People here don't believe teams do anything in developing players, but rather that the players develop themselves.
Yup. A lot of people believe it's one sided for some reason. It was insufferable during the whole Kravtsov fiasco. Where some thought Drury and the club could do no wrong, and the situation was fully on Kravtsov for being an impetuous and spoiled debutante. But, management and Drury had no responsibility for perhaps misleading him, or Drury calling him out in front of the entire team and all that stuff. I feel like these are the same people who fully blame teenagers for doing stupid things like they are adults and their parents have no influence.
And they like to throw out lines like "the NHL is not a developmental league". As if many players don't develop while playing in the NHL. Sure, NHL teams just have extensive coaching staffs for aesthetic purposes. And players don't require tutelage or direction. And they have AHL affiliate just because, I don't know, it's cute. And others suggest by the time players reach the NHL, they can't or don't improve their skills anymore. Like they can't get better at shooting, passing or skating once they've made it to the big show.
I honestly don't know where that perspective comes from. But it seems awfully ill informed whenever it comes up. It's like the old, and outdated "nature vs nurture" debate. There are still countless people who like to argue one or the other, for various political, social and ideological reasons/agendas. When the answer, based on reality, science and objectivity, is so obviously BOTH, the dynamic between the two. And similarly, the NHL and NHL prospect, or really, players in general, have a partnership. And players have such partnerships which each team or affiliate they play for, from Jrs, college, all the way through to the NHL. And it so obviously means both sides interact to develop players. Heck, I feel like Kreider has been "developing" for like 8 years now.