I'm not going to argue with the McTavish cult. He was not NHL ready if he was he would have stayed. Our roster was full of replaceable players. He was consistently behind the play. His pace was not NHL ready.... Go re-watch the games.
Are you the Anti-McTavish cult? You gotta be in a cult to recognize a cult, right?
McTavish made the team as an 18-year old. That kinda speaks for itself that it was a close call, otherwise he never would have made the team from the start. You're looking past the sale when thinking about keeping him beyond nine NHL games. You know who didn't make the NHL roster to start the season? Milano.
I think McTavish fell into that Comtois scenario. Comtois got injured in his 10th game as a 19-year old. Although Comtois did put up 7 points in 10 NHL games, the injury and potential Seattle Expansion draft made it easy for the Ducks to send Comtois back to juniors. The 10 NHL games started his ELC, but it didn't count towards a year contract in the NHL and avoided being available for the Seattle Expansion draft.
This is speculation, but I think McTavish playing center in the AHL for his rehab stint might have given the org more weight into putting him back into the juniors to continue to develop at center after his nine NHL games.
Last off-season, I wanted McTavish to play in the NL-A as a centerman instead of going back to juniors. I didn't even think the NHL was a possibility until he made the NHL roster. Still, going to juniors was probably the best move with respect to being a leader and it culminated with him being the captain of team Canada at the WJC-20's.
......
As for McTavish's pace, I don't think McTavish had a long enough burn to get back into playing shape considering he had two injuries, one where his whole training camp was nearly missed. He looked good to start the season, but got injured again in his 3rd game. The Ducks could have kept McTavish in San Diego longer for his rehab stint at a max of 14 consecutive days, but opted to go with the minimal 3-game stint (a week, iirc).
Being injury prone twice in such a short of time puts him into that Comtois scenario where it's probably best to put him back in juniors if he's injury prone and you don't burn a year of ELC with a player who isn't on the ice often.
Again, 20/20 hindsight says McTavish would have been better than Comtois, Steel, Milano, and any other AHL'er we brought up last year. Yes, we were lacking NHL talents last year. Of course, we didn't know that at the time we were sending McTavish back.