SpeakingOfTheDevils
Devils Advocate
Glad everyone is content with Zacha. Remember Barzal?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/495f1/495f185fc1f2d2bd459ec9ded3ca2eb67b513d95" alt="laugh :laugh: :laugh:"
I had a feeling that, if the pick were used on a forward, it would be easy to sell us on whatever the name ended up being.
Glad everyone is content with Zacha. Remember Barzal?
Glad everyone is content with Zacha. Remember Barzal?
I mean, if we drafted Barzal all this talk would be about him and not Zacha. Then we could say, remember Zacha?
A high-caliber forward prospect is exactly what we were all clamoring for. We got one in Zacha, and could have got one in Barzal if we went that route.
But Zacha is the third best forward in the draft, and Barzal, well Barzal's stock precipitated rather swiftly.![]()
There is nothing to be gained by having him here, especially since he played a whopping 37 games last year. We all want to play with our shiny new toy right away, but his development is critical to our future success and I don't want him here this year. Let him play a full season in Sarnia/Albany and dominate. Then we will have a more polished, finished player for 2016-17, when we MIGHT be in the discussion for a playoff spot.
All we need to do is look at the litany of prospects from our own organization that were rushed and had their development stalled or ruined. You want to give him a little taste with those 9 games at the beginning of the season, fine. But that's it.
Plus, there's no need to start the clock on this guy any earlier than we need to.
I mean, if we drafted Barzal all this talk would be about him and not Zacha. Then we could say, remember Zacha?
A high-caliber forward prospect is exactly what we were all clamoring for. We got one in Zacha, and could have got one in Barzal if we went that route.
Thing is there was a lot more skepticism of Barzal here even before the draft and that'd still be an issue with the size. Plus Zacha has gone above and beyond the call kissing up to us (the fans), taking the red eye from the draft to go to the sth thing and all that so we're even more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Was it not beneficial to both the Bruins and Pastrnak's development to have him up with the big club last year?
Perhaps, but the Devils really have to nail this pick. I think it makes more sense to take the time and develop him properly rather than throw him to the dogs right away. There is no downside to sending him back to junior, because you can be sure that the Devils will be keeping tabs on him and helping him develop while he's back in Sarnia too.
Besides, Zacha doesn't turn this team into a playoff contender and he'll likely be benched a lot. I don't see a ton of benefit having him up here other than playing with Elias and if they really want that, then give him 9 games and send him back.
But Zacha is the third best forward in the draft, and Barzal, well Barzal's stock precipitated rather swiftly.![]()
Drives me nuts when people throw this garbage out there when Shero and Hynes have been on record indicating the exact opposite.
If he carves a spot for himself, he plays. If there are people outplaying him, he goes down. He will get a cup of coffee in the NHL, that's for certain. But if it's clear he needs more time in the O, he'll get it.
He will absolutely not be benched. Where did you come up with that?
Drives me nuts when people throw this garbage out there when Shero and Hynes have been on record indicating the exact opposite.
If he carves a spot for himself, he plays. If there are people outplaying him, he goes down. He will get a cup of coffee in the NHL, that's for certain. But if it's clear he needs more time in the O, he'll get it.
He will absolutely not be benched. Where did you come up with that?
Zacha is a nice prospect who has high potential but I still believe it was a reach. When Shero mentioned Jordan Staal I nearly puked.
Do we even know if he is allowed to go back to Sarnia?
He's a rookie in the NHL, learning the game and has spent a grand total of 37 games in North America. He's going to make mistakes and he'll likely be inconsistent and you can't continue to let him make mistakes if he isn't learning from them. That takes time in the video room and practice. It's not garbage, it's the way things are done at the pro level. You don't let somebody continue to make the same mistakes especially when it's the coaches job to win. You don't like what I have to say, fine, but don't be delusional.
You're correct. If he's making mistakes, he'll be sent back after 9 games.
I'm saying that, if he's up with the club for the whole year, he won't be benched. Because he will have shown in the 9 games that he's not making the mistakes you're alluding to.
But if he is making mistakes, he'll be sent back. I don't think Hynes & Co will be intent on benching an 18 year old when he could be developing in a lesser league.
Not sure what's so delusional about that.
I might get roasted for saying this, but I don't think I'd mind if Zacha was benched for a few games here and there his first season in the NHL as long as he understood why and the coaching staff was working with him to address the problem(s). With Larsson, I think what got frustrating for me was that there didn't seem to be enough teaching and explaining going on behind the scenes with DeBoer.
Interesting that Zacha may be ahl eligible. Would be good to confirm.
definitely agree, so long as hynes is teaching him and gives him a bit of responsibility at a time. even 3rd line minutes for a few games is fine. I just want him to grow