Triumph
Registered User
- Oct 2, 2007
- 13,613
- 16,586
If they come out and just absolutely dominate right from the start of training camp, then fine, leave them up. That is something I am okay with, but I am not necessarily expecting that. If they show anything less, there is absolutely 0 harm in letting them play a year in the AHL. None. Getting kids acclimated to the pro game or getting another year developing in the pro game makes the transition into the NHL much easier. If they dominate in the AHL, let them dominate the AHL. Let them learn what they can and can't do in an environment that is much more forgiving than the NHL. The AHL is, at its core, a developmental league. I cannot think of a single instance where a player playing in the AHL in his D+2 or D+3 has ever harmed their development.
You said it yourself that you don't expect them to be very good in the NHL. In the AHL, these kids can iron out the wrinkles in their game that would get exposed if they were to step right into the NHL. I don't agree with the reasoning for wanting kids to be injury callups and be yo-yoed between leagues. That is something that, in my opinion, harms more than helps.
The AHL is a developmental league - for 3rd line players. The majority of top line guys in this league barely spend any time there at all. If talented young players show themselves as capable of playing in the NHL, or worthy of a chance at that league, it's incumbent on the team to give them a chance at it. And yes, that means being injury replacements, if those injuries are deemed to be long enough.
The reason you can't think of an instance of a player playing in the AHL harming their development is because whereas it's very easy to point to examples like Zacha of players who had lackluster rookie seasons and were overmatched, it's much more nebuluous to point to players whose team gave up on them or wrote them off.