dude, i'm sorry but you are way off here... and again twisting around instead of just owing a mistake.
dude, i'm sorry but you are way off here... and again twisting around instead of just owing a mistake.
not interested in going back and forth in semantic debate. Take a minute to look up any literature on LTAD and you may revisit your understanding.
but, to the backtracking on what you meant... you are right, it is so obvious that people do not develop at a constant or set rate. Therefore, building an opinion or take off of a misguided and flat out false "rule of thumb" is a great way to come up with a bad take.
a player does not need to dominate at an inferior level in order to be ready to develop at a higher level, that is and remains a very poor take precisely because of how obvious it is that prospects develop at differing rates. thanks for pointing out the flaw in your initial argument.
,perhaps you should spend some time getting familiar with the subject matter before spouting off so ignorantly about it
There is no such thing as a "development line", as far as I know, nobody's ever used that term.
I will not waste my time on more of your ignorant posts on the topic.
Cooley is going to get more offensive TOI than Slaf going by their respective first game. He should have an higher tally than Slaf despite a lower production per 60 minutes just based on that.
It’s like teams use their offensive players to get results other then the peanuts they get from them defensively:
Teams that aren't the Habs, it should be noted...(slightly better under MSL, but still too much vet bias).
We need to stop focusing on other players and making sure own players become very good contributor.
He speaks with such confidence too. Dunning Kruger effect on full display on this thread.
There is no such thing as a "development line", as far as I know, nobody's ever used that term.
I will not waste my time on more of your ignorant posts on the topic.
haha this shit is funny. Miller time, the authority on athletic development. Nothing Dachamp has said is incorrect. You’ve not offered any correction or thoughtful insight, just insistence that you know the subject better than him.perhaps you should spend some time getting familiar with the subject matter before spouting off so ignorantly about it
Fully agreed. I hope to see you post this when the usual uncool crowd trash Shane Wright, Matvei Michkov, Frank Nazar, or other prospects in other organizations who have struggled at times.
I don’t agree with this. I think if you dominate at a lower level you gain confidence, experiment with different things, learn from success.
Hutson and Roy both dominated their respective leagues. I think it benefited them.As for Slaf, I’m on record as having said that I’d have preferred him in the minors last year and this season.
I don't care about other prospects that much. I am a hockey fan and I like following other prospect but I will never harass or have an obsession over other team prospects.
I think Michkov would sting more as he was projected to be an elite and exceptional player since a long time before the draft. Cooley wasn't seen as a potential 100 points player at the draft and he would need to exceed expectactions to reach that point. He has the potential to be a high productive 1C with a consistent 70-80 points output and maybe a peak year around 85. He was my choice in 2022 and still think it was a bold strategy to take a winger instead of comparable prospect at C and D. But if Slaf become a top line producer and brings an element of physicality, it could still be worth it. Still a long way to go though but his first game was really good !
Most players dominate their league because they don't have anywhere else to play. When the NHL is too tough, or the team is focused on wins over development then players like Roy don't have anywhere else to go but a league they can dominate. And yeah they can continue to develop there it's just they would develop more if they were in a tougher league where they wouldn't be able to dominate. For Roy had he been able to play in the AHL last year that would probably have been a better development environment then going back to the CHL and dominating it again.
As I said, it’s not for every player but as a whole. You’re absolutely right that there are players where it wouldn’t make sense. Mario Lemieux walked into the NHL and dominated. I mean what’s the point of leaving hi. In the minors? He was clearly ready,
So well said! Even the typical 16 year old rookie in the CHL starts on the 3rd or 4th line instead of dominating Midget AAA. It's necessary.
He plays on the 1st PP. I thought Cooley’s game was no better than Slaf’s first game.. However, Cooley plays Center and was OK two ways. Plus, you saw, he’s adjusting to the NHL. I think 3 or 4 times he tried deaking 3 guys in zone entries. Low percentage plays in the NHL. For a first game, Cooley was excellent,
You didn't really deal with @Sorinth's argument. You just keep asserting things that are NOT taught in Coaching Development courses. According to the best science we have on Athlete development, Sorinth is right.
