Team_Spirit
95% Elliotte
- Jul 3, 2002
- 37,344
- 26,123
Player Discussion Juraj Slafkovsky Discussion
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
Yes. And the definition of "success" is exactly what so many posters here missed with Slaf.
He, his coach, his GM, and observers with experience in sport development, all could see quite well the relative "success" being achieved.
Posters, pundits and fans obsessed with a narrow and simplistic stat lens of "success" couldn't see it.
Devil is in the details. Inability to appreciate the nuances of success in motor learning and performance execution is apparent in many of the takes complaining about Slaf being "rushed".
Speaking of overused cliches/figures of speech lol
Confusing performance development with "fear of his own shadow", "low hockey iq", "Bambi skating" et. is a common occurrence in these threads. It's this confusion that reflects poor understanding or lack of experience with athletic performance development.
This is a simplistic view.
You're here speaking more to the emotional aspects of performance development... An area the team scoured for heavily and by every external evidence, got right in assessing Slaf's ability to emotionally handle the road ahead of him. It appears that it was in large part this aspect that moved them away from the more polished and higher ranked Wright.
Reaching a players performance ceiling has far less to do with "amount of time dominating at lower levels" than many fans assume. Some elite performers are so good so early that they spend most of their youth playing at levels ahead of their physical ability & so never/rarely "dominate" until get get to a level they can stay at long enough for their physical maturity to allow that to happen... Or, they so lack in the physical gifts relative to other elite talents that they don't hit dominance until they've fully physically matured
You see that a bit more in Football, Josh Allen and Tom Brady are two examples that somewhat fit each
Sure... But the team assessed that what he most needed was a well surrounded environment to learn (& in some cases unlearn) specific movement and performance skills. They decided (correctly in my opinion, based on the progression and outcomes to date) that Montreal was the best environment to achieve that and that it would be more beneficial to him than simply building off of his Olympic "success" and going to some lesser pro league where he would likely be encouraged to prioritize scoring & immediate performance impact over his own holistic athletic development.
That Montreal was a fit for that has everything to do with the phase the organization and roster was in... Had we been a playoff focused team (say having secured Slaf via a trade or lucky lottery win), I don't doubt they might have sent him elsewhere... Just a few weeks ago MSL made a comment in regards to Roy that highlights this (the situation of the team not being as conducive as it previously was to development prioritized focus in roster and play allocation).
Again here, the nuances matter immensely
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Catanddogguitarrr
Registered User
That was a bad year draft, let's say it as it is. Knowing that, at least Habs picked a tall and strong player who will be helpful in some way. I think he will improve his shot long term cuz he doesn't use it enough. He will become a winner in battle boards once he will be a stronger man at 22 and 23. And he will improve his hockey sense I hope, it's all things that improve with time. Look at Eller between when he was an Habs and the career he had after. And Lehkonen too. We need some patience.
Catanddogguitarrr
Registered User
C'est ça ou une image de belles-mères, either that or a picture of mothers-in-law, lol.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
I am curious if Demidov's arrival next year leads to MSL trying a new top line next year, and how Slaf would respond.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
I think Slaf-Newhook-Caufield would probably be good enough to be an at least mid-tier 2nd line if we can't get that elusive 2C, then an acquisition of a top line winger to play with Demidov and Suzuki could be another option.
Ultimately we'd add both a top line W and a 2C, though.
CristianoRonaldo
Registered User
We need to be patient, if everything goes well, he may be a 70 points player, who is hard to against, that's useful. Next year, he needs to take a step.
Less common in no small part because there are so many pathway options prior to the NHL... Not every sport has so many alternative pathways.
Though one could view the NCAA exodus of young talents after 1-2 yrs, before they truly dominate that level of play, as a bit of a parallel. That is quite common and one might well argue that a player like Newhook would've hit the NHL with more confidence had he stayed another year or two in NCAA. I don't particularly agree, nor do most organizations/players, but the argument can be made.
OldCraig71
Registered User
If he is going to be a 70-point player, it will mean that he produces in the first half of the season, and so far, he has struggled to do that. Slaf can be dominating when he's "on," but it has to happen more consistently.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
Does anybody make that argument? That seems really specious. Newhook spent 1.5 seasons in the NCAA (I think there was an injury) and had already dominated it.
MasterD
Giggidy Giggidy Goo
- Jul 1, 2004
- 5,586
- 5,730
No, come on now. This is the team that played Scott Gomez at the end of his career. We had David Desharnais. Benoit Pouliot. There's a long list of guys that were way more underperforming and frustrating that a TWENTY YEARS OLD Slafkovsky.
I really want to discuss this respectfully and politely but that take is just delusional.
Unless you're really, really young.
- Jan 18, 2022
- 6,826
- 14,374
Projection.
Unfortunately, I’m not really, really young.
Kostitsyn, Gomez, DD, Marc Bergevin — yes they bothered me a lot. Kostitsyn for his inconsistency and false promise, Gomez for his perimeter play, Desharnais for his lack of athleticism… Bergevin for a litany of reasons. Hamrlik’s refusal to ever play the body bothered me, it ruined all his other good aspects for me. Pouliot? I wasn’t among those who expected anything special from him, he, Drouin, Domi and Rene Bourque and whatnot never bothered me (same reason why Laine doesn’t bother me). Gionta’s awful snap shot from the top of the circles — very VERY frustrating.
Slafkovsky is the 1st overall pick and he’s treated like one, he’s protected like one, he’s given opportunities like one, overtime, icetime, PP time, contract… and he doesn’t play like one, doesn’t produce like one, isn’t reliable like one. He clearly doesn’t have the game knowledge that comes with being the best of a cohort. No one says “boy, I wish we had Slafkovsky on our team.”
I was as glad as anyone when he had a surge of performance in recent weeks and I’m frustrated that he’s back to being a bozo. More often than not he’s not a fun player to watch and follow and track with a spotlight… it’s very frustrating, more often than not.
And yet he’s only 20 and his future is unwritten. I won’t insist that he’s the next Kostitsyn or Zubrus even though it really feels that way.
River Meadow
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2016
- 5,943
- 9,967
I'm curious, do you really think that?
From what I remember, there was no real consensus at the time because of how terrible and uninterested Wright looked in the playoffs before the draft.
It was more like people were hoping whichever choice the Habs made was the right one.
Current art Ross front runner has nearly identical D4 & D5 seasons production -wise (both under 70 points), before "breaking out" to 85points in D6... Hasn't looked back since.
Progression would be great. We all want it a fraction of how bad he wants it. Reality is that this time next year he'll be wrapping up his 21-year old, D4 season... And regardless of how good, bad or plateau it is, he'll still have a lot of time and work to put in to find out just how good he can be.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
If you're making analogies to things that don't exist then consider that you might be missing the point.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
No need to be petty because your poor arguments don't hold up. this thread isn't about me or you, so let's stick to Slaf, sha'll we?
Gaylord Q Tinkledink
Registered User
- Apr 29, 2018
- 28,646
- 41,553
So far in his career he's widely inconsistent.
The worst part is he's more consistent in being a non-factor than anything else.
He's also pretty old at the ripe age of 20..
Gotta give him time and it's frustrating as f***.
The worst part is he's more consistent in being a non-factor than anything else.
He's also pretty old at the ripe age of 20..
Gotta give him time and it's frustrating as f***.
Last edited:
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 30,021
- 23,239
I think I remember that about Wright. It was widely assumed that he'd be selected 1st overall but then he had that anemic memorial Cup run. And thus far Wright shows no indication that he'll ever be a great player, though maybe he'll be a good one i don't know.
In hindsight Slaf is the correct choice at 1st overall among the 5 or so players that were discussed. What remains unclear is if he's being used properly and what role he can play on the team moving forward.
CristianoRonaldo
Registered User
Sure, but we want to see some progression, he will be paid close to 8M/year, of course he has time, he's only 21 years old. I can confidently say that Slaf won't reach the Art Ross level. Like 70 points would be good enough, anything more is a bonus.
Best part about it is that if he's at ~70pts next year, I bet we'll still hear from him some frustration that he isn't even better than that
