Totally agree, I should have made that more clear. I guess I just assumed you would realize I didn't mean points=NHL ready. Otherwise smallish forwards would always make the transition to the NHL.
But it doesn't change the fact I believe DSP is better served playing in the AHL than being given an NHL job automatically.
So then, what exactly do you mean by dominating?
Smith-Pelly stands out with every shift and every situation. Maroon is hit and miss. In fact Maroon's usually the first guy they move off of a line. He hasn't been awful by any means, but there is nothing that screams out dominance or NHL prowess.
Smith-Pelly stands out with every shift and every situation. Maroon is hit and miss. In fact Maroon's usually the first guy they move off of a line. He hasn't been awful by any means, but there is nothing that screams out dominance or NHL prowess.
Well I guess I just disagree then. I don't think DSP stands out every shift and hasn't clearly shown he only belongs in the NHL.
I guess the argument then becomes do you think DSP is better served for his development having 50 points in an AHL season or 30 in an NHL one. As I've said before I would just prefer a prospect play 20 minutes a night in the AHL rather than 10 in the NHL.
If DSP plays 15 games in the AHL and dominates then what is the harm? But he shouldn't be given an automatic NHL shot just because.
I don't think DSP stands out every shift and hasn't clearly shown he only belongs in the NHL.
At which level are you talking about?
Edit: I think that question might be steering this conversation in the wrong direction. What I'm really curious about is what Maroon has done in the past few games that you felt was dominant? That's why I asked you what you meant by dominant.
He played 44 games and more than held his own and in Norfolk he hasn't really missed a beat.
Playing in NHL games means nothing (see Nino Niederreiter).
Again I think we just disagree on whats best for development. "holding his own" isn't what I want from a second round pick. I want contribution and IMO a tough vet could have contributed as much as DSP did last season.
I think it's kind of funny that there's only two options (not just for DSP but DSP in this discussion):
1) Play in the NHL but not develop as expected.
2) Play in the NHL and develop.
How about DSP progressed more in the NHL last season than he would have in a lower league? Look at his progression from beginning to end (AND he missed a decent amount of games due to injury). Progressing like he did in the NHL does NOT equal a similar progression in the AHL. If a player is able to progress in a higher league, then that league is more beneficial for that player to play in than a lower league.
I dont see why so many people insist on a player starting in the minors first. Sure that's the most common progression, but saying everyone needs to go that route is just not correct.
Playing in NHL games means nothing (see Nino Niederreiter).
Again I think we just disagree on whats best for development. "holding his own" isn't what I want from a second round pick. I want contribution and IMO a tough vet could have contributed as much as DSP did last season.
At the end of last year you could see DSP gaining confidence and improving every game, for the way he plays being on the 3rd or 4th line this year wont hurt his development, I wish we had a big physical center besides Getzlaf to pair him with
I think it's kind of funny that there's only two options (not just for DSP but DSP in this discussion):
1) Play in the NHL but not develop as expected.
2) Play in the NHL and develop.
How about DSP progressed more in the NHL last season than he would have in a lower league? Look at his progression from beginning to end (AND he missed a decent amount of games due to injury). Progressing like he did in the NHL does NOT equal a similar progression in the AHL. If a player is able to progress in a higher league, then that league is more beneficial for that player to play in than a lower league.
I dont see why so many people insist on a player starting in the minors first. Sure that's the most common progression, but saying everyone needs to go that route is just not correct.
Skills development is better in lower leagues. Because in upper leagues they do not practice it. Also because you get more ice time in bigger special teams roles (both PK and PP). If you want to develop skills in upper leagues you have to be self-motivated and train extra on the side.
Smith-Pelly scored at a 21 point pace last year. Some people think he has 2nd line or complementary 1st line upside. He's not as likely to reach that playing 12 minutes a night.
Now last year he would have had to have been in the OHL. So maybe there's a case where he's too good for that league (although I don't believe so considering that he didn't set the league on fire in 10-11). But this year he can play in the AHL. Being in the AHL will give him more offensive time and skills practice, and hopefully he will progress faster in those areas than he would have in the NHL.
I think we put way to much weight on what these guys are doing in the CHL and expect it to translate to Anaheim.
DSP is not going to be a big points guy in the NHL, he just isn't. That won't be his game, he's a 3rd line guy for the long haul. Etem is now falling under criticism because he's not doing what he did in juniors. That expectation is just not attainable in the AHL this year. Just imagine if Holland was still in the CHL last year as a 20 year old. How do you think his numbers would have been against younger weaker players? He would have been all world.
Now it looks like Rakell is being set up for the same fall on this board. Rakell has good numbers, nothing compared to Etem's last year in the CHL. Kids are going to react different to a fast and physical mans game and it takes time to learn and adapt to the pro style.
DSP was 19 and he scored at a 21 point pace playing 3rd line minutes. I still think he becomes a Dustin Brown type 50 point second line winger that HITS.
I think we put way to much weight on what these guys are doing in the CHL and expect it to translate to Anaheim.
DSP is not going to be a big points guy in the NHL, he just isn't. That won't be his game, he's a 3rd line guy for the long haul. Etem is now falling under criticism because he's not doing what he did in juniors. That expectation is just not attainable in the AHL this year. Just imagine if Holland was still in the CHL last year as a 20 year old. How do you think his numbers would have been against younger weaker players? He would have been all world.
Now it looks like Rakell is being set up for the same fall on this board. Rakell has good numbers, nothing compared to Etem's last year in the CHL. Kids are going to react different to a fast and physical mans game and it takes time to learn and adapt to the pro style.
I think you're selling DSP way short. He was 19 last year. I think he becomes a good second liner for us.
i have been following all the back and forth on DSP and Vatanen. The AHL is a developmental league. My only input is that you evaluate where the particular young player is ready to make that jump.
The AHL allows the younger player to be put in more situations such as the PK and PP where he might not get that shot in Anaheim.
Tampa Bay's philosophy mirrored that the Red Wings. Let the player develop fully at the AHL level before he's brought up. A case in point, Mark Barberio, a dman had a great rookie season. He and Vatanen have similar playing styles. The Bolts could have brought him up after that rookie season and they had openings on defense in Tampa. But they decided to let him stay in Norfolk his second season. He then leads the league in scoring by a defenseman and is named the AHL Defenseman of the Year. Barring the lockout IMO Barberio would be in Tampa this season.
So let each player develop fully before throwing him into the mix in the NHL. It will pay dividends for sure.
In general, it is best to have ween players into the league which would also benefit the team. The exceptions are, of course, those said superstars.
The only reason why young players make the NHL jump early without being in the AHL is that they are superstar talent and have achieved 90% of reaching that level or there is a lack of talent on the NHL club level. More often than not, it's a mixture of both where the potential is about 60 - 70% achieved. Fowler and DSP made the team to that situation, both were very talented and we didn't have talent to suppress their talent from the NHL level. That means we are not a very good team overall if we are relying so much on youngsters that have talent, but no where near the Crosby-Malkin talent.
Since the days of Smirnov-Chistov, I do not like the philosophy of rushing players into the league. Taking the time to develop players with the purpose of developing players is the reason for the AHL. Once players have proven they dominate the AHL after a certain time, whatever timeline that may be, then promote them. Getz and Perry went through the AHL. They both were promoted to the NHL club level after 17 (Getz) and 19 (Perry) AHL games. Bobby Ryan went the same route.
The best AHL set up that I have seen that benefits the player and org best was when the Ducks had Portland as its AHL affiliate. Former Ducks' GM Burke made the AHL program run the exact same philosophy as the NHL program. That made the transition from the AHL to the NHL quite simple because it was relatively the same game, but faster. What it did was make the young player not think as much, but react much quicker in every situation. This would prove fruitful as injuries are part of the game and young talent would be called up to replace that said position. That consistency is crucial to the player development as it also gives him confidence.
Not knowing what a player does wrong or be able to identify it is a detriment to growth. Compound that with receiving less minutes to play at the NHL due to that said mistake would cause a young player to lose confidence. The AHL is where the coaches identify a player's deficiencies and work on those deficiencies. If they don't work on them, then the player will not be promoted to the NHL level. Which is why I was glad to hear that the Norfolk coaches saying Etem needs time to develop. Etem will be given time to play at the AHL whereas at the NHL level he would probably be scratched or be demoted to the AHL and thereby making him lose even more confidence.
I agree with letting them play in the AHL until they are clearly too good for the league or won't develop any further there. I think DSP would benefit far more getting 1st PP minutes and a ton of ice time in the AHL once the NHL goes back but unfortunately he's needed in Anaheim.
The idea that a player needs to dominate a lower league sounds nice, but I don't see much evidence to show it's necessary for development. It sounds like the kind of thing fans come up with to explain why a player, that they were certain was going to be great, failed or fell short. Add in some edge cases that play to their confirmation bias and voila.
I don't know that I'd say it's necessary for a player to dominate, but he should at least show he's ready to step into the NHL comfortably, or that it might not be beneficial to stay in the AHL anymore(which I don't think is the same as dominating). The NHL is the most structured league in the world, and a player should show that he's ready for that structure.
1) Believe that taking a player up too quick is permanently damaging. You bring them up a level when dominate the previous level. If you are right the player is not damaged (and develops better in the long run). If you are wrong the player sits in the minors for a few extra games until you do bring them up.
2) Believe that a player deserves to play as high a level as possible and they develop faster there. If you are right the player may develop the same, but a little quicker. If you are wrong the player could be permanently stunted.
Why take the chance? Is there really enough a reward to be worth the potential damage?
Why take the chance? Is there really enough a reward to be worth the potential damage?
Nope. Plenty of guys development has been stunted by playing at too high a level too soon - I can provide a ton of examples if somebody wants but I'm too lazy to do it right now.
On the other side of things - look at how teams like Detroit handle their prospects and how much it pays off. Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Filppula and many other players they developed weren't rushed into the NHL and weren't asked to play important roles until their mid twenties. Brendan Smith is a guy who on many teams would have played 2nd pairing minutes last season but Detroit has always been patient with players and looking at their record, it's for the better.
I don't know that I'd say it's necessary for a player to dominate, but he should at least show he's ready to step into the NHL comfortably, or that it might not be beneficial to stay in the AHL anymore(which I don't think is the same as dominating). The NHL is the most structured league in the world, and a player should show that he's ready for that structure.
I feel that is probably why the coaching staff chose to hold on to DSP last season over playing someone from Syracuse in that spot. Players will still develop in the NHL, this stuff about dominating would show up more around this league and Europe if it was otherwise. What seems like the real concern to me is whether that player brings something of value to the table. With Devo, I think it was the physicality and strong forechecking which set him above his peers. A bit like an internship, he's doing grunt work and occasionally getting an opportunity to play against guys that he wouldn't at any other level. In the meantime he develops in practice and with the supervision of our fitness staff.
This stuff about breaking players sounds like a lot of it is anecdotal or referencing edge cases.
This stuff about breaking players sounds like a lot of it is anecdotal or referencing edge cases.
If that was the case, why do we hear so often from the mouths of coaches and GMs that the reason behind a certain player being sent down was because it would be best for their development to be playing a bigger role in a lower league?
If that was the case, why do we hear so often from the mouths of coaches and GMs that the reason behind a certain player being sent down was because it would be best for their development to be playing a bigger role in a lower league?
Because they weren't showing development at the level they were at, and in some cases, McMillan springs to mind, regression.
