I know you're on this crusade against the captaincy meaning anything but it's just not true. Does it mean as much as some of us make it out to be? No. Does it mean something? Yes. Players admit as much when they ever make mention of "our captain". If it literally didn't matter one iota they wouldn't refer to them by title but rather by name.
I think if this organisation is going through a culture change we also need a philosphy change.
And i think that includes being prepared to throw young players into the deep end for small amounts of time. I dont think molly coddling them in minor leagues/juniors for 3 years or so is necessarily the right option.
I think Playing Faksa for the 9 games is a great option. Lets give the kid some NHL action. even some ice time with Jagr (albeit minimal).
After his 9 game stint and we know where we are at with him we can send him back to juniors.
Long term our solution needs to be Faksa/Glennie/Reilly Smith/Chiasson as our forwards, lets put them in these situations. I think it would be wasting an oppurtunity to use wandell or fiddler.
Rushing prospects and changing the culture of the current team are 2 completely separate things. Sending a non-lottery pick back to juniors for his 18 year old season is not "molly-coddling". In no way should you be making decisions on the readiness of a prospect like Faksa based on the injury situation of the NHL club. If his play in training camp demands a 9 game flyer, then so be it.
Last edited by piqued: 07-11-2012 at 07:43 PM.
Reason: grammar fail
You mentioned this in another thread and I didn't respond because it seems outlandish to me. Is Rundblad not considered the prospect he once was or what's the situation there?
Rushing prospects and changing the culture of the current team are 2 completely separate things. Sending a non-lottery pick back to juniors for his 18 year old season is not "molly-coddling". In no way should you be making decisions on the readiness of a prospect like Faksa based on the injury situation of the NHL club. If his play in training camp demands a 9 game flyer, then so be it.
Sorry but we did molly coddle Glennie.
We wrapped him up in cotton wool and waited 3 seasons for him.
I dont think it would have hurt his development to have a 6-8 game stint in the NHL in the last two seasons especially during our heavily injured times. We invested so much into him he should have played in the NHl by now ( im not counting that rubber game last season)
Who knows if we gave him games in the bigs he may have got more confidence/bettered his game/ improved his development
I really disagree that it would be rushing Faksa by giving him a 9 game stint early in the season if he has a good camp.
If he struggles he goes straight back to juniors, but he goes back knowing a) whats it takes to be a pro and b) that he has what it takes..i really dont see the negative in that.
Glennie wasn't ready for the NHL. Putting him in the NHL anyway wasn't going to make him magically ready. How much we invested in him is irrelevant. The pick was a project from the moment it was made, even supporters of it would grant that much.
If a team sucks, it has nothing to do with who is wearing the C.
I'm not sure on this one... my personal, not backed up by any facts view, is that morrow absolutely sucks at handling conversations with the refs. as captain, i think interpersonal skills in that area are huge. morrow always had that whiny, "you've got to be kidding me" complain face.. if i were the official, i'd wanna ***** slap him.
We wrapped him up in cotton wool and waited 3 seasons for him.
I dont think it would have hurt his development to have a 6-8 game stint in the NHL in the last two seasons especially during our heavily injured times. We invested so much into him he should have played in the NHl by now ( im not counting that rubber game last season)
Who knows if we gave him games in the bigs he may have got more confidence/bettered his game/ improved his development
What would giving Glennie a few games done besides make him lose even more confidence? He was injured every time we needed a callup too.
I really disagree that it would be rushing Faksa by giving him a 9 game stint early in the season if he has a good camp.
If he struggles he goes straight back to juniors, but he goes back knowing a) whats it takes to be a pro and b) that he has what it takes..i really dont see the negative in that.[/QUOTE]
First of all, 9 game stint or no, Faska is going back to the juniors next year. Barring a Benn style breakout which is unlikely at 19 years old, there's no way he plays more than 9 games. As for whether he should get 9 games, well you're disagreeing with Piqued but he's saying the same thing.
Quote:
if he has a good camp.
Quote:
If his play in training camp demands a 9 game flyer, then so be it.
If he earns it in training camp, he'll get it. If he doesn't, then he gets sent back. It's not rushing to give him 9 games if he has a good camp. It is rushing to give him 9 games if he didn't earn it, and yes, that can mess with a prospect's development. I forget who but someone last season wrote a great article about how kids returning from the 9 game tryout get ostracized by their junior teammates and lose some of being part of their team.
Part of the reason one might have been hesitant in handing Glennie NHL games is because of the reputed attitude/work ethic problem. A kid like that shouldn't be gift wrapped NHL games. Faksa is the absolute other end of the spectrum. Combine that with his body size and defensive ability I personally don't see the downside in giving him some games this year. The poster who said he will probably use those games to note things he needs to work on in the OHL and go on to dominate that league, I agree.
Glennie wasn't ready for the NHL. Putting him in the NHL anyway wasn't going to make him magically ready. How much we invested in him is irrelevant. The pick was a project from the moment it was made, even supporters of it would grant that much.
Glennie not in the NHL last season is no surprise at all.
You mentioned this in another thread and I didn't respond because it seems outlandish to me. Is Rundblad not considered the prospect he once was or what's the situation there?
He's still a great prospect and there's no situation. Guess my opinion of Morrow is inappropriately high? Just seems to me like you guys could really use a player like Rundblad and we could really use a player like Morrow.
He's still a great prospect and there's no situation. Guess my opinion of Morrow is inappropriately high? Just seems to me like you guys could really use a player like Rundblad and we could really use a player like Morrow.
It's possibly mine/ours is inappropriately low. I would do that trade and hope to hell our GM would as well if it were offered. Not sure if Morrow would waive the NTC to go to Phoenix though. He's been through the last few years of ownership bs here, I really doubt he'd want it again. On the other hand if he liked playing for Tip and viewed it as just the one year commitment it's not really a problem.
He's still a great prospect and there's no situation. Guess my opinion of Morrow is inappropriately high? Just seems to me like you guys could really use a player like Rundblad and we could really use a player like Morrow.
It kind of helps that we don't really have any offensive defensemen prospects (I'm aware we drafted 3 this year) that are close to making the NHL.
I'm hoping ours is low, but who knows.
Also, I highly doubt GMJN would trade within the division even for a guy like Rundblad.
