Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko

[chosen]

I would consider it.

I do think he rebounds on this points thing.

Since you've said that teams and coaches develop players, have they all let Kakko down?

Couldn't be his fault, right?

Is he now going to develop even though management hasn't changed or is it just because you always dislike players over 27 and love players that are under 25?

In another thread, you mocked me for saying player development by management is impossible to prove and therefore nonsense. When I gave you data that conflicted with your opinion, rather than show me examples of your opinion, you bailed.

There's another guy on this site lecturing me on player development who's a Kravtsov fan. Yeah, if only Kravtsov had been developed by the Rangers. He would be so great.

 

[bhamill]

Since you've said that teams and coaches develop players, have they all let Kakko down?

Couldn't be his fault, right?

Is he now going to develop even though management hasn't changed or is it just because you always dislike players over 27 and love players that are under 25?

In another thread, you mocked me for saying player development by management is impossible to prove and therefore nonsense. When I gave you data that conflicted with your opinion, rather than show me examples of your opinion, you bailed.

There's another guy on this site lecturing me on player development who's a Kravtsov fan. Yeah, if only Kravtsov had been developed by the Rangers. He would be so great.

Management/coaching tact is certainly a factor in development. Especially in how quick a player develops, and how confident he is. But of course not the only one. How hard a player works, how much natural talent/IQ he has, his rate of physical maturation, mental maturity, confidence, all factors.
Kakko has already showed he can put up points 5v5, and despite his offensive slump, his defense and possession numbers are strong. He’s a hard worker too. He will almost certainly come around. Even if he, counter to the norm, is only what he was last year at 21-22, that is a valuable player that you don’t sell low on… Not to imply that YOU want to sell low. That’s the general you.

 

[dshea19]

I truly think that his game requires complimentary players. He needs to be with cycle players. Zib and Kreider are pure rush players or Kreider waits for tips. I was hoping for a healthy return for Chytil and maybe having him play between Kakko and Cuylle would be the right mix for all involved. The Rangers only had two guys (Buch and Vatrano) that could ever play with Kreider and Zib. Goes to show that some players need the right guys to play with and then you have some guys that can just play with anyone.

 

[NickyFotiu]

I truly think that his game requires complimentary players. He needs to be with cycle players. Zib and Kreider are pure rush players or Kreider waits for tips. I was hoping for a healthy return for Chytil and maybe having him play between Kakko and Cuylle would be the right mix for all involved. The Rangers only had two guys (Buch and Vatrano) that could ever play with Kreider and Zib. Goes to show that some players need the right guys to play with and then you have some guys that can just play with anyone.

Zooks played well with CK and Zibs before Buch.

 

[dshea19]

Zooks played well with CK and Zibs before Buch.

True. That feels like a lifetime ago.

 

[yrrebbor]

#2 my ass!

 

[chosen]

Management/coaching tact is certainly a factor in development. Especially in how quick a player develops, and how confident he is. But of course not the only one. How hard a player works, how much natural talent/IQ he has, his rate of physical maturation, mental maturity, confidence, all factors.
Kakko has already showed he can put up points 5v5, and despite his offensive slump, his defense and possession numbers are strong. He’s a hard worker too. He will almost certainly come around. Even if he, counter to the norm, is only what he was last year at 21-22, that is a valuable player that you don’t sell low on… Not to imply that YOU want to sell low. That’s the general you.

Today we live in a world of provable metrics as to how players are evaluated.

There is no similar way to evaluate development.

Under the same coaches and management, some players develop, while some don't, so it can't be the coach or management. At least there is no way to prove it.

It's just a popular theory.

 

[bhamill]

Today we live in a world of provable metrics as to how players are evaluated.

There is no similar way to evaluate development.

Under the same coaches and management, some players develop, while some don't, so it can't be the coach or management. At least there is no way to prove it.

It's just a popular theory.

Well it’s perfectly logical that certain tact’s of coaching/development would work better for some players than others, even if all players got identical treatment which being the coaches are humans, is unlikely. No, there no way to “prove it,” I’d say “quantify it” is a better way of putting it, yet it’s common sense logic that the way coaches and management treat players certainly affects them and their play and/or development. Just like different systems of play suit different players.

 

[mas0764]

Today we live in a world of provable metrics as to how players are evaluated.

There is no similar way to evaluate development.

Under the same coaches and management, some players develop, while some don't, so it can't be the coach or management. At least there is no way to prove it.

It's just a popular theory.

Just cause there’s no way to measure it doesn’t mean there’s no evidence of it.

 

[McRanger92]

Cuylle and Kakko is something

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Cuylle and Kakko is something

That line/combo has been strong

 

[Ruggs225]

That line/combo has been strong

Imagine Chytil was healthy. That three would be a handful.

 

[McRanger92]

Imagine Chytil was healthy. That three would be a handful.

They need to get a veteran 3C to set the tone for them

 

[n8]

They need to get a veteran 3C to set the tone for them

We just waived one of those. Please be more specific!

 

[Barnaby]

That's fair. This is my thought process there.. the NHL announced the cap is going up 4 million this off-season, they think it could jump by another 4 the summer after. Third liners will start coming in around that number. That's a deal you'd make with the future in mind. He's got a 40 point season under his belt at 21/22. People were ready to hang Chytil at that age. Even if thats his ceiling when the cap jumps it likey ends up cheaper than average

Maybe we can quit quadrupling down on the Finnish Flash. Odds are if he sticks long term then we are looking at a 3rd line winger. Why take on the risk when the odds of him becoming worth more than a 4 million per winger looks unlikely. At some point, we need to see the player and not the draft spot.

 

[Rongomania]

That line/combo has been strong

Since like game 1 of the preseason.

Kid finally f*cking scores in a blowout.

We also have to remember, it takes a solid 20 games to feel right after an injury like that. Keep it rollin' !!

 

[RangersFan1994]

They need to get a veteran 3C to set the tone for them

Why does it have to be a veteran? I rather have a good 3rd line center regulars of veteran or a player in their 20s ready for a bigger role.

 

[chosen]

Well it’s perfectly logical that certain tact’s of coaching/development would work better for some players than others, even if all players got identical treatment which being the coaches are humans, is unlikely. No, there no way to “prove it,” I’d say “quantify it” is a better way of putting it, yet it’s common sense logic that the way coaches and management treat players certainly affects them and their play and/or development. Just like different systems of play suit different players.

What you're saying is that players respond differently to different ways of being treated.

So, in order to have a good method of developing players, each one of them must have a developmental regimen tailored to them, which by the way is impossible. An organization and team can't be run this way.

Zibanejad and Buhnevich flourished under Quinn, yet zero fans give him credit for that and rightly so.

They weren't developed by Quinn and the Rangers any more than Kakko and Laf have been held back by the organization and coaches, so how would you quantify your opinion?

 

[mas0764]

What you're saying is that players respond differently to different ways of being treated.

So, in order to have a good method of developing players, each one of them must have a developmental regimen tailored to them, which by the way is impossible. An organization and team can't be run this way.

Zibanejad and Buhnevich flourished under Quinn, yet zero fans give him credit for that and rightly so.

They weren't developed by Quinn and the Rangers any more than Kakko and Laf have been held back by the organization and coaches, so how would you quantify your opinion?

The friggin excuses this guy comes up with the avoid blaming this franchise for sucking at developing forwards.

Boggles the mind.

 

[McRanger92]

Why does it have to be a veteran? I rather have a good 3rd line center regulars of veteran or a player in their 20s ready for a bigger role.

I’m all ears

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The friggin excuses this guy comes up with the avoid blaming this franchise for sucking at developing forwards.

Boggles the mind.

What, specifically, could the Rangers have done differently with Kakko?

And don't just say something generic like "more ice time!"

That's not a real answer.

One of the few real things I think that should have been done was push him to improve his skating (i.e. power skating courses, etc.). Other than that? It's hard to say this is on management. They can't make him take better shots or use his shot.

 

[bhamill]

What you're saying is that players respond differently to different ways of being treated.

So, in order to have a good method of developing players, each one of them must have a developmental regimen tailored to them, which by the way is impossible. An organization and team can't be run this way.

Zibanejad and Buhnevich flourished under Quinn, yet zero fans give him credit for that and rightly so.

They weren't developed by Quinn and the Rangers any more than Kakko and Laf have been held back by the organization and coaches, so how would you quantify your opinion?

How do you quantify yours? How do you prove Kakko and Laf WEREN’T held back? Which, by the way I have never once said, so you are arguing against something I never said. You really think coaching and such has zero effect on development? Demonstrate how that’s the case. It’s wildly illogical…
I can point directly to how 1OA and 2OA picks are handled by teams and compare it with how differently Kakko and Laf were brought along, and then contrast their rates of progress. We weren’t bottom feeders so our high picks didn’t get the opportunities like PP1 like other high forward picks normally get, because we were trying to win. And that’s acceptable, but we can’t have our cake and eat it too. Its a trade off. It’s all pretty common sense, opportunity and reps make for faster development of talented high picks. Im going to take YOUR tact here and ask you to prove how that’s wrong.

And BTW, coaches often handle 30 different players 30 different ways. They don’t need 30 tailored programs, one program tweaked for the strengths and weaknesses of your players is just good coaching. One size never fits all.

 

[Kovalev27]

This kid can’t skate thats his biggest problem. He’s gotten bigger and his skating looks worse. Unlike laf who’s skating looks like a strength now.

That wheeler tap in last night from Mika? He’d be nowhere near the net on that rush. Nowhere. And wheeler is hardly fast but he’d still skate circles around kakko.

Plenty of opportunities doesn’t generate any offense.

 

[mas0764]

What, specifically, could the Rangers have done differently with Kakko?

And don't just say something generic like "more ice time!"

That's not a real answer.

One of the few real things I think that should have been done was push him to improve his skating (i.e. power skating courses, etc.). Other than that? It's hard to say this is on management. They can't make him take better shots or use his shot.

Saying there is nothing that could have saved one specific player is not the same as saying teams do not develop players.

 

[chosen]

The friggin excuses this guy comes up with the avoid blaming this franchise for sucking at developing forwards.

Boggles the mind.

Awaiting a coherent defense of your position.

More than a dozen coaches and GMs have been here, but none of them knew how to develop forwards.

I've already pointed out some forwards, who by your definition developed here.

Do you believe Kucherov, McDavid, Jack Hughes wouldn't have developed as Rangers?

Did Buffalo fail to develop Reinhart because he is now great on Florida?

Did Buffalo develop Tage Thompson? He's become an excellent player with Buffalo.

Do you believe that Buffalo chose to develop one and not the other?

How do you explain the difference?

I could cite a barrelful of similar examples. At what point will you understand that how a player performs is dependent on the player?

Other than stamping your feet, you havenn't presented a reasoned argument for your theory.

How do you quantify yours? How do you prove Kakko and Laf WEREN’T held back? Which, by the way I have never once said, so you are arguing against something I never said. You really think coaching and such has zero effect on development? Demonstrate how that’s the case. It’s wildly illogical…
I can point directly to how 1OA and 2OA picks are handled by teams and compare it with how differently Kakko and Laf were brought along, and then contrast their rates of progress. We weren’t bottom feeders so our high picks didn’t get the opportunities like PP1 like other high forward picks normally get, because we were trying to win. And that’s acceptable, but we can’t have our cake and eat it too. Its a trade off. It’s all pretty common sense, opportunity and reps make for faster development of talented high picks. Im going to take YOUR tact here and ask you to prove how that’s wrong.

And BTW, coaches often handle 30 different players 30 different ways. They don’t need 30 tailored programs, one program tweaked for the strengths and weaknesses of your players is just good coaching. One size never fits all.

Then why don't all players under a specific coach or team develop?