Player Discussion The Slaf Thread - Parabolic Growth Edition

[ReHabs]

It was never about “dominating lesser leagues.” It was about putting him in a situation where he wasn’t overwhelmed. And he was overwhelmed the first year and some change. It amazes me how people don’t get the concept.

Many posters absolutely said they wanted to see him dominate a lesser league before moving up. There were even calls for him to go to the CHL specifically for that.

I don't think you two are in a major disagreement. You'd expect a 1OA to do very well in a lower-than-NHL league. Whether a fan would be happy or satisfied with the performance if the player was merely doing well and not dominating is another question (one to which we can't really know the answer). Speaking for myself, I thought Slaf didn't earn a spot in the 2022 training camp (and I felt he didn't keep it at any point throughout the season...) and so he should've gone elsewhere -- I, personally, wouldn't have minded if he merely only did well in another league because his trajectory was meant to take several years no matter what. Proposing to send him to the CHL or elsewhere was to put him in a position to do what he's doing today: be a protagonist and "the guy" on the ice and make plays happen. It's effin' fantastic he's doing that in the NHL, for us, so soon.

Dominating would be a function of him not being overwhelmed in any league or division in which he played. How great is it he's doing it in the NHL? It's great.

It will be interesting to watch how things change with regards to development vs winning assuming we progress as expected.

Those two priorities are often at odds, but in a sense it only becomes truly important once the playoffs roll around. Like with Colorado, they probably could have afforded to be patient with Newhook because even though it might mean less wins in the regular season they weren't really at risk of not making the playoffs. And there's an argument that the team would be better off finishing lower in the standings so long as the young guys did actually develop throughout the year.

Often though what we see is coaches are hired to be fired, so they don't prioritize development. But if the GM and coach are on the same page that in season development is more important then winning then home ice advantage in the playoffs then there's the chance that a good team can do both, develop their young guys, and win games once they matter in the playoffs. The bubble teams are in a tougher spot because they don't have that cushion of still making the playoffs.

You can't prioritize development at all times though. Sometimes you have to go for it and that means leaning on the guys who make fewer errors and have more experience. It's perfectly fair for Colorado to cut bait with Newhook and it's perfectly fair for Hughes to think there's something there that could be of value when the time comes (or: of more value than the two mid-30s OA picks he traded away).

With Slaf, we have to accept MSL and Hughes felt there was more to gain with giving him reps in the NHL than elsewhere. If the Habs were competing for the top of the division maybe the calculus would've been different. I'm not sure.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I never said he developed in 24 hours. My argument was he wasn’t being put in a position to succeed before being promoted randomly to the top line. There’s a lot of ignorant comments that the way we were handling before that was right and anyone questioning that were foolish, and those people are wrong.

I don't agree with everything they did and there were times where things looked rough. But, they had a plan in place. They were giving him more and more, but they were doing it in a sequential way. It ended up working out, doesn't mean that it was all 100% perfect.. but all I am saying is before I'd say you can't develop in the NHL and you shouldn't bring players up without a level of marination; but I've softened on that because if you have a player and a development plan in the NHL, it can work out.

But this wouldn't have worked with the old regime because they didn't have a development plan or staff in place. It would have been a death sentence before, now, with the right players and the right approach, that can happen and happen successfully.

 

[CheldishGamibno]

Just to stir the conversation up I also love to point at Brady Tkatchuk who developed just fine under one of, if not THE, worst coach in the league and a shitshow of an organization

For guys like KK we're really quick to just blame development and coaches and that might just be due to our abysmal drafting history and the fact that we struggled for so long when in reality, you know, maybe KK is just bad, may Scherbak was just bad, maybe Galchenyuk was just an idiot

I know its a Slaf thread but KK showed great things at 18, I really liked his IQ for one. For KK it might be between his ears because guy had talent. 3rd was a reach but he wasn't going a spot over 8th overall IMO.

Leave KK another year in Assat then let him come over, provide him Adam Nicholas and good mental support and I believe the story would be way different.

 

[ReHabs]

I never said he developed in 24 hours. My argument was he wasn’t being put in a position to succeed before being promoted randomly to the top line. There’s a lot of ignorant comments that the way we were handling him before was right and anyone questioning that were foolish, and those people are wrong.

Some commentary insisted that no matter what, things were pre-determined and there was nothing that could be done differently in a way that would really affect the outcome. It's hard to make any response to such arguments.

Obviously my argument that Slaf's development was better off elsewhere was wrong so I'm not going to point fingers at anyone but it's the structure of the approach to which I refer. On one hand you have: "no matter what, things will play out as they do -- so don't complain" and the other you have my hyper-fixated butt going "no no no, I have processed all the inputs and I am certain of this output". I think both are wrong-headed tbh.

 

[417]

The person you’re quoting was so wrong on Kohtkaniemi, he almost needed to be right on Slafkovsky to save face. He’s just throwing darts at a wall to see what sticks. And that’s my problem with a lot of opinions on development. People don’t have an actual system. They just use hindsight and a prediction to back up their claims.

The person he's quoting, is the same person (me) who you told to "stick to basketball" when I kept telling you that Slafkovsky was progressing and that results would follow.

The same person you've now got on ignore because you don't have the courage to face me lol

How my basketBALLS taste now?

 

[LaP]

It will be interesting to watch how things change with regards to development vs winning assuming we progress as expected.

Those two priorities are often at odds, but in a sense it only becomes truly important once the playoffs roll around. Like with Colorado, they probably could have afforded to be patient with Newhook because even though it might mean less wins in the regular season they weren't really at risk of not making the playoffs. And there's an argument that the team would be better off finishing lower in the standings so long as the young guys did actually develop throughout the year.

Often though what we see is coaches are hired to be fired, so they don't prioritize development. But if the GM and coach are on the same page that in season development is more important then winning then home ice advantage in the playoffs then there's the chance that a good team can do both, develop their young guys, and win games once they matter in the playoffs. The bubble teams are in a tougher spot because they don't have that cushion of still making the playoffs.

What is important and it's something we have done very very poorly over the years is to take prospects as they are and not project into the future. For example let's say you are trying to win. You drafted this kid in the first round who project as a solid 1st line winger. Let's just say Rutger McGroarty. You need a 3rd line winger and while McGroarty is not a 1st line yet he's already a good 3rd line winger. Put him there and let him develop on a 3rd line instead of signing an over the hill vet UFA. No need to bury the kid 10 years in the AHL until he's a bona fide 1st line winger which he might never become.

Too often in the past we have let drafting position influence the way we treated prospects. The best exemple being Chipchura. A perfectly fine 4th line center who never had his chance because he was drafted in the 1st round and had to be a 1st line center or a bust. I think NYR is a good example of what to do. They bring kids and accept them as they nare. Cuyle is a good depth winger they have him as a depth winger until he can be more. They are very patient with their young players and use them in a role they can do now not a role they project to do later.

I'll always maintain that burying a kid in the AHL for 3-4 years is not the right thing to do. After around 150ish games there's no much to learn there for a young player. You can't learn to face McDavid and MacKinnon and Kucherov while playing in the AHL.

 

[ReHabs]

What is important and it's something we have done very very poorly over the years is to take prospects as they are and not project into the future. For example let's say you are trying to win. You drafted this kid in the first round who project as a solid 1st line winger. Let's just say Rutger McGroarty. You need a 3rd line winger and while McGroarty is not a 1st line yet he's already a good 3rd line winger. Put him there and let him develop on a 3rd line instead of signing an over the hill vet UFA. No need to bury the kid 10 years in the AHL until he's a bona fide 1st line winger which he might never become.

Too often in the past we have let drafting position influence the way we treated prospects. The best exemple being Chipchura. A perfectly fine 4th line center who never had his chance because he was drafted in the 1st round and had to be a 1st line center or a bust. I think NYR is a good example of what to do. They bring kids and accept them as they nare. Cuyle is a good depth winger they have him as a depth winger until he can be more. They are very patient with their young players and use them in a role they can do now not a role they project to do later.

It often felt like the Habs were playing catch-up with their prospects no matter what. Players were brought up to plug holes on the roster that never had sufficient skill depth. Insufficient C depth. Insufficient scoring depth.

Depth is when (imperfect) skill players are in lesser roles. We had the opposite. Skill prospects never got a chance because they were never good enough to plug the hole that should've been resolved through other means... and they were never good enough trade pieces because they were either too valuable to trade away (given our dearth of skill prospects) or they were over-cooked and pseudo-busts.

 

[417]

I would say based on what has happened these last few years that I edge closer to 417s side of the development debate, but I have a lot more caveats on this. The issue isn't particularly with developing in the NHL, it would be allowing the space and having the people in place to allow it to happen.

The Bergevin regime development couldn't happen in the NHL and very rarely happened anywhere else, they didn't have the resources, they didn't see the value in it, and they didn't create an environment ripe with the right type of teachers for it to happen.

So I am less concerned about players being brought up too early because development is something this new regime believes can happen in the NHL where the previous regime were all about results and didn't care about tomorrow.

Which is exactly what I've been arguing for years...Kotkaniemi is actually a perfect example because we wasted so much time playing him behind players we shouldn't have (Nate Thompson, Eric Staal) or players we never intended to keep (Philipe Danault).

Would have have changed his career trajectory? knowing what we know today, probably not, he just wasn't the pick to make at #3 clearly.

However, if we look at Slafkovsky, the difference between this regime and the previous one, as you so eloquently put it, they've actually allowed the spaced and put people in place to foster the development we've seen with him in his 2 years with the Habs.

 

[417]

I never said falling for his way, just that I have come closer to that view than I have ever had in the past.

You can develop in the NHL if you put a priority on development. If you don't have the right conditions for development then being in the NHL is not a good space for development. It's why we were able to take a shot on Newhook where Colorado didn't have the patience to do so. Colorado failed at developing Newhook because they had to push him into the NHL early and were in a space where he had to perform due to their expectations. We had all the space in the world to let Newhook grow and get those top 6 opportunities.

Developing in the NHL will happen less and less for Montreal as we shift into those playoff contention years but this regime is still more adept at doing it than the previous one.

Since he @nhlfan9191 doesn't have the courage to unblock me (imagine HIM, blocking ME LOL) you can tell him that what I said about Slafkovsky all along, ONLY applied to Slafkovsky.

He's trying to spin it like I said all prospects should develop in the NHL, I've never, ever said that.

I have always maintained that it is a case-by-case basis and that Slafkovsky, his best bet was to develop him IN the NHL.

 

[LaP]

I have always maintained that it is a case-by-case basis and that Slafkovsky, his best bet was to develop him IN the NHL.

And it's clearly what the management think since they have Reinbacher not in the NHL this year.

 

[LaP]

BTW ignoring the lockout years and COVID when is the last time a 1st overall pick did not start in the NHL right away? Him not starting in the NHL right away would have created a shockwave. He would have been called a bust no matter what imo.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Just to stir the conversation up I also love to point at Brady Tkatchuk who developed just fine under one of, if not THE, worst coach in the league and a shitshow of an organization

For guys like KK we're really quick to just blame development and coaches and that might just be due to our abysmal drafting history and the fact that we struggled for so long when in reality, you know, maybe KK is just bad, may Scherbak was just bad, maybe Galchenyuk was just an idiot

Its tough to say and we will never know , its easy to say its all on the player but would Slaf have broken out so soon under Therrien/Julien.

I am of the same mindset as you that development is as much on the individual than it is on the organisation , some guys are unbustable and just get it. Others need some/alot of help. I think we've seen both spectrums with Suzuki/Caufield with this management , Caufield needed a jolt from MSL to get going after Ducharme, while Suzuki has steadily improved every year , I think Suziki would have also improved under Therrien/Julien/Ducharme but perhaps that says more about the type of different skillset both have

 

[Leto]

BTW ignoring the lockout years and COVID when is the last time a 1st overall pick did not start in the NHL right away? Him not starting in the NHL right away would have created a shockwave. He would have been called a bust no matter what imo.

Beside Owen Power (2021) who returned to college during the COVID years, you have to go back to 2006-2007 with Erik Johnson.

 

[JoelWarlord]

He stunk and I don’t see the upside of a teenager struggling while not getting any opportunities at the NHL level.

The upside is that he was getting NHL exposure, NHL coaching, and working to push himself alongside all the other young players on the team, and he now has 119 games of experience at the highest level at a very young age as he continues to develop. I won't pretend he was "good" in the early days but I think you're being a bit harsh as well, he was scoring as efficiently as any player in his role and had reasonable enough on-ice numbers for his deployment. Not great, but he was playing well enough to stay afloat IMO. I certainly don't think every player should be treated this way, but every player isn't 6'3 230 with loads of skill so they can still be a useful bottom sixer even when they're a lost puppy out there like year 1 Slafkovsky was.

I never said he developed in 24 hours. My argument was he wasn’t being put in a position to succeed before being promoted randomly to the top line. There’s a lot of ignorant comments that the way we were handling him before was right and anyone questioning that were foolish, and those people are wrong.

What if the stuff that came before is part of why he's able to succeed in the position he's in now? I think they took too long to get him on the top line this year, and probably should have given him an earlier run with Monahan last year, but in broad strokes I think the slower and gradual approach was generally right for the player he was back then. I don't think the Newhook Anderson line was right, but they abandoned it after about 10 games. The other element of Slafkovsky's development is IMO he was just not in the right kind of shape last year. 240lb ended up being too heavy (at least for now) and he didn't have the stamina to play big minutes last year after focusing more on bulking up.

When you're tired 20 seconds into every shift and late to every puck it's easy to look like there are hockey IQ or skill problems, and now those things aren't issues when he has the conditioning to play his game. Similar thing happened with Joshua Roy finally taking his conditioning seriously between his draft year and D+1. The nice thing for Slafkovsky is it was clearly never a work ethic thing either, he just focused too much on trying to get heavier to throw hits between the draft and 22-23 season, and that's been addressed.

I know its a Slaf thread but KK showed great things at 18, I really liked his IQ for one. For KK it might be between his ears because guy had talent. 3rd was a reach but he wasn't going a spot over 8th overall IMO.

Leave KK another year in Assat then let him come over, provide him Adam Nicholas and good mental support and I believe the story would be way different.

He was so smart and clever as a rookie right after the draft and just has never really taken a step since then and the Bambiniemi stuff continues to be a problem. This is his sixth year in the NHL and he's still just as lanky as he was on day one, and hasn't improved his balance at all. He genuinely peaked at 18, it's really bizarre, it seems like he doesn't take offseason training seriously enough (or is working hard but doing the wrong things).

 

[Sorinth]

I don't think you two are in a major disagreement. You'd expect a 1OA to do very well in a lower-than-NHL league. Whether a fan would be happy or satisfied with the performance if the player was merely doing well and not dominating is another question (one to which we can't really know the answer). Speaking for myself, I thought Slaf didn't earn a spot in the 2022 training camp (and I felt he didn't keep it at any point throughout the season...) and so he should've gone elsewhere -- I, personally, wouldn't have minded if he merely only did well in another league because his trajectory was meant to take several years no matter what. Proposing to send him to the CHL or elsewhere was to put him in a position to do what he's doing today: be a protagonist and "the guy" on the ice and make plays happen. It's effin' fantastic he's doing that in the NHL, for us, so soon.

Dominating would be a function of him not being overwhelmed in any league or division in which he played. How great is it he's doing it in the NHL? It's great.

Well people aren't happy with Mesar doing well but not dominating the CHL so it's probably safe to assume that many wouldn't be happy with Slaf if he had gone to the AHL and done well but not dominated, especially since the comparable would be Rantanen who was dominant at the AHL level post draft.

But more to my original point, is that going to the lower league and doing great isn't necessarily the best thing for development. Like for example, Slaf had an issue with keeping his head up and bracing for contact before getting hit which he seems to have corrected this year. Had he spent last season in the CHL or Europe he probably wouldn't have fixed that issue because in the CHL he would've been able to get away with not bracing for contact properly and just having kids bounce off him and in Europe there's less hitting in general. He needed to go to a league like the NHL or AHL where he couldn't get away with it. And as a note this is something we also see with Guhle, he's still got those junior habits of not really bracing himself properly because he's used to being the bigger/stronger guy and isn't anymore.

A prospect dominating a league is always exciting for fans, but in terms of actual development it's not always the case of being what's best for the player. As a counter example I would argue Drouin as an example of a guy who would have benefited from going to the NHL at 18, not because he was "NHL ready" but because he needed to struggle in order for him to really understand that he needed to change his habits. Going back to juniors just reinforced his belief that he could rely on talent/skill alone.

You can't prioritize development at all times though. Sometimes you have to go for it and that means leaning on the guys who make fewer errors and have more experience. It's perfectly fair for Colorado to cut bait with Newhook and it's perfectly fair for Hughes to think there's something there that could be of value when the time comes (or: of more value than the two mid-30s OA picks he traded away).

I think there's an argument that for a top team it's probably better to prioritize development for the first 60ish games of the season and then switch over to prioritizing winning to finish the season and into the playoffs. Prioritizing winning might be the difference between having home ice advantage or not, but having a young guy develop into a guy that can actually be trusted to play is way more valuable.

And I'm not saying what Colorado did was wrong, but from everything Hughes and MSL have said I feel like they will give development more of a priority then most other NHL teams do even during a competitive/contending window. So it will be very interesting to see whether they can find a balance that works out better.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Its tough to say and we will never know , its easy to say its all on the player but would Slaf have broken out so soon under Therrien/Julien.

I am of the same mindset as you that development is as much on the individual than it is on the organisation , some guys are unbustable and just get it. Others need some/alot of help. I think we've seen both spectrums with Suzuki/Caufield with this management , Caufield needed a jolt from MSL to get going after Ducharme, while Suzuki has steadily improved every year , I think Suziki would have also improved under Therrien/Julien/Ducharme but perhaps that says more about the type of different skillset both have

The piece on this that is important and is a huge improvement from this regime compared to Bergevin.

The individual has to buy in - but if you give them no direction and no resources, then they may be buying in but going to the wrong people or focusing on the wrong things.

The Habs have Nicholas in place, they bring in skills coaches like Dr. Shot, and the Habs are working with them all the time.

Provide someone the resource and they'll generally take advantage of it. Give them no compass and no resources, and you are asking for them to invest valuable time and development days on the wrong coach, the wrong skill, etc.

 

[Guy Larose]

I never said he developed in 24 hours. My argument was he wasn’t being put in a position to succeed before being promoted randomly to the top line. There’s a lot of ignorant comments that the way we were handling him before was right and anyone questioning that were foolish, and those people are wrong.

You say it's random. You're taking a fit because they didn't do it the way YOU would have done it. Truth of the matter is they did what they did, and it worked, instead of the way an "HF expert" would have. YOU were obviously wrong in this case.

 

[nhlfan9191]

You say it's random. You're taking a fit because they didn't do it the way YOU would have done it. Truth of the matter is they did what they did, and it worked, instead of the way an "HF expert" would have. YOU were obviously wrong in this case.

Whose having a fit? I was happy when they moved him to the first line because that was the only way it was going to work. He wasn’t doing anything before that which was counterproductive. You don’t even understand the argument that’s being made so I don’t know why you’re even replying to me. That’s happened a lot in this thread over the last 2 years.

 

[Guy Larose]

Whose having a fit? I was happy when they moved him to the first line because that was the only way it was going to work. He wasn’t doing anything before that which was counterproductive. You don’t even understand the argument that’s being made so I don’t know why you’re even replying to me. That’s happened a lot this thread over the last 2 years.

LMAO...yeah, I don't understand...your takes are... something....especially in the tank thread

 

[nhlfan9191]

LMAO...yeah, I don't understand...your takes are... something....especially in the tank thread

Elaborate.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Whose having a fit? I was happy when they moved him to the first line because that was the only way it was going to work. He wasn’t doing anything before that which was counterproductive. You don’t even understand the argument that’s being made so I don’t know why you’re even replying to me. That’s happened a lot in this thread over the last 2 years.

Actually Slaf looked good with Dach and Monahan at C too. Did not look good with Evans nor most of the time with Dvorak.

 

[Rapala]

He didn't just develop in 24 hours from being put on that line. His first season was rocky and ended early, his start was bad production wise but he was playing with a checked out Anderson and Newhook forced to play the middle. That line wasn't good.

Once that line was broken up, the production didn't follow, but you could see how Slaf was growing and developing. The production just finally came when he played with better players and that development continued with the confidence.

Exactly. Suzuki would never have asked to take him under his wing if he was playing terrible hockey.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

Suzuki thinks Slaf can become a top 5 winger in the league

 

[jellybeans]

I've said be patient with KK be patient with Anderson and i've been saying be patient with Slaf its about time i get one right.

 

[cphabs]

He did it!