NHL Transactions, Injuries & Rumours

[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.

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.

The issue is that you are asserting that the Leafs have "everything to lose" by keeping Morgan Rielly up. There is no evidence to suggest that is the case at all, it is true that the Leafs have nothing to lose by demoting him, but the latter does not logically follow from that assertion.

[Robin Hood]

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

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

Because your definition of "helping our team" this year involves us breaking even at best on Morgan Rielly as a player.

As an organization, I'd rather Rielly come in next year, or even the year after (if need be) because he will help our team regardless of when he plays for our team. But if he can help our team more by spending more time developing, I would much rather defer that benefit on breaking even at worst on that benefit compared to him playing this year.

I don't know how much easier I can explain this. I will be SHOCKED if the Leafs keep Rielly up regardless of how well he plays over the next 6 games.

[Nick]

OEL is likely better than scouts predicted, AHL would be nice for a lot of dman, juniors ruins that. Aside from injury saying that Bogo is falling short seems off-mark. Hedman also appears to be a #1 Dman - now is he JT? nope...but I always firmly believed any talk as to who was going #1 was purely media playing up a story, JT has always been miles ahead of his age-group.

I'm not sure keeping Reilly up is a bad thing, nor do I believe for sure that sending him down is a good thing. However I do not like the idea of playing him bottom pairing minutes, out of the role we expect to develop him into. Competing in WJC I believe is a positive development that we should send him to whether he's playing for the leafs or back in Juniors. But if he stays, it better be because the coaching staff believe it's best for his development, and not because he's a better dman right now than Jesse Blacker.

[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.

The issue is that you are asserting that the Leafs have "everything to lose" by keeping Morgan Rielly up. There is no evidence to suggest that is the case at all, it is true that the Leafs have nothing to lose by demoting him, but the latter does not logically follow from that assertion.

See my post to 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.

"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.

Because your definition of "helping our team" this year involves us breaking even at best on Morgan Rielly as a player.

this literally makes no sense, shiv. i feel like this is one of those instances where you get so caught up in an argument that you lose perception of common sense.

seriously, what does "breaking even at best on Rielly as a player" even mean? Logically? Linguistically?

[Nick]

the latter does not logically follow from that assertion.

we need a venn diagram.

[Robin Hood]

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

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

Because your definition of "helping our team" this year involves us breaking even at best on Morgan Rielly as a player.

this literally makes no sense, shiv. i feel like this is one of those instances where you get so caught up in an argument that you lose perception of common sense.

seriously, what does "breaking even at best on Rielly as a player" even mean? Logically? Linguistically?

No need for personal attacks. I'll explain.

I view Morgan Rielly as an asset for the Leafs. I also believe Rielly has a peak he can reach as a player <-- The peak of that asset.
I believe Rielly's odds of reaching that peak are higher if he goes back to the minors as:
1) keeping him up increases the odds that he doesn't reach that peak which can happen in many ways (3rd pairing minutes, taking shortcuts to survive against NHL players etc.)
2) sending him down allows him to get stronger and faster (better minutes, WJC etc) which increases his odds of reaching that peak

I would much rather Rielly reach his "peak" and take the route that guarantees us the highest odds of doing so than taking the route that helps us now but adds more risk to Morgan Rielly's value as an asset on our roster in the future.

I really can't explain this any better. If you still don't get it, we think about hockey very differently.

[MSP4LYFE]

the latter does not logically follow from that assertion.

we need a venn diagram.

lol

[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.

Because your definition of "helping our team" this year involves us breaking even at best on Morgan Rielly as a player.

this literally makes no sense, shiv. i feel like this is one of those instances where you get so caught up in an argument that you lose perception of common sense.

seriously, what does "breaking even at best on Rielly as a player" even mean? Logically? Linguistically?

No need for personal attacks. I'll explain.

I view Morgan Rielly as an asset for the Leafs. I also believe Rielly has a peak he can reach as a player <-- The peak of that asset.
I believe Rielly's odds of reaching that peak are higher if he goes back to the minors as:
1) keeping him up increases the odds that he doesn't reach that peak which can happen in many ways (3rd pairing minutes, taking shortcuts to survive against NHL players etc.)
2) sending him down allows him to get stronger and faster (better minutes, WJC etc) which increases his odds of reaching that peak

I would much rather Rielly reach his "peak" and take the route that guarantees us the highest odds of doing so than taking the route that helps us now but adds more risk to Morgan Rielly's value as an asset on our roster in the future.

I really can't explain this any better. If you still don't get it, we think about hockey very differently.

no, we think about logic differently. you are taking some fact pattern that you assume to be true about all defensemen only developing properly in junior and applying to a situation where it doesn't necessarily apply.

you are completely operating under your own little context you've created where defensemen are inherently unable to reach their ceiling if they play in the NHL at 19 years old. this is not reality. but you are operating under the assumption that this is so.

[Robin Hood]

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

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

Because your definition of "helping our team" this year involves us breaking even at best on Morgan Rielly as a player.

this literally makes no sense, shiv. i feel like this is one of those instances where you get so caught up in an argument that you lose perception of common sense.

seriously, what does "breaking even at best on Rielly as a player" even mean? Logically? Linguistically?

No need for personal attacks. I'll explain.

I view Morgan Rielly as an asset for the Leafs. I also believe Rielly has a peak he can reach as a player <-- The peak of that asset.
I believe Rielly's odds of reaching that peak are higher if he goes back to the minors as:
1) keeping him up increases the odds that he doesn't reach that peak which can happen in many ways (3rd pairing minutes, taking shortcuts to survive against NHL players etc.)
2) sending him down allows him to get stronger and faster (better minutes, WJC etc) which increases his odds of reaching that peak

I would much rather Rielly reach his "peak" and take the route that guarantees us the highest odds of doing so than taking the route that helps us now but adds more risk to Morgan Rielly's value as an asset on our roster in the future.

I really can't explain this any better. If you still don't get it, we think about hockey very differently.

no, we think about logic differently. you are taking some fact pattern that you assume to be true about all defensemen only developing properly in junior and applying to a situation where it doesn't necessarily apply.

you are completely operating under your own little context you've created where defensemen are inherently unable to reach their ceiling if they play in the NHL at 19 years old. this is not reality. but you are operating under the assumption that this is so.

Fine, let's take personal shots.

I think you have difficulty reading. Saying odds of success are higher or lower in one instance does not imply that something is a certainty.

Nor do you understand the concept of risk. Reward must increase if additional risk is taken.

How you can logically not infer what I am trying to say escapes me as any person with common sense could have arrived at that by now.

And you do not seem to have an appreciation for historical numbers or statistics. Can't argue with a lack of logic.

[Nick]

Yep that got personal. Should be a fun topic about a potential star young leaf prospect, and not one we need to save the franchise, but rather one to build us up!



If Randy/Dave/development staff believe there is little risk to having Rielly in the NHL, there could even be a benefit in terms of development time. If he is able to cope with the changes he needs for the NHL, he could actually increase his development pace, and perhaps hit a higher ceiling.

Every top end prospect is different. I think Morgan is more than strong enough for the NHL, it's whether or not he thinks he's good enough that I'm concerned about. Dion had swagger at 20 - does Morgan? Because with the natural mistakes made by a young offensive dman, does he have the ego to over-come it? Will sending him down be a bigger hit to his ego if he sees that he belongs? Lots to consider but I'm firmly against there being one-best method to follow.

[Robin Hood]

Yep that got personal. Should be a fun topic about a potential star young leaf prospect, and not one we need to save the franchise, but rather one to build us up!



If Randy/Dave/development staff believe there is little risk to having Rielly in the NHL, there could even be a benefit in terms of development time. If he is able to cope with the changes he needs for the NHL, he could actually increase his development pace, and perhaps hit a higher ceiling.

Every top end prospect is different. I think Morgan is more than strong enough for the NHL, it's whether or not he thinks he's good enough that I'm concerned about. Dion had swagger at 20 - does Morgan? Because with the natural mistakes made by a young offensive dman, does he have the ego to over-come it? Will sending him down be a bigger hit to his ego if he sees that he belongs? Lots to consider but I'm firmly against there being one-best method to follow.

I don't think there is a best method to follow for every player. But we have enough puck movers on our team that this risk isn't justified IMO. Phaneuf, Franson, Ranger and Gardiner can all move the puck. Heck even Liles can. Maybe Rielly is better than some of them already. But I'd rather he stay down since we have the luxury of keeping him down.

Btw - the part of this argument that is completely being overlooked is how important it is to preserve the years of an ELC

[Nick]

- CBS just had me concerned!!!

Deryk Engelland has signed to play for RIHK, a team in Norway, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports.

Say WTF, look closer:

News: (10/14/12)

*Whew*

nice updates CBS....

[CAM]

You guys are ruining the transactions thread. Take it to the Leaf parade planning thread.

[MSP4LYFE]

Yep that got personal.

I had a good chuckle after reading that

[Tony]

Quick screws up and lets one in from the opposite faceoff circle ... nice job LMAO

[Peter]

Went from being down to 1 dman last week
and now Ellis is playing with Weber, Lindholm with Beauchemin, and Wilson is back in the Avs lineup this week.

Thanks hockey gods.

[anton]

brunner is a stud

[Nick]

Man Edmonton has been in some horrible hockey games already this year. WPG/NJD both went down to edmonton's level...

[The BBKL Insider]

Leafs lineup tonight:

http://blog.mapleleafs.com/mondays-leaf ... ice-lines/


jay Mc out with a new baby