The 9 Games

[Coach]

Had a random musing this morning reading about Tkachuk and watching the highlights.

Does anyone else get the feeling that the 9 games opens the door for players straight out of junior and gives them a better chance to make the team than the players that are in the 20-25 range? Having the 9 games thing seems to me like it allows those younger players time to adjust to the team, find their game, get more forgiveness, etc.. than those guys who get call ups for a few games, or guys that are in and out every other game like Hamilton. Not many other prospects/call ups get 9 straight games to sort themselves out and try to look like NHL players.

Not speaking to Tkachuk specifically, just the system it seems to create surrounding these top-end picks and moreso, maybe it should tell us something about how other call-ups should be treated.

Why not give guys like Shinkaruk and the like or someone 9 games to figure it out? How often does it happen that someone gets called up and plays 6-10 straight games? Are they noticeably worse than the players they replace? Most nights, that answer is no in my eyes. The times that Hamilton has been in the game he looks no better or worse than Chiasson, or Bouma, etc.. So why not leave him in and see if something interesting happens? Why not call up a talented youngster to play with the top group (not just get slotted into a 4th line spot) and see what happens? It's not like it's a bunch of scrubs down there. There are 4-5 players down there with pretty great pedigree.

[Robbob]

I think part of it is that the majority of the rookies come from the CHL so as part of the agreement it is the NHL or back to junior. Shinkaruk, Klyington and the others can come up or down pretty much as needed.

[Firebot]

Every player that played in juniors have the exact same opportunity. Some are good enough to an NHL trial right when they were drafted and able to get evaluated over 9 NHL games, and others were not.

Guys like Mangiapane, Poirier, Klimchuk had the exact same opportunities as Monahan and Tkachuk

[smiggy77]

If I'm not mistaken, the 9 games only pertains to the first year of an ELC and whether it costs you a year off that contract. It does not pertain to the second or third year of their ELC. I could be wrong though but that is how i understand that rule.

While our young guys are super talented and look great at the AHL or JR level, the NHL is still the NHL and is significantly quicker. The biggest hurdle is adjusting to the speed and making decisions at that speed.

For the younger guys, it gives them an opportunity to see what they need to work on to improve their game, but they don't get placed in the right situations to help improve as a player at the NHL level. Also, I don't think they give a team a better chance to win. Even with Tkachuk, you can see that some of his decisions aren't the best, but he has the footspeed and strength to play in this league right now.

We have been blessed with VERY skilled players who made the jump so quickly (Monny, Tkachuk) but I wouldn't count on every prospect being able to do that so quickly.

With that being said, yes Shinkaruk should be able to join the team whenever they need it but I presume management believes that it is better for his development to get some confidence in the AHL and work on whatever they have him working on in his development program. Regardless, I do see him or Hathaway getting called up should there be any injuries on our roster.

[Coach]

I think you guys are missing the point a bit.

Now that those players (the 20+ers) have had their first try straight from junior and are in the deeper system as an AHL player, and don't have this 9 game limit for the burning of the ELC year, they don't have that stretch of what is basically a tryout period beyond training camp.

After the first few games, players in this position tend to look pretty ordinary, but they almost always get these full 9 games to see if they can round it out.

My query is less about them (the Tkachuks) and more about, how come when we call up a player do they not get this grace? This time to round it out. Maybe if there was patience to stick a guy like Shinkaruk or the like with the top group for 8-10 games straight, something interesting might happen. vs giving them a single game shot or a few shifts to see if something happens quickly.

Tkachuk has rounded out nicely, but is it because he has been given this 9 game grace that other (still very young) players don't really have anymore?

[N-E-B]

Assuming your point is "why not give *insert prospect name here* 9 games to see if they can figure it out?", I would say that's an interesting idea but probably something best done near the end of the season if they aren't in a playoff race.

Might not be a bad idea if/when an injury happens. If it's long term bring up one guy for 9 and if he doesn't cut it give the other guy 9.

That said, I don't think 9 games is any kind of magic number. Some guys adjust a lot quicker (such as Monahan) and some a lot slower (Backlund).

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I think you guys are missing the point a bit.

Now that those players (the 20+ers) have had their first try straight from junior and are in the deeper system as an AHL player, and don't have this 9 game limit for the burning of the ELC year, they don't have that stretch of what is basically a tryout period beyond training camp.

After the first few games, players in this position tend to look pretty ordinary, but they almost always get these full 9 games to see if they can round it out.

My query is less about them (the Tkachuks) and more about, how come when we call up a player do they not get this grace? This time to round it out. Maybe if there was patience to stick a guy like Shinkaruk or the like with the top group for 8-10 games straight, something interesting might happen. vs giving them a single game shot or a few shifts to see if something happens quickly.

Tkachuk has rounded out nicely, but is it because he has been given this 9 game grace that other (still very young) players don't really have anymore?

Its not like there is a special nine game patience for young players. If they don't look good, they can be sent home after game three. Happens all the time.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

Its not like there is a special nine game patience for young players. If they don't look good, they can be sent home after game three. Happens all the time.

Again, it's not so much about their 9 game buffer. Although I do think having that gives teams more of an excuse to keep these top picks for a while longer than they would otherwise hold onto them. Not saying that's the case for Tkachuk personally at all.

It's more a musing about why not give other young players more time (ie the 9 games) to round themselves into form on the team? Whenever we call up players they get maybe a game or two (or maybe even just a shift or so) so show what they have. IMO it's not enough. When you're choice for that top line wing is Alex Chiasson, and you've given him 10-12 games, it's not working, why not give someone with high-end pedigree a chance for that long (or even just 5+ games at a time)?

[Finger Cookin]

It's because there's more options and flexibility with pro players than with junior players. If you have a borderline junior player, you only have two choices: NHL or junior. With pros, you have NHL, AHL, ECHL.And at all three levels you control the coaching the player receives, what training they're to follow, and therefore have much more hands on with their development. If the borderline junior returns to junior, you lose some of that control.

Would other young players in the Flames organization be in Calgary if Stockton or Adirondack weren't options? Maybe. Would Tkachuk be in Calgary if the OHL wasn't the only other place the Flames could put him? Hard to say with certainty.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by MattyC

After the first few games, players in this position tend to look pretty ordinary, but they almost always get these full 9 games to see if they can round it out.

If you look at the numbers, that's not usually the case.

I don't remember who it was, but I remember someone posting the stats and it's actually very rare for a player to get exactly 9 games to start the season and then get sent down. Teams tend to make up their minds after 3-5 games and if the player makes it to 9, he'll almost always play game 10 and beyond.


Look at this year's draft for example. 6 players drafted in June have played in the NHL this season. Sergachev got three games before Montreal sent him back to the OHL. The other five will all have hit the 10 game mark by the end of today (Puljujarvi is the only one still under 10 and he should play it on Saturday).

Of those 5, Tkachuk and Chychrun are the only ones who'd actually have to be sent back to the OHL. Matthews, Laine, and Puljujarvi could all play in the AHL this season.



From what I can tell, since the last lockout, Sam Reinhart is the only player who had a slide-eligible ELC who played 9 NHL games to start the season and then was sent back to junior.

The only other 9 game rookies were players who were able (and did) play in the AHL that season, and their 9 games weren't played right at the start of the season. For example, Kapanen last season played most of the year in the AHL but got 9 games in Toronto near the end of the season.

[Enoch Root]

I get what you're saying, Matty, and I agree that there is a bit of an inherent benefit there (getting that tryout period at the NHL level, simply because there are no other options), however, in the end, I don't think it matters. Every avenue has its pros and cons.

For example, take Shinkaruk. It could be argued that Tkachuk got an unfair opportunity. However, SHinkaruk has the opportunity to work on his game in the AHL (where it is a bit easier to stand out and where he'll get more icetime), and he has the entire year as his window for a call-up.

At some point there will be injuries on the big club. That opens up an opportunity for someone to get full minutes. And the person called up is probably some who is currently playing really well and has lots of confidence. SO it becomes a perfect opportunity (as opposed to the 9 games, which are huge pressure).

Long story short, every path leads to the same place - it's up to the player to take advantage of their opportunities when they come along.

[Coach]

Yeah I'm not really arguing that it's unfair, just a thought that it may be valuable to have players who are called up get a few games in a row to adjust to the team and the league. The same way it happens for these top picks from Junior. Not saying 9 is some magic number. Something like 4-7 is probably closer to appropriate.

Just don't see how a player is expected to make an impact right away or be sent back down from the AHL. Why not give them a little more time ala the Junior kids. Even those guys getting 3-5 games is more than a call up generally gets, and usually in better opportunity positions.