A letter from Louis Leblanc (in french)

[LeHab]

An apples-to-apples comparison would be the players drafted 16-20 during the period 2006-2012. That gives the sample size, but it's a more consistent sample.

But good point otherwise.

Depends what question you are looking to answer. I was looking at how other 18th OAs generally turn out. As we can see odds are not very good but for some reason people keep on dwelling over with unrealistic expectations.

 

[Kriss E]

Reminds me of Yakupov... (different circumstances but some similarities the way they were handled)

I didn't get how they treated Yakupov either in his 2nd season onward, but he got a lot of chances.
Leblanc only played 8 games in the NHL after his rookie year. Yakupov played 302 more games in the NHL after his rookie year.

 

[Fixxer]

I didn't get how they treated Yakupov either in his 2nd season onward, but he got a lot of chances.
Leblanc only played 8 games in the NHL after his rookie year. Yakupov played 302 more games in the NHL after his rookie year.

There was a coaching staff change in both cases, and results went downhill after...

 

[Paddyjack]

BTW there was an article in La Presse too, with some more information : Louis Leblanc, 10 ans plus tard | JEAN-FRANÇOIS TREMBLAY | Hockey

 

[Kimota]

BTW there was an article in La Presse too, with some more information : Louis Leblanc, 10 ans plus tard | JEAN-FRANÇOIS TREMBLAY | Hockey

Very great stuff by Ted Donato, welcoming him back.

Ç'a été beaucoup moins facile sous les ordres de Michel Therrien. Leblanc n'était pas un favori du nouveau régime. Il se demande encore ce qui s'est passé pour qu'il fasse partie des premiers joueurs retranchés lors du camp avant la saison 2013-2014. Il avait participé à un seul match préparatoire, au cours duquel il avait inscrit un point.

f***ing Therrien, man. And I have my doubts that Bergevin was behind him that much too. Michel Bergeron always says when you're a player you always need your champions inside the org., sometime it only need one to fight for you so people can give you a chance. With the regime change maybe there was nobody to fight for LL.

 

[Tutu to]

Reading the letter, it strikes me that LeBlanc still does not quite realize that he did not have it, that he was just not good enough to be a NHL player. He played in the NHL at 20, and he probably thought that he deserved to be there like many heralded young prospects. However, the organization rightly saw that this was not the case, and they decided to treat him like any other prospect in the organzization and let him earn a future call-up. It must have felt unjust for LeBlanc because all his hockey life he was the chosen one, but it was the right thing to do because he just was not as good as he thought he was. Lefebvre was probably tough but fair with him, and LeBlanc folded under the new reality.

I think LeBlanc busting is not that surprising. As an athlete, he looked very underwhelming. He was not really fast, nor strong. I don't remember him tearing the QMJHL at 19. I think he was probably a player that peaked early (Midget level) because of his smarts on the ice, but when the competition got more intense, his athleticism (or lack of) resulted in his demise. Also, I don't thing he was willing to "fight" for it. Average players like him only make it out of the large pool if they give it everything, and LeBlanc was not that guy.

He was just a bad pick. I think Timmins was on the fence with him and Kreider, and picked the wrong one. It happens to all scouts. I agree with Louis that it's time for people to move on.

100 percent agree with this post.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

It's amazing how entitled some of the management defenders are when it comes to prospects.

Is a player a bad skater? Skating is genetic, so he's guaranteed a bust.
Does a player have a thin skin? Grit is genetic, so he's guaranteed to bust.
Does a player lack hockey IQ? IQ is genetic, so he's guaranteed to bust.
Does a player lack a strong shot? Wrist strength is genetic, so he's guaranteed to bust?
And on and on.

Aside from the fact that the above is a pseudoscience, it's also bad management practice. Within both the real world, and in the artificial world of the NHL and its enforced parity, you cannot have a full roster of perfect employees. That's because there are very few perfect employees. A competent employer has to work with what he has. If a particular employee is lacking a particular attribute, you can adjust the system to emphasize his strength, or you can help that employee reduce his shortcoming.

The issue here, is that the management defenders love Bergevin so much that they believe that he shouldn't have to work. All of the players need to be perfect in every attribute, and if they're not, there's nothing that the coaching and development staff can do to help them, as all skills are innate, though it's not Bergevin's fault for either drafting them or failing to trade them earlier.

What Leblanc had was hand eye coordination, hockey IQ, two-way play. He would have needed help to better develop strength, and apparently, grit. He would have also needed ice time. It's not a ridiculous order for a development staff.

Your 2nd paragraph is just one snowman argument after another.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

And the thing is, it would have been EASY for them to polish the rest of his game. Cause FROM WHAT I SAW on the ice, the drive and work ethic was there. I don't understand why they gave up on him so damn quickly. Just look at bozos we have on our fourth line now. Leblanc is not better than these guys?

No, he's really not. Louis sucked worse than McCarron and that's saying something.

 

[Doc McKenna]

Fair, lets say he is a quitter and didn't have a good opinion of his skills or what ever you say... Why didn't Lefevbre work with him to make him realize that ? This isn't a low upside 7th rounder were talking about, he's a first round pick that had boatloads of talent. Treating everyone the same is the reason why this team didn't develop any talent, it's the reason why Galchenyuk and Scherbak busted, it's the reason why Pacioretty almost busted. Realizing that not all players are equal and that cookie cutter strategies do not work, especially when you're running a million/billion dollars company, is kinda... Important ?

My dad said that as a Job Leader you need to identify who can do what and who can be a better asset. Treating people the same is fine, but as I now experience as a job leader myself, some people you use for one thing and some for others. However when you have a talented person, you don't get them to do menial jobs. They might do them exceptionally, but you leave that for the plugs that can't do much else.

 

[Kriss E]

No, he's really not. Louis sucked worse than McCarron and that's saying something.

It definitely does say something...

...Except he wasn't though. He was an all-star compared to BigMac.

 

[Kriss E]

Very great stuff by Ted Donato, welcoming him back.



****ing Therrien, man. And I have my doubts that Bergevin was behind him that much too. Michel Bergeron always says when you're a player you always need your champions inside the org., sometime it only need one to fight for you so people can give you a chance. With the regime change maybe there was nobody to fight for LL.

Still remember that. I was scratching my head too. Good camp or not, he had a good rookie year and was one of our better prospect, made no sense to just use him for one pre-season game.

 

[bobholly39]

I don't need to read it to know Lefebvre is an ******* and just an atrocious coach who should have never been hired or stayed as long as he did.

I don't care what Bergevin does. Therrien and Lefebvre were two critical mistakes and he did not act quickly enough to fix them

I've been pretty big at defending Bergevin around here (even though I guarantee you I hate the PK trade probably more than anyone here - though it's not about not thinking Weber is great, we just should never have traded PK no matter what) - but to the bolded I agree 100%.

Most of Bergevin's moves, trades, signatures...i've defended majority of them and will continue to do so. I've always been a supporter of Drouin for Sergachev for example, i was fine with letting both Radulov and Markov walk based on circumstances, i was fine with many of the depth trades he did (some pan out, some don't) - but his 2 most critical mistakes by far are keeping Therrien longer than he should (Therrien did great at the beginning so i was fine with signing him - but after the one season where we went from first to last, it was time to go, 100%) as well as Lefebvre.

I would have been fine firing Bergevin for those 2 reasons at anypoint in the past 2 years because they damaged us greatly.

I still think he's competent and capable as a GM though. Unlike most here, i think he's pretty good at trades and at acquiring players, and i have faith that if we do a big trade at TDL or draft this year, odds are it looks good for us. Like I said he does good at a lot of facets of the job as a GM - but the bolded was absolutely killer.

Coming back to Leblanc - it's always unfortunate when players get so much hate as he did. He seems like a nice guy, and i wish him well.

 

[Mrb1p]

My dad said that as a Job Leader you need to identify who can do what and who can be a better asset. Treating people the same is fine, but as I now experience as a job leader myself, some people you use for one thing and some for others. However when you have a talented person, you don't get them to do menial jobs. They might do them exceptionally, but you leave that for the plugs that can't do much else.

Agreed. I have been running kitchens for five years now, not everyone can do anything and not everyone is a hard worker.

 

[Andrei79]

Agreed. I have been running kitchens for five years now, not everyone can do anything and not everyone is a hard worker.

If Therrien ran your kitchen he'd ask you to skin and roast rats.

 

[Mrb1p]

If Therrien ran your kitchen he'd ask you to skin and roast rats.

Therrien would be a perfect old school chef TBH. The pan-flinging kind.

 

[Habby4Life]

I didn't get how they treated Yakupov either in his 2nd season onward, but he got a lot of chances.
Leblanc only played 8 games in the NHL after his rookie year. Yakupov played 302 more games in the NHL after his rookie year.

Simply put, he only played 8 games because he was not good enough. He moved on to Anaheim and only lasted one season in thier system. People can make excuse after excuse and put the blame on coaching or whatever but it is bs. Surely ever coach did not have it out for him. He was just a bad first round pick.

 

[Kriss E]

Simply put, he only played 8 games because he was not good enough. He moved on to Anaheim and only lasted one season in thier system. People can make excuse after excuse and put the blame on coaching or whatever but it is bs. Surely ever coach did not have it out for him.

Really funny to hear people bring up Anaheim...as if the damage done was supposed to just magically disappear.
Again, I use Tinordi as another example. Personally, I think he probably would have never amounted to much of anything at NHL level, but I can also say giving him the impression like he needs to stick up for everyone and fight enforcers like Pedan was incredibly stupid. People believe Komi losing to Lucic set him back, well dang, Pedan destroyed Tinordi in a stupid set up pointless fight. How come Tinordi even remotely entertained the idea of needing to do this? Goes to show you the responsibilities or directions he felt was on his shoulders. Our coaches should have made it clear to him right off the bat that fighting is nowhere near being a priority or even a responsibility of his. Forget fighting, focus on your positioning on defense, forget about having to crush everyone who goes in your corner or down the boards, pay attention to your stick work and moving the puck.
And then, let's assume he'd recover a bit from that....how do you keep a prospect, any prospect, as a healthy scratch here for 3 months.
I don't give a crap how bad you think he was, it doesn't excuse the incredibly stupid decisions we took.

It's no different with LL. It's pretty irrelevant how bad you think he was, it doesn't excuse to piss poor job we did managing this asset.

 

[Habby4Life]

He was a bad pick that just did not work out. It happens every year

 

[Andy]

The weird thing about Louis was that he was always the best player on his teams in junior, performed pretty well in the ahl and the nhl in his rookie seasons in both leagues. He didn't look out of place at the nhl level with the habs. In fact, that year in the ahl, he was one of the team's better players.

The following season, it all went downhill very quickly after a few years of steady and good progression. Something happened. Who's to blame, I don't know, but it's odd to see someone fall off that quickly and after such steady progress.

 

[Habby4Life]

Really funny to hear people bring up Anaheim...as if the damage done was supposed to just magically disappear.
Again, I use Tinordi as another example. Personally, I think he probably would have never amounted to much of anything at NHL level, but I can also say giving him the impression like he needs to stick up for everyone and fight enforcers like Pedan was incredibly stupid. People believe Komi losing to Lucic set him back, well dang, Pedan destroyed Tinordi in a stupid set up pointless fight. How come Tinordi even remotely entertained the idea of needing to do this? Goes to show you the responsibilities or directions he felt was on his shoulders. Our coaches should have made it clear to him right off the bat that fighting is nowhere near being a priority or even a responsibility of his. Forget fighting, focus on your positioning on defense, forget about having to crush everyone who goes in your corner or down the boards, pay attention to your stick work and moving the puck.
And then, let's assume he'd recover a bit from that....how do you keep a prospect, any prospect, as a healthy scratch here for 3 months.
I don't give a crap how bad you think he was, it doesn't excuse the incredibly stupid decisions we took.

It's no different with LL. It's pretty irrelevant how bad you think he was, it doesn't excuse to piss poor job we did managing this asset.

BS just a bad draft pick and so was Tinordi. There were warning signs before both were drafted. The damage done statement is a joke and amusing. Really that fragile? There are numerous examples of guys being stuck in a teams minor league system that persevere and have long careers elsewhere. This is just another example of a first rounder not working out, it’s called a bust and happens every draft. Simply, not every guy makes it for a variety of reasons.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

So who's responsible for LeBlanc, Tinordi, McCarron, Scherbak and Beaulieu?

The scouting staff?
The development staff?
The players only (which would be a scouting staff failure for not knowing this)
Or Management who just recently relieved Lefebvre and who has kept Timmins and the majority of his staff in place.

Beaulieu? The guy is an NHL defenseman. What is Erik Karlsson all of a sudden the standard for top-20 picks?

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

Louis LeBlanc was never very good at any level of hockey after his Midget AAA season. On top of that he lacked the drive and character to succeed. Too bad, he didn't work out. There's nothing else to it.

 

[Habaneros]

I didn't get how they treated Yakupov either in his 2nd season onward, but he got a lot of chances.
Leblanc only played 8 games in the NHL after his rookie year. Yakupov played 302 more games in the NHL after his rookie year.

Yakupov went to Russia ..to get better...
20 goals in 42 games so far...and to boot he's a +19...that wasn't that way in the NHL...(Edmonton -33-35 etc)

I think will see him return to NHL...

 

[Habaneros]

If i was Louis LeBlanc, start training now and sign a PTO with Laval to start the season...

What do ya got to lose?

You're 28 yrs old..not 36..

Give it one last shot....

 

[DAChampion]

@Ozymandias ,

If we can raise the level of discussion for a bit,

I recall a clever saying that I read years ago. It went something along the lines of "when everyone's environment is the same, all variations are genetic. When everyone's genes are the same, all variations are environmental."

We live in some sort of hybrid world (I assume), but there can be a limit to how much environmental manipulation and intervention we can expect. It is certainly the case that hockey is not exhausting its potential talent pool, but there is a limit to what teams can expect to do. Changing a 19 year-old is more difficult than changing a 3 year-old, and moreover, the science on gene-environment interactions is not complete. The teams do not have a complete understanding of the best way to optimize every player, which is separate from them not necessarily having the means to.

How much intervention can we legitimately expect? A lot of your posts in this thread are kind of stating the obvious, as you're arguing against some completely insane opinions. But that's not necessarily a path for you to converge to enlightenment and truth.

As an example, it seems obvious to me that the best way to nurture hockey IQ is to dole out ice time. More game time equals more hockey IQ development. But, there's only so much ice time to go around. If one forward gets 22 minutes a game, then you ave another forward playing 7 minutes a game, or two forwards playing 11:30 a game (etc.).

Leblanc might have had confidence issues. How can a coaching and development staff reasonably help with a player's confidence?