Player Discussion Kirby Dach: Welcome to Montreal part 2

[ReHabs]

Please take off the blinders.

A guy who is trusted to play 17 minutes per playoff game and puts up 6 points in 9 games while being +3 is not a flash in a pan. Just admit he belonged in the NHL. The longer you don't admit it, the worse it looks for you.

The injury in his sophomore season held him back, his coaches then gave him a smaller role leading to less points, but clearly he still learned on the job, because he is playing just fine here.

Lafleur per se is not relevant, but the GM's handling of his first three years versus how Chicago handled Dach this past summer Is relevant. You said that because Chicago cut Dach loose it "proves" he was "rushed".

That statement is wrong on at least three levels. You know, you can admit it is wrong and still make your case that Slafkovsky was not ready. Your acknowledgment on Dach will not be held against you elsewhere.


Dach obviously learned. however, he did not produce points as expected in years 2 and especially 3.

The problem might have been the Hawks, not the league he was in.

9 games is a very small number of games, you cannot extrapolate much from that. Incidentally, this is why a good team would be conservative and demote a player they feel is a ‘tweener rather than keep them up in the NHL and burn a whole ELC year.

We have no disagreement that he clearly learned things while in the NHL. You learn at all points in life.

Given the balance of evidence, as the team that drafted him, I have no doubt that Chicago would not re-rush him to the NHL if they could re-do things. Given what they knew by the end of Year3, they would have let him do another lap in the WHL in Year1 as the Habs/Knights had Suzuki.

Basically, they made a decision in Year1 that should be reserved for only the most important and ready young players.

I don’t think his development as a hockey player (ie a player who helps your team win games) was helped by playing in the NHL as early and often as he did.

 

[417]

Please take off the blinders.

A guy who is trusted to play 17 minutes per playoff game and puts up 6 points in 9 games while being +3 is not a flash in a pan. Just admit he belonged in the NHL. The longer you don't admit it, the worse it looks for you.

The injury in his sophomore season held him back, his coaches then gave him a smaller role leading to less points, but clearly he still learned on the job, because he is playing just fine here.

Lafleur per se is not relevant, but the GM's handling of his first three years versus how Chicago handled Dach this past summer Is relevant. You said that because Chicago cut Dach loose it "proves" he was "rushed".

That statement is wrong on at least three levels. You know, you can admit it is wrong and still make your case that Slafkovsky was not ready. Your acknowledgment on Dach will not be held against you elsewhere.


Dach obviously learned. however, he did not produce points as expected in years 2 and especially 3.

The problem might have been the Hawks, not the league he was in.

Apparently you can only learn when you're getting points.

Lack of points = lack of readiness.

This is the kind of hard hitting analysis I joined up for here.

 

[BJCOLLINS]

what a beauty…….Dach was a goal away from the Gordie Howe.

 

[dinodebino]

Did not take part in the practice. As Suzuki and Dvo.

Ça va ben aller.

 

[The Great Weal]

I think the goal is to find another Dach-type project but as a defenseman.

 

[SlafySZN]

Great article about Dach

https://www.tvasports.ca/2023/01/27/derriere-une-impression-darrogance-le-vrai-visage-de-kirby-dach?fbclid=IwAR3bE1uP6wckx4xO4rg3bkUIX2leX_tnAc7D8MYEz-Nsgbltc7-ZQjKiLjY&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

 

[DAChampion]

Apparently you can only learn when you're getting points.

Lack of points = lack of readiness.

I think that's almost certainly true -- for forwards, and over a large number of games.

 

[SlafySZN]

delete

 

[Adam Michaels]

I think the goal is to find another Dach-type project but as a defenseman.

Hopefully Barron can be one of those.

He was off to a rough start in Laval. And then he became their best D both offensively and defensively. Now in Montreal, he also started not great. But he's slowly becoming more comfortable.

I feel like both Dach and Barron are slowly coming into their own.

 

[BaseballCoach]

9 games is a very small number of games, you cannot extrapolate much from that. Incidentally, this is why a good team would be conservative and demote a player they feel is a ‘tweener rather than keep them up in the NHL and burn a whole ELC year.

We have no disagreement that he clearly learned things while in the NHL. You learn at all points in life.

Given the balance of evidence, as the team that drafted him, I have no doubt that Chicago would not re-rush him to the NHL if they could re-do things. Given what they knew by the end of Year3, they would have let him do another lap in the WHL in Year1 as the Habs/Knights had Suzuki.

Basically, they made a decision in Year1 that should be reserved for only the most important and ready young players.

I don’t think his development as a hockey player (ie a player who helps your team win games) was helped by playing in the NHL as early and often as he did.

While Chicago was foolishly rushing Dach to the NHL, the Flames wisely kept Jakob Pelletier another two years in Junior and then two years in the AHL where he actually IS DOMINATING (over 1.0 ppg this year!!)

According to the slow-development guys, Pelletier should have come in to Calgary and be "ready for the role he was drafted for". What better path than two years of amazing Junior competition at 18/19 and two years dominating the men of the AHL? With a leadership-heavy Team Canada WJC stint thrown in, also 1.0 ppg!!!

So, after all this thorough preparation, Pelletier came up a week ago. And he did nothing in four games. And now he is back in the AHL.

And before you say this is only one player, it's not just Pelletier. MOST of the players who take this route never become NHL stars (but a few do), while MOST of the players who start in the NHL do become stars (but a few don't). Of course the ones starting in the NHL start there because they make the team in training camp, but that is kind of my point. The ones that make the NHL team have a high success rate, even though there are a few examples of failed development (such as KK). There is little reason to be afraid to play an 18 year old in the NHL if he can beat out his competition for a starting spot.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Hopefully Barron can be one of those.

He was off to a rough start in Laval. And then he became their best D both offensively and defensively. Now in Montreal, he also started not great. But he's slowly becoming more comfortable.

I feel like both Dach and Barron are slowly coming into their own.

I don’t feel like Barron ever fell into that reclamation project type like Dach though. Dach already had 3 partial seasons of underwhelming play to be fair. Barron and him are not starting from the same place.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

While Chicago was foolishly rushing Dach to the NHL, the Flames wisely kept Jakob Pelletier another two years in Junior and then two years in the AHL where he actually IS DOMINATING (over 1.0 ppg this year!!)

According to the slow-development guys, Pelletier should have come in to Calgary and be "ready for the role he was drafted for". What better path than two years of amazing Junior competition at 18/19 and two years dominating the men of the AHL? With a leadership-heavy Team Canada WJC stint thrown in, also 1.0 ppg!!!

So, after all this thorough preparation, Pelletier came up a week ago. And he did nothing in four games. And now he is back in the AHL.

And before you say this is only one player, it's not just Pelletier. MOST of the players who take this route never become NHL stars (but a few do), while MOST of the players who start in the NHL do become stars (but a few don't). Of course the ones starting in the NHL start there because they make the team in training camp, but that is kind of my point. The ones that make the NHL team have a high success rate, even though there a few examples of failed development (such as KK). There is little reason to be afraid to play an 18 year old in the NHL if he can beat out his competition for a starting spot.

I feel like this is just some random statement you threw together because it aligns with your thought process.

Where is the proof of both of your claims? Of course, some that don’t start in the NHL won’t make it, they were likely never going to make it, but the idea that all those that start in the nhl become successes except the odd kk just isn’t true. Same for those playing in the AHL or junior another year not making it. You completely made this up.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Welcome to Montreal, Kirby Dach!

JK. This kid is our consolation prize if we don't get Bedard. Just turned 22 years old, will likely finish the season between 45-50 points playing as our #2 Center. Can skate, can pass, can score, can dangle, can hit, can fight, can become our best player over Suzuki IMO. Still a very unfinished project and has yet to tap his full potential. I feel Kirby is the type of player that elevates his game in the playoffs even more. A tremendous acquisition from KH. Very exciting for us to see him succeed with this group and this organization!


They're gonna play Leo Carlsson next year at 18 years old

Goal Caulifield says hello. I don’t see any way where Dach becomes a better player than CC.

 

[Adam Michaels]

I don’t feel like Barron ever fell into that reclamation project type like Dach though. Dach already had 3 partial seasons of underwhelming play to be fair. Barron and him are not starting from the same place.

You're right. Barron and Dach are not starting from the same place. Dach with 3 underwhelming NHL seasons to start his career. And when Barron was acquired last trade deadline, he was playing in his first full pro year.

The only reason I brought both of them up is because at this moment, Dach and Barron are both starting to come into their own, which is what they have in similarity.

But as @The Great Weal was saying, if Habs can pull off another Dach-like trade for a D, it would be a big boost for Habs.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Where is the proof of both of your claims?

Take a look at the entire Draft Class of 2019 on Hockeydb.com

The ones with more NHL games tend to be the more successful ones, even in ppg not just total points. Every single player from the 2019 draft class that started his NHL career this year (allowing 2 years in Junior and one in AHL or Europe) is very low on points.

Now possibly some of the ones with the most points and games may have fallen short of the hopes of those who drafted them, but I fail to see how postponing their NHL development looks like a good strategy.

Once you are done with 2019, you can look at 2016, 2017 and 2018. You will find similar patterns.

Looking at an entire draft year is more illuminating than citing only one example that fits our narratives (from either side of the debate).

 

[salbutera]

Sort of. Did Guy Lafleur's "development" suddenly get better in his 4th NHL season, or did he just finally blossom?

Was Scotty Bowman an idiot for 3 years, or did Lafleur have to figure out what works for him?

What I know is that Sam Pollock did not give up on Lafleur and trade him after three years, the third of which was the most disapppointing, whereas Chicago traded Dach at the worst time for them.

But whatever happened with Dach, you cannot say that because he got injured (in a WJC training camp!), and because Chicago did not use him the same way we are, that he was "rushed".

Do you know that in his ROOKIE season, Dach had 6 points in 9 playoff games!!! The whole Chicago fanbase were so happy with him. He averaged 17 minutes per playoff game and was a +3. In what world is that evidence he did not belong?

Please just STOP saying Dach was rushed.

Adding: Lafleur was a 20-year old rookie based on drafting rules back in the day.

 

[CHwest]

Goal Caulifield says hello. I don’t see any way where Dach becomes a better player than CC.

If Dach continues on his trajectory he will certainly become a more valuable player.

Sort of. Did Guy Lafleur's "development" suddenly get better in his 4th NHL season, or did he just finally blossom?

Was Scotty Bowman an idiot for 3 years, or did Lafleur have to figure out what works for him?

What I know is that Sam Pollock did not give up on Lafleur and trade him after three years, the third of which was the most disapppointing, whereas Chicago traded Dach at the worst time for them.

But whatever happened with Dach, you cannot say that because he got injured (in a WJC training camp!), and because Chicago did not use him the same way we are, that he was "rushed".

Do you know that in his ROOKIE season, Dach had 6 points in 9 playoff games!!! The whole Chicago fanbase were so happy with him. He averaged 17 minutes per playoff game and was a +3. In what world is that evidence he did not belong?

Please just STOP saying Dach was rushed.

You are right about the points, but somewhere along the line his confidence took a hit and he fell of. So yes he was rushed. These are kids among men, confidence in most of them is very fleeting.

 

[The Great Weal]

You're right. Barron and Dach are not starting from the same place. Dach with 3 underwhelming NHL seasons to start his career. And when Barron was acquired last trade deadline, he was playing in his first full pro year.

The only reason I brought both of them up is because at this moment, Dach and Barron are both starting to come into their own, which is what they have in similarity.

But as @The Great Weal was saying, if Habs can pull off another Dach-like trade for a D, it would be a big boost for Habs.

I think a guy like Adam Boqvist fits that description. He seems solid every time I see him, needs more chances.

 

[Adam Michaels]

I think a guy like Adam Boqvist fits that description. He seems solid every time I see him, needs more chances.

Interestingly enough, he was exactly who I was thinking of, too.

 

[The Great Weal]

Interestingly enough, he was exactly who I was thinking of, too.

They got lots of RHD and Jiricek seems to be their guy for the future. Would be nice to get Olivier too in that potential trade. No clue what the Jackets would want though.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Take a look at the entire Draft Class of 2019 on Hockeydb.com

The ones with more NHL games tend to be the more successful ones, even in ppg not just total points. Every single player from the 2019 draft class that started his NHL career this year (allowing 2 years in Junior and one in AHL or Europe) is very low on points.

Now possibly some of the ones with the most points and games may have fallen short of the hopes of those who drafted them, but I fail to see how postponing their NHL development looks like a good strategy.

Once you are done with 2019, you can look at 2016, 2017 and 2018. You will find similar patterns.

Looking at an entire draft year is more illuminating than citing only one example that fits our narratives (from either side of the debate).

None of what you said is true. I don’t have to look at draft classes to know this. Some 18 ear olds are good enough, most aren’t.

I think a guy like Adam Boqvist fits that description. He seems solid every time I see him, needs more chances.

I agree he fits the description.

 

[417]

I think that's almost certainly true -- for forwards, and over a large number of games.

Don't get me wrong, it has to turn into production eventually

 

[BaseballCoach]

None of what you said is true. I don’t have to look at draft classes to know this. Some 18 ear olds are good enough, most aren’t.

We agree on that, of course.

The point is that the majority of those who actually do start in the NHL at 18 work out, and only a smaller percentage of those who do not start at 18 work out.

This is because with almost all teams who have this choice, those who win a job in training camp are kept in the NHL and those who can't are not.

I don't think it is coherent to use the term "rushed" for those who made the team but stagnate months, years, or in the case of Galchenyuk, half a decade later.

Also, I don't agree with those who say that "there is no cost" to holding a player back.

The cost is slowing down his development. This is because every person who comes up from the AHL needs to adapt to the NHL. The adaptation is simply later if the player is sent down to start, if he was actually good enough to start in the NHL.

There is NO QUESTION that Brady Tkachuk and Tim Stutzle would have taken longer to reach star status, had they done a "costless" stint of a year or two or three in Junior/College/Europe/AHL, continuing to get away with moves/tricks that may not work in the NHL.

I have no problem with discussing whether or not a given player is good enough to start in the NHL at 18. What I disagree with is the narrative that delaying is always costless, or that anyone who does not immediately put up big points was "rushed".

Dach's producton to date may be a "disappointment" to some, but surely he is doing better right now in the NHL than Jakob Pelletier or the dozen other players drafted in the first round in 2019 who are in their rookie campaigns this year.

I can have a reasonable disagreement with other posters over whether Juraj Slafkovsky is actually good enough for the NHL bottom six right now. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that a stint in the AHL means that he or any other non-generational player can skip the developmental step of starting in the NHL in the bottom six. For sure, Kirby Dach's development path is not an argument in FAVOUR of sending Slaf down.

 

[MilesNewton]

he looks hurt or skating strange also not his normal amount of minutes

 

[FourQuarters]

I think a guy like Adam Boqvist fits that description. He seems solid every time I see him, needs more chances.

He and Kirby are great buddy, too. Blue Jackets gave him PP time, but he's so fragile, too many injuries.