You compare the kid with players of similar talent and thats Larkin, Ehlers, L.D etc
C William Nylander (2014, 8th, TOR) V [Mod warning in OP]
- Thread starter JawandaPuck
- Start date
You compare the kid with players of similar talent and thats Larkin, Ehlers, L.D etc
Agreed. I'd have Larkin and Ehlers just a shade above Nylander right now but it's tough to compare as they are in the NHL and are in a better situation. I don't see much separation. Maybe throw Nylander in the group with Dal Colle, Ritchie and Virtanen. Right now it's really personal preference with those four players. But things can change pretty quickly.
Last edited:
VictorLustig
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 8,881
- 2,954
Exactly, it's difficult to compare players playing in the NHL to players in the minors.
Larkin, Ehlers, etc are all NHL ready, Nylander, mdc, and virtanen are all in compatible situations of levels of NHL readiness at the moment. It's not so much a tier thing, more a peer thing.
Last edited:
lawrence
Registered User
- May 19, 2012
- 16,742
- 7,664
lemme guess.. you also watched all of Jake Virtannens pre season games for whatever odd reason?????
epic. this place is full of users that are literally full of it.
Semantics
PUBLIC ENEMY #1
If you've posted these articles before, then it should be really easy for you to pull them out again, right? But you can't. Because you're full of it.
Hah, cute, but I'm still not posting them yet again. You can google.
The two quotes are Babcock saying Nylander has a chance to make the team if he earns it, it's not a guarantee he'll be sent down.
Second quote is that while Nylander was good in preseason, he still has a lot to work on. Note the words a lot.
The same article Nylander is asked if he is ready for the NHL and he says he doesn't know.
No need to accuse me of being full of it, it just gets tiresome repeatedly posting the same article because everyone of my fellow leaf fans is repeating the same talking points.
1. Nylander was always going to be sent down no matter what.
2. Nylander is ready for the NHL.
Babcock himself has disputed both those points, but whatever, i don't expect you to read quotes from Babcock, and all of a sudden change your mind. A few quotes won't drown out hours of leaf radio, and discussion on tsn. Who cares what Babcock says I guess.
KGL
Auston 3:16
- Sep 5, 2014
- 7,499
- 9
Either provide the source or stop spreading misinformation. Babs has not said Nylander has "a lot of work to do". He has however said he's as talented a player as the Leafs have (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/babcock-nylander-as-talented-as-we-have/), he's said he wants Nylander to be 'over ready' (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nylander-making-babcocks-decision-tough/), and he's said Nylander has to bring it every game, which is the only criticism he really gave of Nylander (https://twitter.com/michael_traikos/status/648543636146245633).
Now that that is cleared up, there seems to be a lack of understanding regarding how Nylander was always destined for the AHL, well Bob McKenzie seems to think that was the case (https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2015/09/24/bob-mckenzie-william-nylander-destined-for-the-ahl/), but what does he know, right?
I looked for a source for what you're saying, couldn't find. I did find a source for where Babs says he doesn't know if Nylander isn't ready (Which is apparently the same article according to you) and once again, no mention of Nylander having "a lot of work to do".
http://t.thestar.com/#/article/spor...e-maple-leafs-despite-impressive-showing.html
Babcock says Nylander still has a lot to work on in this article
Babcock also says it was never impossible for Nylander to make the team, but he had to earn a spot. Dispelling the myth, that Nylander was destined for the AHL.
You are welcome, feel free to continue to ignore mike Babcock.
Babcock says Nylander still has a lot to work on in this article
Babcock also says it was never impossible for Nylander to make the team, but he had to earn a spot. Dispelling the myth, that Nylander was destined for the AHL.
You are welcome, feel free to continue to ignore mike Babcock.
KGL
Auston 3:16
- Sep 5, 2014
- 7,499
- 9
Of course he's going to say he has a shot, you're not going to tell every young guy coming into camp that there's zero chance they make the team. Does that make sense to you? Nylander was destined for the AHL, it's pretty obvious to anyone who watched his pre-season games. He was our best player, he is NHL ready. It's pretty obvious he was destined for the AHL.
As for the quote of him having a lot of work to do, I'd need some context with that. I don't think it's important as you're making it seem, just seems like a passing comment where he says that he has stuff to work on, like everyone does.
Again, Babcock ruled out that it was a given that Nylander was destined for the AHL in the article, that point is specifically commented on.
Again, Babcock said that Nylander still has a lot to work on.
However you want to delude yourself, feel free. Your response was predictable, and hilarious.
Asked for source, source provided, ignore content of source, Move goal posts, rinse, repeat. Sigh.
KGL
Auston 3:16
- Sep 5, 2014
- 7,499
- 9
Again, Babcock wouldn't say straight out that Nylander has zero chance of making the NHL, that would be a stupid thing to say. Bob McKenzie (You may have heard of him, he's highly respected) said Nylander was destined for the AHL. Bob has no horse in this race, he's calling it like it is and that's how it is.
Again, the context behind that comment isn't clear. I'm not sure you quite understand how context can effect the meaning of different comments. I found the source video for where Babs said it (based on the other comments he made it in) and it's such a throwaway comment that it wasn't even included in the video. You're putting more stock into that comment than it's worth.
Last edited:
So, at least you can stop accusing me of spreading misinformation.
These two things occurred:
1. Babcock has said Nylander had a chance to make the team, it appears he simply didn't play at a high enough level for Babcock to earn a roster spot. Hence AHL.
2. Babcock has said Nylander still has a lot to work on. Hopefully he works on whatever Babcock felt needed improving while on the marlies, and has a great year next year.
However one chooses to spin them, or whatever, is up to them. All I know is that AccorDing to Babcock, Nylander had a chance to make the team, but apparently still has a lot o work on.
This would seem to conflict with the opinion that Nylander played well enough to get a roster spot, but was always going to be sent down.
That's all I know cuz that's all that was in the article. Everything else is speculation.
Edit: I have never seen a quote from Babcock to the contrary, Quotes that would support the notion that Nylander played well enough to earn a roster spot, but was sent to the AHL because of reasons.
These two things occurred:
1. Babcock has said Nylander had a chance to make the team, it appears he simply didn't play at a high enough level for Babcock to earn a roster spot. Hence AHL.
2. Babcock has said Nylander still has a lot to work on. Hopefully he works on whatever Babcock felt needed improving while on the marlies, and has a great year next year.
However one chooses to spin them, or whatever, is up to them. All I know is that AccorDing to Babcock, Nylander had a chance to make the team, but apparently still has a lot o work on.
This would seem to conflict with the opinion that Nylander played well enough to get a roster spot, but was always going to be sent down.
That's all I know cuz that's all that was in the article. Everything else is speculation.
Edit: I have never seen a quote from Babcock to the contrary, Quotes that would support the notion that Nylander played well enough to earn a roster spot, but was sent to the AHL because of reasons.
Last edited:
joe89
#5
- Apr 30, 2009
- 20,316
- 179
What's happening is that Leafs are going the Red Wings route, and that includes Babcock behind the bench. Just look at what age our (top) prospects cracked the NHL under Babcock and expect much of the same. It's a strict tie goes to the veteran system in camp, while prospects get their chance via callups.
that is such BS and you know it! you call your self a Leaf fan yet it appears as though you didn't watch a single pre season game. If you had it would be obvious to you that Nylander was better than all except JVR and Kadri.
To your point of Babs saying he had a chance to make the team, I find it comical that you don't see the lip service part of it especially in hindsight that Nylander was better than almost every single forward on both ends of the ice.
Its especially annoying when guys like Rantanen, Ehlers, Larkin made their teams and Nylander was just as good as them infact better that all except Larkin. So for you to imply that he wasn't good enough is comical.
Do you honestly expect them to say that? to say yea he should be in the NHL but we are going to be soo bad we want to keep him away from that? are you new to hockey?
KGL
Auston 3:16
- Sep 5, 2014
- 7,499
- 9
I would, except you are continuing to spread misinformation.
1. As stated, of course Babs would say he has a chance. Bob McKenzie said is was a forgone conclusion he was AHL bound. This was made clear by the fact he was our best player most nights and still went to the AHL.
2. Yes, he did say that, although you seem to be taking it in a different way than it was intended. If this was an important comment Toronto media would have gone crazy with it, that's pretty obvious considering how they have been in the past. This was a throwaway comment, continue using it to reinforce your agenda though.
Yup, Detroit and Winnipeg are both organizations that don't rush their prospects. I believe the jets were wuoted as trying to find reasons to send trouba back down, but simply couldn't. His first game, he led the team in ice time, got a goal and an assist, and earned the first star. I believe Ehlers is also the only other prospect to play before getting at least two years of development in the minors after being drafted. If one watched Ehlers, they would see how strong he is without the put, and how strong he is in the corners.m his line is number one in the league for puck possession at the moment, and it's not like he's being guided by grizzled vets, he's playing with schiefele and Perrault. Both players clearly earned roster spots.
Larkin, which I'm sure most in this thread watched last night, is equal if not more so strong without the puck, and can absolutley handle himself along the boards.
Both players are uNdisputably NHL ready, and earned their roster spots, wether it they would have been trying out on the jets, wings or leafs.
Watching Nylander, it was evident he is probably stronger offensively than Larkin and Ehlers, but simply lazy, or unsure of himself without the puck, and his work on the boards in his own end leaves much to be desired. Clearly not NHL ready.
Anyways, just mine, and apparently babcocks opinion.
Last edited:
What misinformation am I spreading?
Did Babcock not say those two things? I haven't added any interpretation to his quotes. Just restating them.
KGL
Auston 3:16
- Sep 5, 2014
- 7,499
- 9
That Nylander isn't NHL ready when he clearly is and that "he has a lot of work to do" is a negative comment when in reality it's clearly just a throwaway comment that probably applies to every player on the team.
Roomba With a Bauer
Registered User
- Sep 11, 2007
- 4,511
- 3,135
Yep. In order to Babcock to let a rookie play, the rookie has to MORE than NHL ready. He has to be able to play a 200 foot game and basically outperform every other player competing for his roster spot. And if he is a top-six forward, that means he has to blow away every other possible top-six player on the team to earn a spot. Babcock won't slot a top-six rookie into a bottom-six role.
If I were a Leaf fan, I wouldn't be expecting Nylander until 2016 or even early 2017. That's not a knock on Nylander. That's a knock on Babcock.
I don't see what the big deal is. Some players like Larkin have an all round game that makes them NHL ready a little earlier. Just like Horvat last year.
It doesn't mean Larkin will end up better than Nylander. But to suggest that Nylander had no chance to make the Leafs seems like a stretch. Babcock clearly feels that he needs to work on his game away from the puck.
It doesn't mean Larkin will end up better than Nylander. But to suggest that Nylander had no chance to make the Leafs seems like a stretch. Babcock clearly feels that he needs to work on his game away from the puck.
Atomos2
Registered User
In your opinion. Not Babcock's. When you are comparing players from different teams. Keep in mind they are players from different teams.
