I don't think we're that close but I haven't really looked. There are still split squad games and most coaches like to give vets like Backlund, Coleman, Kadri & Weegar more time off in the pre-season. It's probably more of an audition for PP QB #1. If he can fill the role he gets a contract, if not then it doesn't really matter.
We added a bunch of random guys all summer, so I could have sworn we had a ton of extra vets. Guys added like Frk, Mantha, Lomberg, Bahl and Bean.
15.4 Exhibition Games.
(a) No Player shall participate in an Exhibition Game which is scheduled during thefirst three (3) days of Training Camp or on a date immediately following three (3) consecutivedates in which the Player participated in Exhibition Games during the Training Camp period.
(b) Each Club shall schedule no less than six (6) and no more than eight (8)Exhibition Games during Training Camp.
(c) A Club shall be permitted to dress a minimum of eight (8) veterans for anyExhibition Game. For purposes of this Section 15.4(c), a veteran shall constitute either:
(1) aforward or defenseman who played in thirty (30) NHL Games during the previous season,
(2) agoaltender who either dressed in fifty (50) or more NHL Games or played in thirty (30) or moreNHL Games in the previous season,
(3) a first round draft choice from the most recent year'sEntry Draft, or
(4) any Player who has played one-hundred (100) or more career NHL Games.
The matter of Player participation in Exhibition Games shall be referred to the NHL/NHLPACompetition Committee for its consideration and recommendations, if any, in accordance withArticle 22.
Assuming split squad, we need 8 on each side, maybe 9 on each side for players who have played 30 games in the previous season or 100 NHL games total. Parekh and Gridin also seem to qualify as a veteran (1st rounder from most recent draft).
Of our returning dmen, Weegar, Andersson, Hanley and Pachal qualify. Miromanov is the only one that surprisingly doesn't. Bahl qualifies as a veteran.
It looks like we will have 14 forwards that qualifies as veterans. That doesn't include Gridin and Parekh or Barrie.
It seems like we're OK.
I feel like a broken record but...
We have 2 top 4 defensemen. And only Bahl who might be ready to step into a top-4 role.
One of the absolute worst things you can do with a prospect or inexperienced player is put them in a position to fail. Any of Miromanov, Bean, Pachal, or Solovyov in the top 4 for an extended period would be putting them in a position to fail and risking their growth and confidence. Other than Bean, none of the have even established themselves as regular NHLers.
Barrie in the top 4 playing alongside Weegar (I don't want Barrie with Bahl) against top lines would help mitigate that.
Obviously you'd give guys some time in the top 4 when they're playing well, but when they aren't Barrie is a fully developed veteran and putting him in those roles won't ruin his future.
I kinda see both sides. Barrie if good is a good front row seat in getting material for how to do things and/or how not to do things for guys like Parekh, Poirier etc. He's also a vet who you'd rather crater than someone not yet nearing development completion. I agree that for the second pairing, a rotation of Bahl/Bean and Miromanov/Barrie is a preferrable situation than straight up penciling a pairing and hoping for the best.
However, I agree that we need to give those players that push to sink or swim. Barrie if signed (on paper) is a good contingency plan if Miromanov cannot swim. He's a good calibre of player to pressure from the 3rd pairing and be a PP specialist. Same as Bean for Bahl.
But I also think that the dmen being penciled in aren't really fluid. Pachal/Hanley only for 3rd pairing if injuries. That means the d prospects are seriously railroaded from graduating for this season unless they really, really show up. It also means that the second pairing is by committee via (Bahl, Bean, Miromanov, Pachal/Barrie), but likely to be deployed as a 2A/2B pairing Sutter style.
I think the plan for the 2nd pairing is to throw them to the wolves. Normally this isn't recommended, but I think we have personnel to do it right.
I personally disagree. These are not 20 year old rookies with no NHL experience. Bahl/Miro are at the spots in their careers where they need to be taking that next step and should be trusted with more responsibility. Bahl will be going into his fifth pro year, and spent significant time last season on the Devils top pair with Marino. Likewise for Miromanov who is 27 years old with 9 years of pro experience and played almost exclusively with Weegar down the stretch with great results. We are also very much in a position to allow these guys to make mistakes and grow on the job.
Of any player who is best suited for second pairing...
Bahl is 24 years old 82GP last year, 148 NHL GP total.
Miromanov is 27 years old 24 GP last year, 49 NHL GP total.
Bean is 26, 72 GP last year, 197 NHL GP total.
Barrie (PTO) is 33, played 42 GP last season, 85 GP 2 seasons ago and 809 NHL GP total.
Next layer is Hanley and Pachal, but they're more 3rd pairing calibre. They're in the same grouping as the young guys chomping at the bit (Gru, Solo, Parekh, Kuznetsov, Poirier etc.).
The numbers seem bizarre, but knowing that Huska loves dmen, I'd be curious if he's going to experiment with having 8 dmen on hand (4 pairings) and shortening the forward group a little.
Bean and Barrie seem more like the type of guy's you'd want cratered on the second pairing. Bahl, Miromanov and Bean are pretty close to what they are, but there's perhaps a tiny bit left development left that's possible with them.
I get where both sides are coming from. I think Bean, Bahl and Miromanov are guys are the age where maybe it's best to force them to sink or swim to determine what to do with them. If Miromanov seriously doesn't work, I don't think Pachal is a good RD option. I see the reasoning behind Barrie as a 3rd pair with Bean/Bahl. The second pairing is pressured by the third pairing and basically you play your hot hand.