Sheldon Keefe Discussion

[zeke]

Where do people even get the idea that the Flames are a deep team?

Top-6s

TOR: Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Hyman, Mikheyev
CGY: Tkachuk, Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Mangiapane

And here's how their bottom 6/7 forwards have done this year and last year at even strength:

Kerfoot (26): 13:03toi, 10gl/31pt pace, 50.6xgf%
Leivo (27): 12:58toi, 13gl/27pt pace, 50.7xgf%

Thornton (41): 13:23toi, 6gl/26pt pace, 48.3xgf%
Dube (22): 11:50toi, 8gl/26pt pace, 46.4xgf%

Spezza (37): 9:14toi, 10gl/26pt pace, 50.8xgf%
Ryan (34): 11:38toi, 9gl/26pt pace, 50.1xgf%


Vesey (27): 12:22toi, 11gl/23pt pace, 48.8xgf%
Simon (26): 13:27toi, 8gl/25pt pace, 49.4xgf%

Engvall (24): 10:32toi, 11gl/22pt pace, 51.6xgf%
Bennett (24): 11:40toi, 11gl/16pt pace, 51.5xgf%

Simmonds (32): 11:52toi, 4gl/18pt pace, 45.0xgf%
Lucic (32): 11:29toi, 5gl/16pt pace, 50.3xgf%


Boyd (27): 10:24toi, 13gl/35pt pace, 48.9xgf%
Nordstrom (28): 9:51, 6gl/10pt pace, 42.9xgf%

 

[zeke]

And what is special about vegas' bottom 6?

Tuch, Roy, Glass, Carrier, Reaves, Nose, Kolesar?

 

[biotk]

You said guys in that range rarely spend time in the AHL.. Most of them do, they just don't get there until around their third season.

I said: "Most top-4 D who were drafted in the first two rounds spend very little time in the AHL (often none at all, sometimes a couple games after their junior season ends, sometimes half a season as they adjust to pro, or a little more if there is a lockout. Generally those who spend more time are large, physical D who are projects)."

And what I said was absolutely correct.
Starting in 2005 and going for the 9 drafts (D drafted in the first two rounds who became top-4 D):
Jack Johnson - AHL games: 0
Marc Staal - AHL games: 0
Matt Niskanen - AHL games: 13
Marc-Edouard Vlasic - AHL games: 1 (but occurred halfway through second season, despite playing 82 games and had nothing to do with development)
Erik Johnson - AHL games: 1
Petry - AHL games: 51
Alzner - AHL games: 104
McDonagh - AHL games: 38
Shattenkirk - AHL games: 13
Cole - AHL games: 109
Subban - AHL games: 77
Doughty - 0
Bogosian - 5
Pietrangelo - 1
Schenn - 0
Myers - 0
Karlsson - 12
Gardiner - 57
Del Zotto - 11 (post injury in second NHL season)
Carlson - 48
Voynov - 256
Josi - 74
Schultz - 34 (all during lockout)
Hamonic - 40 (mostly during lockout)
Scandella - 96 (mostly during lockout)
Hedman - 0
OEL - 35 (mostly during lockout)
Cowen - 3 (during lockout)
Ellis - 61 (mostly during lockout)
de Haan - 76
Kulikov - 0
Leddy - 53 (mostly during lockout)
Dumoulin - 115
Orlov - 79
Gudbranson - 2 (during lockout)
Fowler - 0
Forbort - 192
Faulk - 43 (mostly during lockout)
Merrill - 27
Nemeth - 104
Holl - 194
Larsson - 67 (33 during lockout)
Hamilton - 0
Brodin - 9 (during lockout)
Klefbom - 57
Murphy - 36
Edmundson - 100
Murray - 0
Rielly - 14
Lindholm - 44
Dumba - 23
Trouba - 0
Ceci - 30
Maatta - 0
Matheson - 59
Skjei - 76
McCabe - 58
Severson - 5
Jones - 0
Nurse - 13
Ristolainen - 34
Morrissey - 65
Pulock - 163
Zadorov - 52
Theodore - 97

This was taking a pretty generous view of top-4 D which shifts the games up somewhat, but out 65 D, 27 played fewer than 15 games in the AHL and the median was 35 games. Most top-4 D who were drafted in the first two rounds spend very little time in the AHL.

Our two were able to get there early. Over a 5 year stretch, of all the guys who had decent careers, 33/36 took 4 or more years to make the show, 30/36 took 5 or more years to make the show and 22/36 took 6 or more years to make the show. Most spent a bunch of time in the A or bouncing back and forth. If 33/36 took 4 or more years, is it not reasonable to suggest there's no need to panic? Those guys also didn't deal with two interrupted COVID seasons.

I have zero interest in players who were/are bottom pairing or #7D. You can get them anywhere. If that is what you think the Leafs' should be developing Sandin and Liljegren into, cool, but I think that is a massive failure of development and potential (same goes for Dermott).

Now I get wanting them to get regular minutes somewhere but that's hard to get anywhere.....something none of those past guys were faced with.

The Leafs' not getting Sandin and Liljegren high level games anywhere over a 11 month period is a complete failure of the organization when it comes to their development.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

I said: "Most top-4 D who were drafted in the first two rounds spend very little time in the AHL (often none at all, sometimes a couple games after their junior season ends, sometimes half a season as they adjust to pro, or a little more if there is a lockout. Generally those who spend more time are large, physical D who are projects)."

And what I said was absolutely correct.
Starting in 2005 and going for the 9 drafts (D drafted in the first two rounds who became top-4 D):
Jack Johnson - AHL games: 0
Marc Staal - AHL games: 0
Matt Niskanen - AHL games: 13
Marc-Edouard Vlasic - AHL games: 1 (but occurred halfway through second season, despite playing 82 games and had nothing to do with development)
Erik Johnson - AHL games: 1
Petry - AHL games: 51
Alzner - AHL games: 104
McDonagh - AHL games: 38
Shattenkirk - AHL games: 13
Cole - AHL games: 109
Subban - AHL games: 77
Doughty - 0
Bogosian - 5
Pietrangelo - 1
Schenn - 0
Myers - 0
Karlsson - 12
Gardiner - 57
Del Zotto - 11 (post injury in second NHL season)
Carlson - 48
Voynov - 256
Josi - 74
Schultz - 34 (all during lockout)
Hamonic - 40 (mostly during lockout)
Scandella - 96 (mostly during lockout)
Hedman - 0
OEL - 35 (mostly during lockout)
Cowen - 3 (during lockout)
Ellis - 61 (mostly during lockout)
de Haan - 76
Kulikov - 0
Leddy - 53 (mostly during lockout)
Dumoulin - 115
Orlov - 79
Gudbranson - 2 (during lockout)
Fowler - 0
Forbort - 192
Faulk - 43 (mostly during lockout)
Merrill - 27
Nemeth - 104
Holl - 194
Larsson - 67 (33 during lockout)
Hamilton - 0
Brodin - 9 (during lockout)
Klefbom - 57
Murphy - 36
Edmundson - 100
Murray - 0
Rielly - 14
Lindholm - 44
Dumba - 23
Trouba - 0
Ceci - 30
Maatta - 0
Matheson - 59
Skjei - 76
McCabe - 58
Severson - 5
Jones - 0
Nurse - 13
Ristolainen - 34
Morrissey - 65
Pulock - 163
Zadorov - 52
Theodore - 97

This was taking a pretty generous view of top-4 D which shifts the games up somewhat, but out 65 D, 27 played fewer than 15 games in the AHL and the median was 35 games. Most top-4 D who were drafted in the first two rounds spend very little time in the AHL.



I have zero interest in players who were/are bottom pairing or #7D. You can get them anywhere. If that is what you think the Leafs' should be developing Sandin and Liljegren into, cool, but I think that is a massive failure of development and potential (same goes for Dermott).



The Leafs' not getting Sandin and Liljegren high level games anywhere over a 11 month period is a complete failure of the organization when it comes to their development.

So I notice a lot of the D you decided to list were guys selected before where the guys we are discussing were selected? Is the argument then that better players develop quicker? Yes there are a couple outliers which are just that in life, outliers. Many of the guys in the list I provided were not just 5-6-7 guys. This reminds me of the Kadri discussions where HF was convinced Kadri was behind in his development for where he was selected while all data showed he was at or ahead. We can't just remove what has happened in hockey the last 2 years. Nor can we say because you spent more time in the AHL you are lesser, given we know full well it isn't even an option for most guys. The only fair thing we can do is judge how they are performing there.

Your last point, as I said, I can agree with in that I would rather they be getting regular minutes at the right level. Where/what that is in today's world, who knows?

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

So I notice a lot of the D you decided to list were guys selected before where the guys we are discussing were selected? Is the argument then that better players develop quicker? Yes there are a couple outliers which are just that in life, outliers. Many of the guys in the list I provided were not just 5-6-7 guys. This reminds me of the Kadri discussions where HF was convinced Kadri was behind in his development for where he was selected while all data showed he was at or ahead. We can't just remove what has happened in hockey the last 2 years. Nor can we say because you spent more time in the AHL you are lesser, given we know full well it isn't even an option for most guys. The only fair thing we can do is judge how they are performing there.

Your last point, as I said, I can agree with in that I would rather they be getting regular minutes at the right level. Where/what that is in today's world, who knows?

The real lesson from his or her analysis is that overfitting your data on a highly-variable human process leads to really head-scratching conclusions.

Overfitting - Wikipedia

Hopefully this poster is good at something else.

 

[Brobust]

I lol every time somebody lists those flames guys as "good depth players".

Anyways, Leafs have kerfoot mikheyev Robertson Engvall Spezza simmonds in their bottom 6.

I'll give you Kerfoot and Mikheyev. I like Engvall but he can't even get into the lineup. Simmonds and Spezza are old and slow 'specialist' players. Babcock would be getting ripped if he was playing those guys. They look consistently awful at 5v5. Robertson is still an unknown quantity, especially at 5v5.

 

[RogerR]

I'll give you Kerfoot and Mikheyev. I like Engvall but he can't even get into the lineup. Simmonds and Spezza are old and slow 'specialist' players. Babcock would be getting ripped if he was playing those guys. They look consistently awful at 5v5. Robertson is still an unknown quantity, especially at 5v5.

Babcock got ripped because he was insane. Keefe is a much better coach in 2021

 

[Dekes For Days]

So I notice a lot of the D you decided to list were guys selected before where the guys we are discussing were selected?

Yes, I noticed that too - quite misleading. And that's on top of the already misleading criteria, as unlike Sandin, most defensemen don't reach the AHL until at least their D+3.

I was curious, so I went back and looked at the drafts through the cap era. I took any defensemen that was picked between 15th overall and 45th overall, and then I removed the defensemen who had played less than the equivalent of two full seasons (164 GP), or less than 100 GP if within the last 5 drafts. I then looked at when each defenseman made the NHL full-time (played over half a season).

Sandin is in the beginning of his D+3 season.

1 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+1 season.
8 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+2 season.
6 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+3 season.
15 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+4 season.
10 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+5 season.
7 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+6 season.
3 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+7 season.

Each grouping features top-pairing defensemen, other than D+7. There is zero reason to believe there is anything wrong with Sandin's development. Biotk's claims are baseless.

 

[biotk]

So I notice a lot of the D you decided to list were guys selected before where the guys we are discussing were selected?

I am looking at D drafted in the first two rounds who became top-4 D. Then I look at the median, so while there are some high draft picks, we are generally talking about players drafted in the late first round. Liljegren was drafted 17th and Sandin 29.

But let's not forget that these are two players considered t0 be draft steals by most of this message board: Liljegren was ranked as high as #2 and only fell because of mono. Sandin was drafted due to Dubas' amazing recognition of talent that other GMs just don't have, aided by a scouting department that has more money than any other.

Then on top of that they were drafted into the organization that most of the people on here think is better at development than any other, and certainly has more money and access to resources, and things like skating coaches etc, that other teams can't compete with, and unlike most drafted players who are sent back to junior, or go to college, or remain overseas, they got to be immersed in that most amazing development program, and were under complete control of that most amazing development program, from age 18.

So - if all that is correct then there is no reason that they can't compete with their actual peers. (which as I said, most D drafted in the first two rounds who become top-4 D don't play much in the AHL, which yes, Sandin and Liljegren were put there at 18, but that is not what I have been arguing against - I have been arguing against the belief that most of their peers play a couple years in the AHL, they just start a couple years later. No, not if you are maintaining a view that these are future top-4 guys. Yes, if you are talking about general draft picks from the first two rounds who mostly don't make it, or sputter out as bottom pairing/injury replacement guys. And the median age for D drafted in the first two rounds who become top-4 D actually becoming top-4 D in the NHL is slightly younger than Sandin is right now, while Sandin and Liljegren are not even close to being full-time D, let alone top-4 D, despite all of those organizational advantages that Sandin and Liljegren were supposed to have.)

So instead what we now have is everyone believing that they are still likely to become top-4s, and believing that they are ahead of the curve, but through only comparing them people who were drafted later than them, and who were not "draft steals" and who were not developed in the most amazing development program, and who generally did not become top-4 D.

The reality is if they are going to become top-4 Ds (unlikely at this point for either) they are behind the curve.

The reality is that they developed in a way that Dubas had previously said was harmful - and that was before the pandemic. And developed badly since the pandemic. Now people can say that because of the pandemic bad development doesn't count or couldn't be avoided. But I knew back in October that the AHL season was likely going to be in shambles and hard to get off the ground - especially in Ontario, and Dubas was considered to be a genius for mostly picking Euros because development in NA was going to be rough this year. So, this was not a case where Dubas couldn't have known that there were going to be problems. He simply decided that having Liljegren and Sandin available in case the rare situation arose where the team could use them as injury replacement was more valuable to his short-term interests than the player's long-term development interests.

 

[biotk]

The real lesson from his or her analysis is that overfitting your data on a highly-variable human process leads to really head-scratching conclusions.

Overfitting - Wikipedia

Hopefully this poster is good at something else.

I understand that actually comparing players with equivalent players, or equivalent players for where you predict or hope a player is going to be is a complete mystery for people who know nothing about statistics - which you clearly know nothing.

 

[IPS]

I am looking at D drafted in the first two rounds who became top-4 D. Then I look at the median, so while there are some high draft picks, we are generally talking about players drafted in the late first round. Liljegren was drafted 17th and Sandin 29.

But let's not forget that these are two players considered t0 be draft steals by most of this message board: Liljegren was ranked as high as #2 and only fell because of mono. Sandin was drafted due to Dubas' amazing recognition of talent that other GMs just don't have, aided by a scouting department that has more money than any other.

Then on top of that they were drafted into the organization that most of the people on here think is better at development than any other, and certainly has more money and access to resources, and things like skating coaches etc, that other teams can't compete with, and unlike most drafted players who are sent back to junior, or go to college, or remain overseas, they got to be immersed in that most amazing development program, and were under complete control of that most amazing development program, from age 18.

So - if all that is correct then there is no reason that they can't compete with their actual peers. (which as I said, most D drafted in the first two rounds who become top-4 D don't play much in the AHL, which yes, Sandin and Liljegren were put there at 18, but that is not what I have been arguing against - I have been arguing against the belief that most of their peers play a couple years in the AHL, they just start a couple years later. No, not if you are maintaining a view that these are future top-4 guys. Yes, if you are talking about general draft picks from the first two rounds who mostly don't make it, or sputter out as bottom pairing/injury replacement guys. And the median age for D drafted in the first two rounds who become top-4 D actually becoming top-4 D in the NHL is slightly younger than Sandin is right now, while Sandin and Liljegren are not even close to being full-time D, let alone top-4 D, despite all of those organizational advantages that Sandin and Liljegren were supposed to have.)

So instead what we now have is everyone believing that they are still likely to become top-4s, and believing that they are ahead of the curve, but through only comparing them people who were drafted later than them, and who were not "draft steals" and who were not developed in the most amazing development program, and who generally did not become top-4 D.

The reality is if they are going to become top-4 Ds (unlikely at this point for either) they are behind the curve.

The reality is that they developed in a way that Dubas had previously said was harmful - and that was before the pandemic. And developed badly since the pandemic. Now people can say that because of the pandemic bad development doesn't count or couldn't be avoided. But I knew back in October that the AHL season was likely going to be in shambles and hard to get off the ground - especially in Ontario, and Dubas was considered to be a genius for mostly picking Euros because development in NA was going to be rough this year. So, this was not a case where Dubas couldn't have known that there were going to be problems. He simply decided that having Liljegren and Sandin available in case the rare situation arose where the team could use them as injury replacement was more valuable to his short-term interests than the player's long-term development interests.

Unless people seriously thought we drafted Sandin and Liljegren to develop them into bottom pair defensemen

If people actually paid attention to how other more successful teams drafted and developed D (which I don't think they do, or maybe they do but are just that blinded by the Dubas rose tinted glasses), this wouldn't even be a discussion.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If people actually paid attention to how other more successful teams drafted and developed D, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Yes, if you and biotk were actually paying attention to how successful teams drafted and developed, and how similar quality prospects have been developed to successful results, this wouldn't be a discussion. We have multiple people proving how wrong the statements from both of you are, and it merely gets ignored.

As has been shown, Toronto has multiple home-grown defensemen on the current team. This includes our best defenseman so far this season, who notably overcame the most obscure development path possible, and a toxic coach who wouldn't play him, to get to where he is today.

As has been shown, successful teams have followed many of the exact same strategies that the Leafs have with Sandin.

As has been shown, successful defensemen (even top-pair defensemen) within Sandin's draft range make the NHL full-time at all sorts of ages, ranging from their D+1 to D+7. The large majority of successful defensemen picked within Sandin's range had not made the NHL full-time at this point in Sandin's development.

The claims are baseless. There is nothing wrong with Sandin's development.

 

[biotk]

Unless people seriously thought we drafted Sandin and Liljegren to develop them into bottom pair defensemen

If people actually paid attention to how other more successful teams drafted and developed D (which I don't think they do, or maybe they do but are just that blinded by the Dubas rose tinted glasses), this wouldn't even be a discussion.

I respect those who say that because the Leafs are in win now mode they are fine with sacrificing Sandin and Liljegren's potential. I disagree (not only because the Leafs' have not won a series but also because teams can both win and properly develop at the same time) but at least they are not denying what the Leafs have been clearly doing with them.

 

[zeke]

I at least they are not denying what the Leafs have been clearly doing with them.

Yes it is best if people don't deny that they have moved Sandin and Lilly ahead faster than their peers.

 

[IPS]

Yes, if you and biotk were actually paying attention to how successful teams drafted and developed, and how similar quality prospects have been developed to successful results, this wouldn't be a discussion. We have multiple people proving how wrong the statements from both of you are, and it merely gets ignored.

As has been shown, Toronto has multiple home-grown defensemen on the current team. This includes our best defenseman so far this season, who notably overcame the most obscure development path possible, and a toxic coach who wouldn't play him, to get to where he is today.

As has been shown, successful teams have followed many of the exact same strategies that the Leafs have with Sandin.

As has been shown, successful defensemen (even top-pair defensemen) within Sandin's draft range make the NHL full-time at all sorts of ages, ranging from their D+1 to D+7. The large majority of successful defensemen picked within Sandin's range had not made the NHL full-time at this point in Sandin's development.

The claims are baseless. There is nothing wrong with Sandin's development.

Did you even bother to read his post?

It was already calculated, Sandin has played more AHL games than the average D drafted in the first two rounds who went on to become a top-4. Which means that Sandin is behind in development compared to the majority of successful defensemen picked within the first two rounds.

There's no ands, ifs, buts or pro-Dubas spins here. The facts don't care about anyone's feelings towards Dubas.

 

[Critical13]

The upside to this Sandin debate is that we've been fortunate to not have any big injuries yet this year. Our defence has been very sturdy in that regard.

 

[IPS]

I respect those who say that because the Leafs are in win now mode they are fine with sacrificing Sandin and Liljegren's potential. I disagree (not only because the Leafs' have not won a series but also because teams can both win and properly develop at the same time) but at least they are not denying what the Leafs have been clearly doing with them.

And if that's the case it makes more sense to trade him like you said. It's piss poor asset management no matter how much spin gets put on it.

 

[IPS]

The upside to this Sandin debate is that we've been fortunate to not have any big injuries yet this year. Our defence has been very sturdy in that regard.

Would be nice if we could just get a look at Sandin either way.

 

[Bomber0104]

I respect those who say that because the Leafs are in win now mode they are fine with sacrificing Sandin and Liljegren's potential. I disagree (not only because the Leafs' have not won a series but also because teams can both win and properly develop at the same time) but at least they are not denying what the Leafs have been clearly doing with them.

If there was an AHL for these guys to play in right now, I don't think this would be as big an issue, no?

 

[zeke]

Did you even bother to read his post?

It was already calculated, Sandin has played more AHL games than the average D drafted in the first two rounds who went on to become a top-4. Which means that Sandin is behind in development compared to the majority of successful defensemen picked within the first two rounds.

There's no ands, ifs, buts or pro-Dubas spins here. The facts don't care about anyone's feelings towards Dubas.

Lmao. You guys are too much.

Youngest dmen in hockey last year.

1.T.Bjornfot (Apr.6/01, #22): 3 games
2.V.Heinola (Mar.2/01, #20): 8 games
3.A.Boqvist (Aug.7/00, #8): 41 games
4.R.Dahlin (Apr.13/00, #1): 141 games
5.R.Sandin (Mar.7/00, #29): 28 games

 

[Brobust]

Where do people even get the idea that the Flames are a deep team?

Top-6s

TOR: Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Hyman, Mikheyev
CGY: Tkachuk, Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Mangiapane

And here's how their bottom 6/7 forwards have done this year and last year at even strength:

Kerfoot (26): 13:03toi, 10gl/31pt pace, 50.6xgf%
Leivo (27): 12:58toi, 13gl/27pt pace, 50.7xgf%

Thornton (41): 13:23toi, 6gl/26pt pace, 48.3xgf%
Dube (22): 11:50toi, 8gl/26pt pace, 46.4xgf%

Spezza (37): 9:14toi, 10gl/26pt pace, 50.8xgf%
Ryan (34): 11:38toi, 9gl/26pt pace, 50.1xgf%


Vesey (27): 12:22toi, 11gl/23pt pace, 48.8xgf%
Simon (26): 13:27toi, 8gl/25pt pace, 49.4xgf%

Engvall (24): 10:32toi, 11gl/22pt pace, 51.6xgf%
Bennett (24): 11:40toi, 11gl/16pt pace, 51.5xgf%

Simmonds (32): 11:52toi, 4gl/18pt pace, 45.0xgf%
Lucic (32): 11:29toi, 5gl/16pt pace, 50.3xgf%


Boyd (27): 10:24toi, 13gl/35pt pace, 48.9xgf%
Nordstrom (28): 9:51, 6gl/10pt pace, 42.9xgf%

Backlund is their 3C right now. And he's been a ridiculous 55CF% player for the last 3-4 seasons. He alone gives them a massive edge over Toronto.

Then there's Bennett who isn't just a tough guy. He's also a guy who's top 50 in ixG/60 over the past 3-4 seasons.

 

[biotk]

Did you even bother to read his post?

It was already calculated, Sandin has played more AHL games than the average D drafted in the first two rounds who went on to become a top-4. Which means that Sandin is behind in development compared to the majority of successful defensemen picked within the first two rounds.

There's no ands, ifs, buts or pro-Dubas spins here. The facts don't care about anyone's feelings towards Dubas.

Just to be more specific - my argument is that among D drafted in the first 2 rounds who become top-4 D the median age for them making the NHL full-time is roughly 20 years 200 days and the median age for them becoming top-4 in the NHL is roughly 100 days later (these numbers change slightly, but only slightly, as new players are drafted and become top-4 over time). Most of the top-D similar to Sandin and Liljegren in terms of size and style of play make it sooner than that median, not later. A good chunk of those who make it after the median age either went to college, stayed in Europe or are big, physical D who have a tendency to develop more slowly.

Sandin and Liljegren are not close to becoming full-time or top-4 D, despite the claims that they were draft steals and have been under complete control of what is supposed to be the most amazing developmental organization from the age of 18. So they are not ahead of the curve, but behind the curve, and that would be ok if they were developed, but they are not.

But because they have not met expectations posters have shifted to comparing them with 4th and 5th round draft picks, or comparing them to players who generally didn't make it. Or just making things up like Zeke did here: "Dermott didn't play any NHL games at all until midway through his 21yr old season, the season that Lilly is currently entering. And Dermott only made it after Polak was injured"

Dermott was 21 years, 15 days old when he made the NHL permanently. Liljegren is already 9 months older than that and the team desn't have him in the top 8. And Dermott replaced Borgman who had finally played himself out of the lineup, but Dermott should have been in the lineup from the first day of the season. Polak not only was not injured, and a RHD, so Dermott wouldn't have been replacing him anyway, but was Dermott's partner.

There is no correlation between playing AHL games early and making it to the top-4 in the NHL and playing more AHL games only make you less likely to make it to the top-4.

Playing NHL games at an early age - but not sticking - as both Sandin and Liljegren did - as well as players like Sbisa and Mueller - is not a sign of them being ahead of their peers. It is sign that they are being developed badly - or that the team does not feel they have top-4 potential - same goes for being used as injury replacement at a young age - and is exactly what Dubas said the team would not do because it is harmful to development, and something that all good developing teams avoid doing.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Did you even bother to read his post? It was already calculated, Sandin has played more AHL games than the average D drafted in the first two rounds who went on to become a top-4.

Yes, I did read his post that was massively misleading. I saw him include picks from the top of the first round (including lottery picks) to skew the numbers towards his narrative, and utilize AHL games played as his measure for literally no reason other than to further skew the results, as he knew that both Sandin and Liljegren played in the AHL years before the majority of players are even allowed to.

The question is, did you read my post:

Yes, I noticed that too - quite misleading. And that's on top of the already misleading criteria, as unlike Sandin, most defensemen don't reach the AHL until at least their D+3.

I was curious, so I went back and looked at the drafts through the cap era. I took any defensemen that was picked between 15th overall and 45th overall, and then I removed the defensemen who had played less than the equivalent of two full seasons (164 GP), or less than 100 GP if within the last 5 drafts. I then looked at when each defenseman made the NHL full-time (played over half a season).

Sandin is in the beginning of his D+3 season.

1 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+1 season.
8 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+2 season.
6 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+3 season.
15 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+4 season.
10 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+5 season.
7 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+6 season.
3 defenseman made the NHL full-time in their D+7 season.

Each grouping features top-pairing defensemen, other than D+7. There is zero reason to believe there is anything wrong with Sandin's development. Biotk's claims are baseless.

As you can see, Sandin is not behind at all in his development. The large majority of successful defensemen picked within Sandin's range had not made the NHL full-time at this point in Sandin's development. This includes top pairing and top-4 defensemen.

The claims that there are issues with his development are completely baseless.

 

[zeke]

Lmao. You guys are too much.

Youngest dmen in hockey last year.

1.T.Bjornfot (Apr.6/01, #22): 3 games
2.V.Heinola (Mar.2/01, #20): 8 games
3.A.Boqvist (Aug.7/00, #8): 41 games
4.R.Dahlin (Apr.13/00, #1): 141 games
5.R.Sandin (Mar.7/00, #29): 28 games

Also note that Sandin is the only one of these guys that played for a team that finished even in the top 20 in the standings.

 

[biotk]

And if that's the case it makes more sense to trade him like you said. It's piss poor asset management no matter how much spin gets put on it.

Yup - get back assets for him and give him a chance to actually succeed somewhere else. It is easier to ruin him though - as you know the fanbase will blame the player and you don't have to worry about getting blowback if he succeeds elsewhere.