NHL Transactions, Injuries & Rumours

[KapG]

Luke Schenn

lol that was just because he was very unfortunate with regards to having ron fucking wilson coaching him. terrible coach...

luke schenn is also a beast now and like anton said has developed into what he was suppose to for the most part.

[The BBKL Insider]

Luke Schenn sucks

[Robin Hood]

those players are all still under 25 years old. you yourself said dmen dont reach their ceilings till then so im failing to see your argument.

you're telling me that all those players would be somehow signficantly better if they had played 1 more year of junior? thats a ridiculous claim. also, am i missing something or are all the players you just listed either great or excellent players for their age.

It's not just about 1 more year of Junior. In some cases, it is better to keep the player in the AHL for longer as well. You are looking at this in "absolute" terms. E.g. "Erik Johnson is a pretty decent NHLer and he's still young and he still has time to hit his ceiling." This is a player that was taken ahead of Jordan Staal and Jonathan Toews. It is a running joke on the St. Louis organization because they rushed him. He is not expected to be a "good player for his age". Taken where he was taken, he was supposed to be a gamebreaker, one of the best at his position. The other guys listed are all similar in that they are good players (Top 5 picks seldom aren't) but to not live up to what they could have been has a lot to do with development.

says who exactly? you have no idea what any of these players "could have been". you also have no idea how another year of playing in a lesser league would have affected their play. guys get sent down and become unmotivated and complacent too - negatively affecting their progress. brendan smith is a former 1st round pick who stewed for years in the AHL "developing" and has evolved into a below average bottom pairing guy.

the point is that it's ridiculous to arbitrarily send Rielly down without giving him a chance to prove he belongs in the NHL because playing another year against teenagers is somehow inherently good for development.

It has nothing to do with "could have been".

It has to do with expectations vs reality. Hedman's expectations were high enough to be in the same ballpark as Tavares. They're not even in the same universe anymore. That is not to say Hedman would have automatically been as valuable had TBL kept him down. But TBL "gained" NOTHING by keeping him up.

I repeat, keeping Rielly up helps us gain nothing. And we burn a year on the ELC.

I've made all my arguments though. Obviously we won't agree on this.

[anton]

Btw remember the Hedman vs Tavares pre-draft debate as to who NYI should take first?

Gudbranson was the surefire #3 behind Hall/Seguin

Larsson was the most NHL-ready player outside of Landeskog and COL needing a d-man was supposed to be considering to take him

you have already said that it takes defenseman later into their 20s to reach their ceiling but here you are qualifying hedman (22), gudbranson (21) and larsson (20) as disappointments already.

so in 3 years when they've all actually reached their ceilings and are great NHL defenseman, you're argument becomes null i assume?

[anton]

I repeat, keeping Rielly up helps us gain nothing. And we burn a year on the ELC.

I've made all my arguments though. Obviously we won't agree on this.

you've determined this after 1 game? how do you know rielly, you know, won't actually HELP this team score?

[MSP4LYFE]

According to many advanced stats, Hedman was actually one of the best defenceman in the NHL last season.

[MSP4LYFE]

I repeat, keeping Rielly up helps us gain nothing. And we burn a year on the ELC.

I've made all my arguments though. Obviously we won't agree on this.

you've determined this after 1 game? how do you know rielly, you know, won't actually HELP this team score?

I agree completely.

[Robin Hood]

Btw remember the Hedman vs Tavares pre-draft debate as to who NYI should take first?

Gudbranson was the surefire #3 behind Hall/Seguin

Larsson was the most NHL-ready player outside of Landeskog and COL needing a d-man was supposed to be considering to take him

you have already said that it takes defenseman later into their 20s to reach their ceiling but here you are qualifying hedman (22), gudbranson (21) and larsson (20) as disappointments already.

so in 3 years when they've all actually reached their ceilings and are great NHL defenseman, you're argument becomes null i assume?

I'm not qualifying those players as disappointments...

I'm pointing out that keeping them up has really not yielded a better result than keeping them down would have considering what they were projected to be at the time of their draft.

I think you will start to see this trend significantly in the future. Top 5 picks will start to be forwards more and more and the d-men that are taken will be kept down instead of brought up the year of/the year after their draft.

Meanwhile you have yet to identify a player of Rielly's age that has broken out and not regressed.

[anton]

drew doughty
alex peitrangelo
erik karlsson
victor hedman
zach bogosian
oliver ekman-larsson

all played in the NHL right away or after 1 more year of Jr/Euro

[Robin Hood]

Here I'll go:

Erik Johnson (and he started in 2007-2008 after being drafted in 2006)
Luke Schenn
Zach Bogosian
Viktor Hedman
Erik Gudbranson (wasn't rushed like Rielly but he's STILL not close to what he was projected to be. He will get there but just another example of how long it takes)
Adam Larsson

Won't touch last year's draft as it's too early to tell.

Another player - Cam Fowler

[kyuss]

Luke Schenn

lol that was just because he was very unfortunate with regards to having ron fucking wilson coaching him. terrible coach...

luke schenn is also a beast now and like anton said has developed into what he was suppose to for the most part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxa7qizZfsA
well, maybe tomorrow?

[Robin Hood]

drew doughty
alex peitrangelo
erik karlsson
victor hedman
zach bogosian
oliver ekman-larsson

all played in the NHL right away or after 1 more year of Jr/Euro

Hedman and Bogo can't be on your list LOL.

The rest are the exceptions not the rule.

[MSP4LYFE]

Shiv, I think you would be better served by rephrasing your argument to reflect the position that a young defenceman cannot be ruined by overdeveloping in the junior ranks. That is a valid position, but to assert that calling up a young defenceman will ruin them, or more than likely ruin them is simply false, and not something that can be substantiated with compelling evidence. The truth of the matter is that every prospect is different, some are ready at a young age, some aren't. No single truth applies to all cases.

[anton]

they can't be on my list because your list is wrong?

zach bogosian broke his fucking leg his first year and is still a monster. in no way has he regressed. hedman's stats speak for themselves.

i just love how your list is the holy grail and mine are "exceptions".

[MSP4LYFE]

Meanwhile you have yet to identify a player of Rielly's age that has broken out and not regressed.

You won't find too many players in any age group that match that description. Players seldom develop in a linear pattern, regression is a very common phenomenon.

[Robin Hood]

drew doughty
alex peitrangelo
erik karlsson
victor hedman
zach bogosian
oliver ekman-larsson

all played in the NHL right away or after 1 more year of Jr/Euro

Hedman and Bogo can't be on your list LOL.

The rest are the exceptions not the rule.

OEL btw taken in 2009, played in the AHL in 2010 along with the NHL
Pietrangelo taken in 2008, played in the OHL in 2008 and in the AHL in 2009

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT

[Robin Hood]

Shiv, I think you would be better served by rephrasing your argument to reflect the position that a young defenceman cannot be ruined by overdeveloping in the junior ranks. That is a valid position, but to assert that calling up a young defenceman will ruin them, or more than likely ruin them is simply false, and not something that can be substantiated with compelling evidence. The truth of the matter is that every prospect is different, some are ready at a young age, some aren't. No single truth applies to all cases.

That's exactly what I've been saying, Kareem.

"We lose nothing by sending Rielly down. We have everything to lose by keeping him up".

That doesn't mean Rielly will get ruined if we keep him up. Nor does it mean he becomes a superstar if we send him down. It means there is less risk. And we save 1 year on the ELC.

[anton]

for the love of god please explain to me how we lose "everything" by letting morgan play if he's ready and helps our team win.

it's completely nonsensical.

[Robin Hood]

for the love of god please explain to me how we lose "everything" by letting morgan play if he's ready and helps our team win.

"Everything to lose and nothing to gain" is an idiom. It means that we can only come out behind or break even at best.

Vs keeping him in the minors, where we have "nothing to lose and everything to gain" meaning we can only come out ahead or break even at worst.

[anton]

again, how does morgan playing well and helping our team only break even.

i feel like you're purposely sending this in circles now.