Player Discussion: Cole Perfetti 10th OA pick

[snowkiddin]

Yeah I know, I'm just frustrated with this group as a whole right now. It's going on 4 years and the same issues over and over again are plaguing this team.

They have been so damn frustrating to watch now since midway through 18-19.

This is true but I honestly think coaching is a huge part of the problem.

It’s the same issues. Less than popular lineup decisions (I won’t say “bad” since that’s largely subjective but I don’t think anyone loved top pair Beaulieu), a joke of a defensive system, and routinely not showing up in some games …

I just think you gotta kick Moe to the curb, and then if the issues maintain with a new coach, then you start a new youth movement and build around the Heinola/Perfetti/Lucius/Chibrikov core.

 

[DRW204]

Yeah I know, I'm just frustrated with this group as a whole right now. It's going on 4 years and the same issues over and over again are plaguing this team.

They have been so damn frustrating to watch now since midway through 18-19.

17-18 is the outlier.

 

[surixon]

17-18 is the outlier.

Starting to look that way.

 

[LowLefty]

It's all about roster optimization for me that is all.

I mean moving kids right into the top 6 early in their development clearly hurt Montreal last year when Suzuki and Caufield played big roles on that run.

It clearly hurt Tampa when they put Point right into their top 6 at age 20.

Smart teams put players in position to succeed.

If you don't feel he's ready for that role then he should have gone straight to the Moose as far as I'm concerned.

The Jets are a very good D&D team - they go through the steps to develop their players.
I have no issue with how they do this - in fact, I think they do a good job in hanging on to key players under fair contracts.

Cole's time with the Jets, even if it wasn't in a role you thought was right, will be valuable and time well spent.
The examples that you point out are not typical - there are always exceptions -

Cole's time on the Jets has been called out by many as a great opportunity - and most of the same have stated that he will be better off heading back for further development with the Moose.
But somehow it becomes another failing of our coaching -
It was not a failing - it was the plan - and the plan was to give him some time in PS and reg season - and that's what he got. (and he'll be likely be back)

I heard the same rants from the "experts" on Petan, Niku, Dano - they were all players that should have been given better minutes, more opportunity to show us how great they were -
And we heard the same replies from fans - why don't we provide the same opportunity to our young stars as Tampa, Habs, etc, do??? You don't hear much about this bunch anymore - I wonder why.

 

[DRW204]

I hate this but it's true. Is Perfetti totally NHL ready in all aspects? Probably not. Is he ready enough to learn on the fly in the NHL? Probably yes. Is he better today offensively than all but 3-4 of our forwards? Also likely.

...but Paul Maurice is on the hot seat this season. The team is cap strapped and likely feeling the heat on the pocket books with the COVID and ticket sales situation. In Paul's mind keeping Perfetti up to grow into a bonafide role isn't the play, he needs his trusty minimal upside Toninatos and Beaulieus to play since they've proven they can at least tread water in the bottom 6/pair - regardless of the fact that Perfetti is a better player now and in future. With his job on the line Perfetti is still just too raw for Paul.

 

[surixon]

The Jets are a very good D&D team - they go through the steps to develop their players.
I have no issue with how they do this - in fact, I think they do a good job in hanging on to key players under fair contracts.

Cole's time with the Jets, even if it wasn't in a role you thought was right, will be valuable and time well spent.
The examples that you point out are not typical - there are always exceptions -

Cole's time on the Jets has been called out by many as a great opportunity - and most of the same have stated that he will be better off heading back for further development with the Moose.
But somehow it becomes another failing of our coaching -
It was not a failing - it was the plan - and the plan was to give him some time in PS and reg season - and that's what he got. (and he'll be likely be back)

I heard the same rants from the "experts" on Petan, Niku, Dano - they were all players that should have been given better minutes, more opportunity to show us how great they were -
And we heard the same replies from fans - why don't we provide the same opportunity to our young stars as Tampa, Habs, etc, do??? You don't hear much about this bunch anymore - I wonder why.

Anyhow I have no issue with him in the AHL, thought he should have been used better here in his short time up especially given how shitty out pp and top 6 have been. That's all I'm going to say on this now.

Hopefully he goes down and destroys the AHL and forces Moe to use him properly the next time he gets called up.

 

[scelaton]

It's all about roster optimization for me that is all.

I mean moving kids right into the top 6 early in their development clearly hurt Montreal last year when Suzuki and Caufield played big roles on that run.

It clearly hurt Tampa when they put Point right into their top 6 at age 20.

Smart teams put players in position to succeed.

If you don't feel he's ready for that role then he should have gone straight to the Moose as far as I'm concerned.

All those players were in their 20s when they succeeded in the NHL.
Of all the things to be upset about this early, the development of Perfetti is last on my list.

 

[Romang67]

The Jets are a very good D&D team - they go through the steps to develop their players.
I have no issue with how they do this - in fact, I think they do a good job in hanging on to key players under fair contracts.

Cole's time with the Jets, even if it wasn't in a role you thought was right, will be valuable and time well spent.
The examples that you point out are not typical - there are always exceptions -

Cole's time on the Jets has been called out by many as a great opportunity - and most of the same have stated that he will be better off heading back for further development with the Moose.
But somehow it becomes another failing of our coaching -
It was not a failing - it was the plan - and the plan was to give him some time in PS and reg season - and that's what he got. (and he'll be likely be back)

I heard the same rants from the "experts" on Petan, Niku, Dano - they were all players that should have been given better minutes, more opportunity to show us how great they were -
And we heard the same replies from fans - why don't we provide the same opportunity to our young stars as Tampa, Habs, etc, do??? You don't hear much about this bunch anymore - I wonder why.

Are we? Except for one glorious season, we have been an aggressively mediocre team for our entire existence. We've cracked the 100 point barrier exactly once.

We may not be the worst in the league, but calling us a very good draft and develop team feels very generous.

 

[LowLefty]

Well, nothing motivates a young gun like the inevitability of demotion.

He just has to put in the hours on learning to play the right way, take care of the details, adopt that shooter’s mentality and hone his locker-room skills, and then he can look forward to a long and insulated career where his on-ice performance is largely irrelevant, a la Beaulieu, our Eternal 7th D.

Being honest and upfront with your players is not a bad thing - they are not children.
There's a game plan for Cole and it was likely spelled out in detail -
He probably knows the org is very encouraged by his play to date and that he has a great future with the Jets if he works hard and continues to develop.
There's more than one way to motivate

 

[LowLefty]

Are we? Except for one glorious season, we have been an aggressively mediocre team for our entire existence. We've cracked the 100 point barrier exactly once.

We may not be the worst in the league, but calling us a very good draft and develop team feels very generous.

Right - I thought that was all on the coach.
Based on the dialogue around here lately, it most certainly is

 

[surixon]

I hate this but it's true. Is Perfetti totally NHL ready in all aspects? Probably not. Is he ready enough to learn on the fly in the NHL? Probably yes. Is he better today offensively than all but 3-4 of our forwards? Also likely.

...but Paul Maurice is on the hot seat this season. The team is cap strapped and likely feeling the heat on the pocket books with the COVID and ticket sales situation. In Paul's mind keeping Perfetti up to grow into a bonafide role isn't the play, he needs his trusty minimal upside Toninatos and Beaulieus to play since they've proven they can at least tread water in the bottom 6/pair - regardless of the fact that Perfetti is a better player now and in future. With his job on the line Perfetti is still just too raw for Paul.

Your last post just sums up why he continually fails when expectations are high. When the chips are down he refuses to take risks that may provide greater benefits later in the year.

Can't use Ves or Harkins on the PK despite them killing them well for the Moose and in preseason. Now we have to use our 35 plus year old vets and tire them out when their role is to provide offense.

Can't use a player like Cole who was near the top of the AHL in PP points last year to help our PP when it's struggling.

Why even have an AHL team if you aren't going to use players in roles they have been developed for.

His extreme risk aversion and inability to trust young players to do jobs right away is one of the big reasons why he comes up short in crunch time imo.

 

[Romang67]

Right - I thought that was all on the coach.
Based on the dialogue around here lately, it most certainly is

Developing certainly falls on the coach to an extent.

 

[surixon]

Right - I thought that was all on the coach.
Based on the dialogue around here lately, it most certainly is

Last I heard Moe has had a big part in their development. I mean he's the one beaming about just how great Blake, Mark, and Kyle play away from the puck.

 

[surixon]

Developing certainly falls on the coach to an extent.

Imo they have been developing over the last number of years.... bad habits that is.

You never saw the same level of lack of attention to detail on the back check from our key guys in 2018 as you do now.

Mark never cheated for offense as much as he's done the last few years etc.

 

[LowLefty]

Last I heard Moe has had a big part in their development. I mean he's the one beaming about just how great Blake, Mark, and Kyle play away from the puck.

I was referring to the Moose - I thought we were discussing Cole

 

[LowLefty]

Imo they have been developing over the last number of years.... bad habits that is.

You never saw the same level of lack of attention to detail on the back check from our key guys in 2018 as you do now.

Mark never cheated for offense as much as he's done the last few years etc.

So you feel they are developing Scheif at this point?

 

[LowLefty]

Developing certainly falls on the coach to an extent.

Yes, to an extent -
I believe most of it falls before the NHL has them in the lineup.

 

[LowLefty]

Your last post just sums up why he continually fails when expectations are high. When the chips are down he refuses to take risks that may provide greater benefits later in the year.

Can't use Ves or Harkins on the PK despite them killing them well for the Moose and in preseason. Now we have to use our 35 plus year old vets and tire them out when their role is to provide offense.

Can't use a player like Cole who was near the top of the AHL in PP points last year to help our PP when it's struggling.

Why even have an AHL team if you aren't going to use players in roles they have been developed for.

His extreme risk aversion and inability to trust young players to do jobs right away is one of the big reasons why he comes up short in crunch time imo.

Cole is not planned for the NHL TY - they've covered that.
If we can't put together a PP with this line up, do you really think Cole is the answer or is it something else.
I've just set you up for a Mo rant - take it and run with it

 

[Romang67]

Yes, to an extent -
I believe most of it falls before the NHL has them in the lineup.

Maurice certainly thinks that players should be fully developed before they enter the NHL. He has repeatedly stated so, in his "the NHL is not a developmental league".

I think that's nonsense.

 

[surixon]

So you feel they are developing Scheif at this point?

People are always developing, it's a fallacy to think all of that development happens before the NHL.

So yes Scheifele, Conner etc are still growing and developing.

What really are our coaches actually paid for if to not put in place a set of standards and hold the players accountable to maintaining those standards. If players game isn't meeting those standards in some areas is it not the coaches job to you know coach a player?

 

[LowLefty]

Maurice certainly thinks that players should be fully developed before they enter the NHL. He has repeatedly stated so, in his "the NHL is not a developmental league".

I think that's nonsense.

There might be a fine line between coaching and development
Personally, I feel young players need the A to develop the basic needs required to play in the NHL - and that happens in the A.
Adapting to the speed and weight of playing with / against mature players -

And I don't think it stops there - I'm sure players will continue to develop through their careers but I don't know how much of it has to do with the guy behind the bench.
Maybe more to do with the Org and their development teams / or player personal trainers.

 

[LowLefty]

People are always developing, it's a fallacy to think all of that development happens before the NHL.

So yes Scheifele, Conner etc are still growing and developing.

What really are our coaches actually paid for if to not put in place a set of standards and hold the players accountable to maintaining those standards. If players game isn't meeting those standards in some areas is it not the coaches job to you know coach a player?

I didn't say it did - and I just replied to a similar post above this one.

 

[surixon]

Cole is not planned for the NHL TY - they've covered that.
If we can't put together a PP with this line up, do you really think Cole is the answer or is it something else.
I've just set you up for a Mo rant - take it and run with it

I have already said I'm fine with him in the A but he could/should have been used in the first three games on the PP as his game/role on the pp is the same type of role that Mark/Blake have played for us. Like piece in for like piece out.

My issue with Maurice is that it doesn't seem like he recognizes the fit for certain situations. Imo he purposefully or couldn't see that he nerfed his PP by going with his Ill suited vets vs going with a player who brings the exact element to the PP that is out of the lineup. By doing so he took away specific set attacking plays and it resorted in our undermanned PP units being ridiculously simple to defend and thus ineffective. It calls into question his ability properly analyze and solve a problem or he lets his bias get in the way when making decisions.

It's the same thing with using Stastny/Wheeler on the PK instead of using Harkins/Ves who have had their AHL development already in those areas and bring many of the attributes Moe values for that role. Both looked juat fine if not good on the PK in camp so why is Maurice playing older and slowing down offensive players in a role that he has In house developed hungry to prove themselves players for. All he's doing is risking his scorers to the chance of an injury blocking a shot, and he's tiring older players out. At their ages Stastny and Wheeler likely need all the energy they have to do what their paid to do and score well.

So I guess it comes down to this, I've seen way too many suboptimal decisions by Maurice to start the year in a year where he needs to be on top of his decision making.


Maybe he makes no difference but maybe he helps get a pp goal or two in the first few games when we wete struggling on it. As for the PP in general, yes I expect it to normalize once we get all our pieces back and they make a couple modifications to it.

 

[LowLefty]

I have already said I'm fine with him in the A but he could/should have been used in the first three games on the PP as his game/role on the pp is the same type of role that Mark/Blake have played for us. Like piece in for like piece out.

My issue with Maurice is that it doesn't seem like he recognizes the fit for certain situations. Imo he purposefully or couldn't see that he nerfed his PP by going with his Ill suited vets vs going with a player who brings the exact element to the PP that is out of the lineup. By doing so he took away specific set attacking plays and it resorted in our undermanned PP units being ridiculously simple to defend and thus ineffective. It calls into question his ability properly analyze and solve a problem or he lets his bias get in the way when making decisions.

It's the same thing with using Stastny/Wheeler on the PK instead of using Harkins/Ves who have had their AHL development already in those areas and bring many of the attributes Moe values for that role. Both looked juat fine if not good on the PK in camp so why is Maurice playing older and slowing down offensive players in a role that he has In house developed hungry to prove themselves players for. All he's doing is risking his scorers to the chance of an injury blocking a shot, and he's tiring older players out. At their ages Stastny and Wheeler likely need all the energy they have to do what their paid to do and score well.

So I guess it comes down to this, I've seen way too many suboptimal decisions by Maurice to start the year in a year where he needs to be on top of his decision making.


Maybe he makes no difference but maybe he helps get a pp goal or two in the first few games when we wete struggling on it. As for the PP in general, yes I expect it to normalize once we get all our pieces back and they make a couple modifications to it.

It's funny how these discussions go - the post chain starts to get so long that we almost forget what we are talking about.
I'm guilty of that sometimes - and this might be one of those times.

We disagree on Cole's usage - especially the PP
I don't want Cole on the PP for a handful of games - I want the coach to fix the PP using the roster players that he is going forward with.
He has tons of taken to ice a solid PP - and he needs to find answers to the issues that are more long term than adding Cole while he is up.

I agree with the rest of the PK content - although it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

 

[surixon]

It's funny how these discussions go - the post chain starts to get so long that we almost forget what we are talking about.
I'm guilty of that sometimes - and this might be one of those times.

We disagree on Cole's usage - especially the PP
I don't want Cole on the PP for a handful of games - I want the coach to fix the PP using the roster players that he is going forward with.
He has tons of taken to ice a solid PP - and he needs to find answers to the issues that are more long term than adding Cole while he is up.

I agree with the rest of the PK content - although it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

Well you did ask me to go off on a tangent on what this was about so I happily obligaed :p

I would rather not be discussing these things as I juat want a good and winning team on the ice but just seems like we are swimming in circles with the same issues remaining the same issues.