Juraj Slafkovsky - Year Two

[Lafleurs Guy]

To be fair, it was the weakest of consensus. Not sure "stop spreading crap" is remotely appropriate here.

I don’t care if it’s the weakest of consensus. We took the guy who most scouts picked number one. Totally fine to say we took the consensus pick.

Guys with an agenda, a dictionary and an “ackshually” I don’t have time for.

 

[Jaynki]

I'm not sure if Slaf actually played better.... but Newhook and Anderson sure did!

Rest assured. The eye test match the data for yesterday.

 

[Revansky]

I feel like a guy like Byfield is a good example of a possible trajectory for Slaf (even if Byfield was a better prospect when drafted). Nearly ppg in his third season (short sample though), with lackluster production in his first two seasons (10 pts in 40 games, 22 in 53 games and shorts stints in the AHL). People were saying the same thing as Slaf : akward looking, not assertive enough, not physical, seems to take to much time to process the game, etc.

Bigger guys seem to need time to build up muscles and get use to their body before maximizing their physical attributes. And most player need times to process a higher pace of play.

Like other have said, put him on the first line for 10-15 games and if it's not working send him down in the AHL for a stint where he would be able to adapt to a slower pace and gain confidence if it's not working.

That's the only thing worrying me, that management keeps him to long at the NHL level and stall a bit is development.

 

[morhilane]

He was 4th in September 2021 on Bob’s list. 5th in January 2022. Not late whatsoever

People acting like Slaf was ranked out of the top 5 in his D0 and raising last minute is just part of the great historical revision some people are working on these days.

 

[salwan]

He needs to play with better players.

As I said last year, I don’t get bringing up an 18 year old and playing him on the 3rd line. Play him with skilled players if you’re going to have him in the NHL.

I sincerely hope they keep him on the first and honestly evaluate him for the next 1-15 games. Stop screwing around with him on the third… Play him on the top line and then decide if he should stay. And if he looks out of place SEND HIM DOWN.

International tournament play probably doesn't translate to the NHL context in any shape or form, but it's true that he initially started on the bottom lines and grew with more and more responsibility and better quality linemates, taking advantage of every opportunity coach Ramsey gave him until he ended up as the team's leading scorer.

 

[Habssince89]

I'm curious, since we often have similar opinions. How would you describe that goal?

He was left alone to drive the net, yet I'd say the goalie was weak on the short side, and Slaf whiffed on his shot which his the goalie's shoulder, but puck still ended in the net.

Omg what a bad description of the goal

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

International tournament play probably doesn't translate to the NHL context in any shape or form, but it's true that he initially started on the bottom lines and grew with more and more responsibility and better quality linemates, taking advantage of every opportunity coach Ramsey gave him until he ended up as the team's leading scorer.

As I’ve said on him before, he’s a bit of a mystery box in my view. I think Montreal has mishandled him and I think he should’ve been in Europe last year.

I’m glad to see they’re finally playing him with our best players. We need to see what he can actually do under favourable conditions. He needs time there to show what he can do. Then we can evaluate.

I suspect he’ll likely be in the AHL this year at some point and I don’t think that would be a bad thing. Just my opinion.

 

[Jaynki]

Curious why didn’t you post this bleating after games 2-10.

The "highs" we saw yesterday and during TC are way more important than the games 2-10.

The fact that those games where his 42-50 in his career is important to take into context.

If it was games 442 to 450 and he was 25 years old then we would not give a shit about his "highs" and would be annoyed by his inconsistency and sometimes, unexpected flash.

But since he is a 19 years old progressing, its all about seeing more and more of his potential (we do) and seeing less and less of inconsistency and passive play.(we don't, yet). Its all about his potential and growing into it.

 

[ReHabs]

I feel like a guy like Byfield is a good example of a possible trajectory for Slaf (even if Byfield was a better prospect when drafted). Nearly ppg in his third season (short sample though), with lackluster production in his first two seasons (10 pts in 40 games, 22 in 53 games and shorts stints in the AHL). People were saying the same thing as Slaf : akward looking, not assertive enough, not physical, seems to take to much time to process the game, etc.

Bigger guys seem to need time to build up muscles and get use to their body before maximizing their physical attributes. And most player need times to process a higher pace of play.

Like other have said, put him on the first line for 10-15 games and if it's not working send him down in the AHL for a stint where he would be able to adapt to a slower pace and gain confidence if it's not working.

That's the only thing worrying me, that management keeps him to long at the NHL level and stall a bit is development.

How are they comparable when Byfield has spent so much time in the AHL and the Habs refuse to entertain the notion for Slaf?

The "highs" we saw yesterday and during TC are way more important than the games 2-10.

The fact that those games where his 42-50 in his career is important to take into context.

If it was games 442 to 450 and he was 25 years old then we would not give a shit about his "highs" and would be annoyed by his inconsistency and sometimes, unexpected flash.

But since he is a 19 years old progressing, its all about seeing more and more of his potential (we do) and seeing less and less of inconsistency and passive play.(we don't, yet). Its all about his potential and growing into it.

I think I understand what you’re saying but you’re referring to the evaluation of the prospect, not the evaluation of how his development is being handled. I don’t think there’s much purpose to evaluate the prospect — he’s ours and we should just accept it.

I don’t care if it’s the weakest of consensus. We took the guy who most scouts picked number one. Totally fine to say we took the consensus pick.

Guys with an agenda, a dictionary and an “ackshually” I don’t have time for.

It’s not agenda pushing to falsely insist there was a consensus and therefore Kent Hughes is not responsible for getting it wrong, if he got it wrong?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

It’s not agenda pushing to insist there was a consensus and therefore Kent Hughes is not responsible for getting it wrong, if he got it wrong?

It’s agenda when you don’t have honest discussions. It’s agenda when you go out of your way to slam him at every turn.

 

[ReHabs]

It’s agenda when you don’t have honest discussions. It’s agenda when you go out of your way to slam him at every turn.

And some go out of their way to magnify the positives and ignore the negatives at every turn. To the point of only commenting whenever Slaf picks up the point (2/11).

 

[Mrb1p]

It was a pretty nice goal yesterday. Whole sequence was good. Heads up give and go to NH, uses the open ice available and drives the net. Weak shot but it worked, so you cant be mad.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

It was a pretty nice goal yesterday. Whole sequence was good. Heads up give and go to NH, uses the open ice available and drives the net. Weak shot but it worked, so you cant be mad.

He had a solid game overall.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

He's a #1 pick. In a weak draft, but a #1 pick. And has a crazy physique. He should be able to look alright even with an average center. He shoots wide all the time (including on Suzuki's goal) and his goal tonight was actually a missed shot on the goalie's shoulder that went in.

I'm not saying he's a bust, but there's tons of work to do, and him scoring tonight doesn't change that fact. He should be in Laval, get some confidence.

That wasn't my point but youre right. He does need to play better. The physical aspect will come when he's not a teenager and has become a man. Everyone knows even if your stature was the same at 19/20 as it is when you're 25/26, the strength differenc is not even debatable so I'm not too worried about that. And while he does need to process the game better, half the problem is his inability to utilize his strengths, mostly his physicality especially on the boards which will come in time. But he does have a lot to work on still that's in his control. But what I said is still fact, he's looked very decent with competent centres. Newhook shouldn't be anywhere near centre. And also gotta add that he was playing with Anderson which even ruins the Suzuki line when he's on it

 

[Revansky]

How are they comparable when Byfield has spent so much time in the AHL and the Habs refuse to entertain the notion for Slaf?


I think I understand what you’re saying but you’re referring to the evaluation of the prospect, not the evaluation of how his development is being handled. I don’t think there’s much purpose to evaluate the prospect — he’s ours and we should just accept it.


It’s not agenda pushing to falsely insist there was a consensus and therefore Kent Hughes is not responsible for getting it wrong, if he got it wrong?

I agree they should entertain the AHL option if he doesn't start producing in the next 10-15 games.

Their comparable in the way people were questioning their ceiling and selection even if both were big bodied guy that everyone knew were going to take time before reaching their development peak.

 

[Ajhccwrs]

You guys are talking like being a late riser is a bad thing.

I would much rather draft a guy that is rising and who's value has constantly been trending up.

Those are the real homerun.

Drafting someone who had his maximum value at 15 years old and whom his perceived value has regressed and you draft him with the expectations that he will have his former value back is the best way to get burnt.

One is trending up and up and up.

The other you wish he will be a shadow of his past.

Its the same thing in the stock market.

People are afraid to buy stock at all time high because it already rose a lot. They prefer to buy depleted stock thats now trading at a fraction of their former price because somehow, somewhere maybe they will get their value back. Its inherently a wrong approach.

Being a riser is an excellent thing. I much prefer draft a player with unique skillset who is trending up.

Its called grasping at straws to try and make their negative opinion on Slaf last as long as possible before it becomes irrelevant.

 

[admiralcadillac]

I'm curious, since we often have similar opinions. How would you describe that goal?

He was left alone to drive the net, yet I'd say the goalie was weak on the short side, and Slaf whiffed on his shot which his the goalie's shoulder, but puck still ended in the net.

If every time a goal or assist Slafkovsky makes is downplayed, and any chances he creates completely ignored, I can understand why people here are so negative.

 

[jrom]

He had a good game but I wish he was more assertive when he has a chance to retrieve the puck / break a cycle in the D zone.

He was mindful of his positioning but at times seemed content to not make a mistake eg not applying a lot of pressure on the puck carrier. If he can improve his puck retrieval it will help a lot his linemates (while he keeps developing).

 

[417]

Quentin Byfield hasn’t even played a full AHL season yet.

He’s played a total of 59 AHL games…this idea that he’s now good all of a sudden because he played 59 AHL games over 3 years is ridiculous.

 

[ReHabs]

Its called grasping at straws to try and make their negative opinion on Slaf last as long as possible before it becomes irrelevant.

Can you simultaneously demand a safe space for Slaf and his worst of the modern era production compared to his peers because “he’s not a typical 1OA, it wasn’t a typical draft” AND ALSO bleat and gloat that he’s a consensus 1OA and nobody should criticize the pick??

If every time a goal or assist Slafkovsky makes is downplayed, and any chances he creates completely ignored, I can understand why people here are so negative.

Thankfully for you, at the current rate you won’t have to suffer seeing more than ten to thirteen more instances of this phenomenon

 

[Sam I Am]

Tough crowd.

To my eye, the kid had a very encouraging game. Scored a goal and with a little luck could have potted a couple more. Showed good hands on multiple occasions.

If he plays every game like last night, I'd be ecstatic.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

If every time a goal or assist Slafkovsky makes is downplayed, and any chances he creates completely ignored, I can understand why people here are so negative.

There’s lots to criticize Slaf and the team about. He’s has GM his struggles and I don’t feel like the team has developed him properly. Criticisms should be expected and it’s totally fine to question if he was the right pick.

But a lot of the criticism is over the top.

 

[admiralcadillac]

There’s lots to criticize Slaf and the team about. He’s has GM his struggles and I don’t feel like the team has developed him properly. Criticisms should be expected and it’s totally fine to question if he was the right pick.

But a lot of the criticism is over the top.

Criticism of what should be positives are bad faith comments

 

[morhilane]

He had a good game but I wish he was more assertive when he has a chance to retrieve the puck / break a cycle in the D zone.

He was mindful of his positioning but at times seemed content to not make a mistake eg not applying a lot of pressure on the puck carrier. If he can improve his puck retrieval it will help a lot his linemates (while he keeps developing).

MSL is praising Slaf's defensive game, that says a lot since the team is playing like shit in the dzone in general.

 

[Ajhccwrs]

Can you simultaneously demand a safe space for Slaf and his worst of the modern era production compared to his peers because “he’s not a typical 1OA, it wasn’t a typical draft” AND ALSO bleat and gloat that he’s a consensus 1OA and nobody should criticize the pick??


Thankfully for you, at the current rate you won’t have to suffer seeing more than ten to thirteen more instances of this phenomenon

It seems like your more worried about the ability to criticize the pick/player/brass instead of having them succeed. Its fine there will be more scape goats in the future where you can revert your endless bias of criticism at.