the AAA championships so triple A team often gets screwed out of several good players for the greater good of their MLB clubs Waivers really when we got a d-man like Kuznetsov how much of a chance is their that he is taken on waivers? Example: so say we call up Rosa or something and he plays good a player then comes off the IR, and we have to make room don't want to send Rosa down cause he is playing well. (and by playing well I mean putting up points) Then why wouldn't we send down Chartrand or Sim or Tripp. Chartrand and Sim play hard but that if you send them down even if they get clamied then in my mind you have already replaced them with better players(if say Rosa Is playing well). So I don't see why waiver are even an issue. Other side: we call up Rosa or something and he plays bad a player then comes off the IR, and we have to make room send Rosa down then. if Rosa plays bad whos going to take him and if they do. For me to consider it a loss they would have to go to their other team and instantly pull an Armstrong (putting up points once everybody has written you off) But it would also lead me to ask questions what did the other team do that we didn't are they using him the same way we did. Armstrong for example was never thrust into a top six role before he would start the same way he did when we got him as an AHL "ringer" maybe called up to player on the 4th line as he was last year. In general it would lead me to this This kind of leads me to evaluating talent. How good are we at this the last 2 years we have shipped of too D men who played very little for us to teams in packages deals. Lilja and Strbak have played solidly for their new teams. Did we give up on these guys too fast. I understand it was a numbers game with Strbak They wanted to give him time to play and adjust to the North American style but didn't wan't to risk it at the NHL level so he wasn't going to play anyway but I think that came back to bite us a little bit and it might be partially due to poor evaluating. * The hope that Zizka was being showcased that I believe we all shared would have been nice but to showcase him we would acutally have to play him. ARRRGGGGGGGH I can't figure out why he is up with the Kings right now I am sorry this is long. Any thoughts on how we develop players? What am I missing? Right? or Wrong? once again I am sorry this is long.