Quote:
Originally Posted by Five-hole
Are you implying that we're applying a one size fits all development strategy? In the last two seasons, we had an 18 year old center and a 21 year old 5'6" winger make the team with no professional experience. In the meantime, we're seasoning a first round, 13th-overall pick who is 21 in the minors and giving him NHL games as merited. A 24 year old, undrafted FA made the team after getting an injury callup and is getting regular minutes this year. How are we applying a one-size-fits-all scheme here?
If you're good enough, you play.
Really? How do you know that exactly?
|
I didn't say or intend to imply that - the Flames have proven that they don't believe that everybody needs to over season in the AHL. Just seems to be really popular to cite Detroit and claim that you can't keep players at one level for too long which I just think is total bull. Players have a finite amount of development time and there's only so much you can learn and develop at an inferior level against poorer competition - some players need longer to learn it is all. What do studies say you do with a student to ensure they keep learning at the quickest and more efficient level... challenge them and place them with people at the same level. Kind of flies in the face of saying that you can put a young developing player in the AHL for 6 years and expect that they will realize their full potential.
Re: Monahan, if you honestly believe that he could be a better player than he is today after a season and a half with the 67s or Adirondack/Abby... fair enough, you're entitled to that but I really can't agree - I realize there's never going to be proof of right or wrong here... but watching him develop in leaps and bounds over the last 16 months I feel really confident that him being in the NHL has been best for his development. Watch a lot of WHL and I've never seen a kid in the CHL advance that quickly in that kind of timeframe.