Juraj Slafkovsky - Year Two

[Sorinth]

I am not saying Slafkovsky can’t. But both of the examples you gave went to find that extra second in the AHL.

Well Draisaitl did it in the CHL not the AHL but yes you have a point. But it's worth noting that nobody is saying that going to the AHL would be bad for Slafkovsky's development. All people are saying is that it isn't required. It seems doubtful to me that Draisaitl going back to the CHL was what helped him develop, it's far more likely it was just the normal development of a young person becoming an adult. And if you want an example where a big guy struggles in the NHL at 18, stays in the NHL anyways and still develops well there's Joe Thornton.

So what environment helps Slaf more? Because in all likelihood he develop regardless of which league he plays in, so the question is more about efficiency and there's pros and cons for both.

 

[NORiculous]

So what environment helps Slaf more? Because in all likelihood he develop regardless of which league he plays in, so the question is more about efficiency and there's pros and cons for both.

it is a known thing that rushing a player can hurt his chances but keeping him down too long doesn’t have the same kind of negative effect. This isn’t only true to hockey. Taking a too big step can really stop progress and even break interest.

I’m normal circumstances you keep a player in the NHL when he shows signs that he is ready.

I like Slafkovsky and still think he can become something good. But I don’t like how managment has dealt with him, specially with the explanations Hughes gave as to why he wasn’t sent down last year. There is no apparent reason to not send him down, not send him to WJC, etc.

Joe Thornton played about the same number of game that Slafkovsky has played before taking a step forward. I didn’t watch him closely enough that year to tell you when it was apparent that step was coming. Most of the time, you can see it coming.

There aren’t any regular signs that Slafkovsky is ready to take a step forward as of now.

I can’t help but wonder if they aren’t outsmarting themselves. Trying to reinvent the wheel has much more chances of failing than the proven roads. I also don’t see any signs that is was the only shot Slafkovsky has to reach his potential. So if that is the case, then what is the point of risking it all on reinventing the wheel?

 

[Gustave]

it is a known thing that rushing a player can hurt his chances but keeping him down too long doesn’t have the same kind of negative effect. This isn’t only true to hockey. Taking a too big step can really stop progress and even break interest.

I’m normal circumstances you keep a player in the NHL when he shows signs that he is ready.

I like Slafkovsky and still think he can become something good. But I don’t like how managment has dealt with him, specially with the explanations Hughes gave as to why he wasn’t sent down last year. There is no apparent reason to not send him down, not send him to WJC, etc.

Joe Thornton played about the same number of game that Slafkovsky has played before taking a step forward. I didn’t watch him closely enough that year to tell you when it was apparent that step was coming. Most of the time, you can see it coming.

There aren’t any regular signs that Slafkovsky is ready to take a step forward as of now.

I can’t help but wonder if they aren’t outsmarting themselves. Trying to reinvent the wheel has much more chances of failing than the proven roads. I also don’t see any signs that is was the only shot Slafkovsky has to reach his potential. So if that is the case, then what is the point of risking it all on reinventing the wheel?

Only here to reply to your Thornton comment;
For context, Thornton skipped a game every three games, played on the 4th line and totaled around what… 7 to 9 minutes a game.

His coach was Pat Burns and he wasn’t a mister development alumni.

Second year he got icetime and top 6 assignments.

 

[Kennerback]

Can release and finish be massively improved at 19 years old? Asking for a friend.

 

[Sorinth]

it is a known thing that rushing a player can hurt his chances but keeping him down too long doesn’t have the same kind of negative effect. This isn’t only true to hockey. Taking a too big step can really stop progress and even break interest.

I’m normal circumstances you keep a player in the NHL when he shows signs that he is ready.

I like Slafkovsky and still think he can become something good. But I don’t like how managment has dealt with him, specially with the explanations Hughes gave as to why he wasn’t sent down last year. There is no apparent reason to not send him down, not send him to WJC, etc.

Joe Thornton played about the same number of game that Slafkovsky has played before taking a step forward. I didn’t watch him closely enough that year to tell you when it was apparent that step was coming. Most of the time, you can see it coming.

There aren’t any regular signs that Slafkovsky is ready to take a step forward as of now.

I can’t help but wonder if they aren’t outsmarting themselves. Trying to reinvent the wheel has much more chances of failing than the proven roads. I also don’t see any signs that is was the only shot Slafkovsky has to reach his potential. So if that is the case, then what is the point of risking it all on reinventing the wheel?

And the Earth being flat was also a "known thing" at one point in time, doesn't make it true. A lot of hockey "trueisms" just don't hold up despite people believing them, enforcers keeping other teams in check is another trueism, yet Marc Savard would probably disagree. And what about "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" isn't that one telling us that we should rush people. And on the flip side being sent down can absolutely hurt a player's development. Going back to the CHL certainly hurt Drouin's development as it reinforced all his junior habits that don't work in the pros. Getting sent to the AHL pretty much ended Leblanc's hockey career as he ended up in a toxic environment and stopped caring about hockey. Now I don't think Slaf going to the AHL would hurt him, but these hockey trueisms just aren't true.

Yes you can be hurt by being rushed, Victor Mete is probably the prime recent MTL example of that. Mete was outmatched and wasn't learning anything because he needed to keep things super simple just to survive his shifts. But that's really not the case with Slaf, Slaf isn't producing but he's still generating stuff, he's still incorporating new positive things in his game, he's very much still developing.

 

[417]

You: “I think the opposite that the slower pace of the AHL will actually reinforce the bad habits he has because he can get away with them there.”


Me: “You have argued essentially that lower-level competition makes you worse, that the habit of being not good enough is reinforced in the AHL”

You: That's simply not true... Again, you're conflating a specific argument about Slafkovsky and applying it generally.”


Ok, I thought your first statement was an argument you were making about sending NHL players down to the AHL to develop, i.e. that this was something that you meant could be true for other players as well.

But now you clarify that you meant that the AHL would reinforce ONLY Slaf’s bad habits, in a process that is unique to him and does not apply to any other players. Thus it can’t be rebutted by any actual evidence of how things have gone with other players, it’s just an article of faith that you hold or you don’t. OK then.

Earlier you had asked that people focus on “fruitful” debates. How can a fruitful debate be had about a claim you make that only applies to Slaf specifically, so no evidence against your claim is relevant?

I'm not sure why you wasted all that time writing that.

What I think about Slafkovsky doesn't necessarily apply to every single player. I was talking about him in isolation and as part of a separate debate…this debate got intertwined with how much the AHL truly is a developmental league.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

And on the flip side being sent down can absolutely hurt a player's development.

I highly doubt that's a common occurence.

 

[417]

it is a known thing that rushing a player can hurt his chances but keeping him down too long doesn’t have the same kind of negative effect. This isn’t only true to hockey. Taking a too big step can really stop progress and even break interest.

Yeah its a “known” thing as in, something people just repeat and its somehow turned into scientific evidence.

I mean, Charles Hudon played over 200 AHL games before he got any meaningful time in the NHL, he was also very productive as an AHL player.

He's still a minor league player today after a few unsuccessful stints in the NHL.

Of course, no one would say “oh he flopped because he stayed in the AHL too long”…but had he started in the NHL a bit earlier, everyone would say he flopped because he was rushed.

There's a lot of false correlation in that saying if we’re being honest...but we’re talking about fans who still believe that “the NHL is not a developmental league”…so not exactly shocking.

I highly doubt that's a common occurence.

It most likely is, but no one says it so it's not a “thing” people believe, but it's as demonstrably evident as saying players getting rushed, ruins them.

 

[Jaynki]

I highly doubt that's a common occurence.

Its as much a common occurence as a player being rushed is ruined.

In either case, it is hardly demonstrable.

 

[417]

And the Earth being flat was also a "known thing" at one point in time, doesn't make it true. A lot of hockey "trueisms" just don't hold up despite people believing them, enforcers keeping other teams in check is another trueism, yet Marc Savard would probably disagree. And what about "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" isn't that one telling us that we should rush people. And on the flip side being sent down can absolutely hurt a player's development. Going back to the CHL certainly hurt Drouin's development as it reinforced all his junior habits that don't work in the pros. Getting sent to the AHL pretty much ended Leblanc's hockey career as he ended up in a toxic environment and stopped caring about hockey. Now I don't think Slaf going to the AHL would hurt him, but these hockey trueisms just aren't true.

Yes you can be hurt by being rushed, Victor Mete is probably the prime recent MTL example of that. Mete was outmatched and wasn't learning anything because he needed to keep things super simple just to survive his shifts. But that's really not the case with Slaf, Slaf isn't producing but he's still generating stuff, he's still incorporating new positive things in his game, he's very much still developing.

Of all the sports I follow, hockey has the most “trueisms” out there, the most bizarre ones too.

 

[Fledgemyhedge]

Yesterday all this time and space fires it into defenders skates. Today 2 on 1… nothing, a complete flub. I don’t know guys. Is it a confidence issue for a very low iq player? Probably both

Needs to be sent down so he can relearn the game in a prominent role

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Its as much a common occurence as a player being rushed is ruined.

In either case, it is hardly demonstrable.

False, as one fits with what we know from developmental biology, while the other doesn't. It's a false equivalency. There's plenty of actual scientific evidence that shows incremental learning is the most preferable. I have yet to see data that shows the opposite, but you can keep falsely believing they're equivalent.

Hugo does no wrong, amirite?

 

[nhlfan9191]

Yeah its a “known” thing as in, something people just repeat and its somehow turned into scientific evidence.

I mean, Charles Hudon played over 200 AHL games before he got any meaningful time in the NHL, he was also very productive as an AHL player.

He's still a minor league player today after a few unsuccessful stints in the NHL.

Of course, no one would say “oh he flopped because he stayed in the AHL too long”…but had he started in the NHL a bit earlier, everyone would say he flopped because he was rushed.

There's a lot of false correlation in that saying if we’re being honest...but we’re talking about fans who still believe that “the NHL is not a developmental league”…so not exactly shocking.


It most likely is, but no one says it so it's not a “thing” people believe, but it's as demonstrably evident as saying players getting rushed, ruins them.

The NHL is not a developmental hockey league. It’s the top tier of hockey in the world and these athletes and coaches are getting paid millions of dollars to perform. The odd time you get a team that’s in a rebuild like we are and there’s a little more room for a Slafkovsky to even make a team. But that’s not the norm. It’s a high pressure league and if you aren’t ready it’s going to eat you before you can get started. Leagues like the CHL are developmental leagues and the AHL has always been a gateway league to the NHL.

 

[Tanknation]

I would not worry about Slaf all to much. I'm positive that after 650 games played, his points totals will be able to match 1 year of Cooley's NHL production.

 

[lillypad33]

'' The good: he sometimes makes a good pass or intercepts a pass, so we see a flash of why he drafted him.''


oh wow so lets celebrate that our 1st overall pick was able to intercept a pass tonight. Meanwhile, Cooley got 3 assists, on pace for a 65+pts rookie season...

So this isn't Slakovsky talk then... It's draft talk. They drafted him. Get over it.

 

[Jaynki]

False, as one fits with what we know from developmental biology, while the other doesn't. It's a false equivalency. There's plenty of actual scientific evidence that shows incremental learning is the most preferable. I have yet to see data that shows the opposite, but you can keep falsely believing they're equivalent.

Hugo does no wrong, amirite?

I get your point and i agree. Not sure how it apply to hockey tho.

I think that Slafkovsky has incrementally learned to the point where he can still learn in the NHL.

Also, i think it holds true for most of the players we may have considered rushed. Example KK.

 

[lillypad33]

So this isn't Slakovsky talk then... It's draft talk. They drafted him. Get over it.

Exactly. Get over it and talk about the actual subject. Christ it's tiresome.

 

[Goldenhands]

I would not worry about Slaf all to much. I'm positive that after 650 games played, his points totals will be able to match 1 year of Cooley's NHL production.

As long as he outperforms him in playoffs, what shouldnt be too difficult...

 

[Skip Bayless]

Make it a fifth game in a row with a SOG. Showing us why he belongs in the NHL.

 

[417]

The NHL is not a developmental hockey league. It’s the top tier of hockey in the world and these athletes and coaches are getting paid millions of dollars to perform. The odd time you get a team that’s in a rebuild like we are and there’s a little more room for a Slafkovsky to even make a team. But that’s not the norm. It’s a high pressure league and if you aren’t ready it’s going to eat you before you can get started. Leagues like the CHL are developmental leagues and the AHL has always been a gateway league to the NHL.

So what are Guhle, Barron, Xhekaj, Harris doing right before our eyes?

Justin Barron looked bound for the AHL at Camp, today he’s playing over 20 mins a game and playing sound defensively and this without having needed to spend any additional time in the AHL this season like most wanted.

What about Poitras and Lohrei in Boston?

Carlsson and Mintunykov (sp?) in Anaheim?

Fantili in Columbus?

Cooley in Arizona?

Etc?

These players are done developing?

Yes the CHL and AHL are gateway leagues to the NHL, no one ever said otherwise (certainly not what I argued - I argued that AHL teams are mostly constituted by replacement-level players).

Again, it's not because we say something that it makes it true, NHL teams develop players all the time. It's the final step.

This idea that you get to the NHL and POOF! You're a fully developed player is demonstrably false.

Even Sidney Crosby years into his career was on record stating he was still developing aspects of his game.

So with all due respect, I'll pass the kool-aid to the next man this time.

 

[Kennerback]

Make it a fifth game in a row with a SOG. Showing us why he belongs in the NHL.

2 shots! Who’s laughing now!!!

 

[Whitesnake]

So what are Guhle, Barron, Xhekaj, Harris doing right before our eyes?

Justin Barron looked bound for the AHL at Camp, today he’s playing over 20 mins a game and playing sound defensively and this without having needed to spend any additional time in the AHL this season like most wanted.

What about Poitras and Lohrei in Boston?

Carlsson and Mintunykov (sp?) in Anaheim?

Fantili in Columbus?

Cooley in Arizona?

Etc?

These players are done developing?

Yes the CHL and AHL are gateway leagues to the NHL, no one ever said otherwise (certainly not what I argued - I argued that AHL teams are mostly constituted by replacement-level players).

Again, it's not because we say something that it makes it true, NHL teams develop players all the time. It's the final step.

This idea that you get to the NHL and POOF! You're a fully developed player is demonstrably false.

Even Sidney Crosby years into his career was on record stating he was still developing aspects of his game.

So with all due respect, I'll pass the kool-aid to the next man this time.

You can name exceptions man. You can. But it's not because you do that it makes it the norm. Yes, you always develop in the NHL. I've seen 27 year old player develop. Mark Streit developed in the NHL. But it's not about that. It's not about having already the maturity and developing from there. Almost everybody you named were more mature. Also had the advantage to play in North America. A North American game, on a north american ice, with a north american schedule.

Bu yes, at one point, you need to get kids in the NHL and have them develop. But you need some basis. Slaf doesn't have any. He has the size. But even the size, how many times do we see players with size evolve later on.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Kid looks dynamite tonight

 

[nhlfan9191]

So what are Guhle, Barron, Xhekaj, Harris doing right before our eyes?

Justin Barron looked bound for the AHL at Camp, today he’s playing over 20 mins a game and playing sound defensively and this without having needed to spend any additional time in the AHL this season like most wanted.

What about Poitras and Lohrei in Boston?

Carlsson and Mintunykov (sp?) in Anaheim?

Fantili in Columbus?

Cooley in Arizona?

Etc?

These players are done developing?

Yes the CHL and AHL are gateway leagues to the NHL, no one ever said otherwise (certainly not what I argued - I argued that AHL teams are mostly constituted by replacement-level players).

Again, it's not because we say something that it makes it true, NHL teams develop players all the time. It's the final step.

This idea that you get to the NHL and POOF! You're a fully developed player is demonstrably false.

Even Sidney Crosby years into his career was on record stating he was still developing aspects of his game.

So with all due respect, I'll pass the kool-aid to the next man this time.

Most of the guys you mentioned weren’t interjected into the NHL like Slafkovsky was at 18. The guys you mentioned that were 18 look/looked NHL ready. You don’t have to be fully developed to play in the NHL, but you do have to be at a certain point of development and that’s where you’re clashing with a bunch of different posters I think. Slafkovsky doesn’t look to be at that point and the disagreement comes from this strategy where a player who is relevitely out classed being able to learn the little things in that environment. The best way to learn is to play and I think the biggest problem with guys who are brought up to quick is they get sheltered and/or lose opportunities quickly to veterans who can do the little things they haven’t had time to learn. If Slafkovsky was showing he could hang, we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all.

 

[eurodin]

Kid looks dynamite tonight

Are we watching the same game?