Friedman's 30 thoughts now on Sportsnet

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

yakupov, shultz, rnh were all rushed.

has there ever been a prospect who suffered from playing another year in junior, EVER?

the fact that the oilers had accepted a slow rebuild in the past few years, not sure why they couldn't be patient and let guys play in the appropriate league while sucking at the NHL level, which they ended up doing regardless.

I really hope baertchi, granlund, ferland, reinhart get long, long looks to make the team in camp. (ie. if a roster spot battle is a tie, it goes to the kid)

I would prefer if gaudreau/bennet are treated slightly differently, where they actually would have to shock management into making it difficult to justify them not going down (ie. tie goes to a vet or the above mentioned rookies).

Well, they did send Nurse down. And with that, Nurse is a better player for doing that.

[SuperMatt18]

Magnus Paajarvi was another Oiler that should have spent time in the AHL instead of coming right into the NHL.

Probably could argue that both Gagner and Cogliano could have been developed better with more AHL seasoning.

It does speak to the Oilers development program that all of Gagner, Cogliano, Eberle, RNH, Paajarvi, had their best PPG with the Oilers within their first two seasons with the Oilers...and then regressed in seasons after. (It's early for RNH but the other 4 became worse players as they "developed" with the Oilers)

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

yakupov, shultz, rnh were all rushed.

has there ever been a prospect who suffered from playing another year in junior, EVER?

the fact that the oilers had accepted a slow rebuild in the past few years, not sure why they couldn't be patient and let guys play in the appropriate league while sucking at the NHL level, which they ended up doing regardless.

I really hope baertchi, granlund, ferland, reinhart get long, long looks to make the team in camp. (ie. if a roster spot battle is a tie, it goes to the kid)

I would prefer if gaudreau/bennet are treated slightly differently, where they actually would have to shock management into making it difficult to justify them not going down (ie. tie goes to a vet or the above mentioned rookies).

Yakupov has one bad sophomore season and he was rushed, after having an amazing rookie campaign?

If Monahan has a terrible sophomore slump was he rushed too?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Yakupov has one bad sophomore season and he was rushed, after having an amazing rookie campaign?

If Monahan has a terrible sophomore slump was he rushed too?

I would have preferred that Monahan went back to junior.

The difference though, was that Monahan MADE the team whereas Yakupov was simply given a spot.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Yakupov has one bad sophomore season and he was rushed, after having an amazing rookie campaign?

If Monahan has a terrible sophomore slump was he rushed too?

We have different definitions of "amazing".

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

We have different definitions of "amazing".

Yah, I guess extended to an 82 game season: 29 goals 24 assists 53 points -7.

What constitutes an amazing season for a rookie?

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Yakupov has one bad sophomore season and he was rushed, after having an amazing rookie campaign?

If Monahan has a terrible sophomore slump was he rushed too?

I think it's more about the character and maturity level. Yakupov was (is?) a distraction and a bit of a goof.

The difference is Monahan's agent won't be creating stories for the media, going to visit the team to discover why they aren't giving his client the opportunities he thinks he deserves.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by saillias

I think it's more about the character and maturity level. Yakupov was (is?) a distraction and a bit of a goof.

The difference is Monahan's agent won't be creating stories for the media, going to visit the team to discover why they aren't giving his client the opportunities he thinks he deserves.

Totally fair.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Yah, I guess extended to an 82 game season: 29 goals 24 assists 53 points -7.

It doesn't work like that; especially not for the season Yakupov had. He had 25 points in 45 games, and then went on a six-point tear to finish his rookie season. I have little doubt that he would not have sustained a .65 point/game average over the course of a full NHL season. It is actually much more likely that he would have produced closer to the much more modest .55 Point/game average that he compiled in games 1–45.

Originally Posted by Weitz

What constitutes an amazing season for a rookie?

Certainly more than 48 games.

As far as the topic at large is concerned, I believe that Yakupov, Schultz, and Paajarvi were rushed, but I don't think that Nugent Hopkins would have benefitted at all from returning to juniour for another year. The biggest problem with Oilers development is not that they have added a few players prematurely to their NHL roster. Their biggest problem is that their young players have been treated with carte blanch entitlement. I don't think that Nugent Hopkins would be any better had he spent another year in the WHL, but I do think that all their players would be much better had they not been so clearly singled out by management as the future of the franchise and with no real accountability.

[bubbsy]

in his short career thus far at the nhl level my observations is that yakupov a) doesn't have an elite level hockey IQ, b) has a game style similar to ovechkin except that he doesn't have the speed/size/shot/skill or general amount of talent as ovechkin.

That style's ability to create results been marginalized for ovechkin, so i don't see yakupov being all that great given that he's no where near the talent level of ovechkin.

add to the fact that he's already publically shown a pretty immature behavour and character, by having rumours of wanting to be traded, etc, when the coach doesn't give him the ice time he wants.

This is just going down the route of another reason why the oilers are no good. Eakins has now rubbed 2 of their #1 picks in the wrong way where there has been public displays of annoyance/frustration between the player and the coach. yet poor mact is stuck having to back his bad decision on the team's coach. One one hand they need a coach who will push the message of accountability and earning your keep, yet by the same token the coach, and at the end of the day, the team's results, will be a function of how well the star players do on the team.

Handing spots to their top prospects rather than having them earn it, earning their ice time once in the NHL, and not sending a guy down to dominate his junior/AHL leagues and the world juniors, are part of the philosophy of the oilers.

you could definitely argue that monahan could have been sent down also, but he actually showed that he was the 3rd best center in the flames organization. Bennet doesnt' have that luxury this camp, as he'll be battling backlund/stajan/monahan/granlund/reinhart/knight and have to prove he's at worst the #3 guy on that list.

I'm liking everything i'm hearing from flames management, that bennet/gaudreau would have to play himself on the team thru a shocking camp. It's an obvious choice to lean towards him playing in junior heading into camp.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by saillias

...The difference is Monahan's agent won't be creating stories for the media, going to visit the team to discover why they aren't giving his client the opportunities he thinks he deserves.

The difference you describe is a symptom of a bigger issue. Monahan is not bigger than the team and he knows it. Yakupov does not understand why he is not bigger than the team since his line mates and fellow former first round Edmonton draft picks clearly are bigger than the team and they also know it.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

16 points in 18 games in the dub with a declining PPG total in each of the last two seasons.

This is called not rushing now?

Since I doubt he'll be on the NHL team and will be given time in the AHL to try and get everything back to where it should have been barring the hip injury, yeah. Not sure what you would call it.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Since I doubt he'll be on the NHL team and will be given time in the AHL to try and get everything back to where it should have been barring the hip injury, yeah. Not sure what you would call it.

The point he is making is that often with players who are rushed there is some evidence that they will be effective high impact players from their offensive production at lower levels. There just isn't that same sort of evidence for Shinkaruk.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Since I doubt he'll be on the NHL team and will be given time in the AHL to try and get everything back to where it should have been barring the hip injury, yeah. Not sure what you would call it.

The point is that Shinkaruk is not close to being an NHL player yet.

So sending him to the AHL this year isn't a case of 'not rushing' him, it is simply the only option available for a prospect that isn't ready (like the vast majority of prospects).

As an example of my point, having Granlund in the AHL last year was simply the correct (and only) option - no 'not rushing' there. However, if Granlund is in the AHL this year (likely), it could very well be argued that he is being 'not rushed' as he has demonstrated that he is now NHL-ready.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The point is that Shinkaruk is not close to being an NHL player yet.

So sending him to the AHL this year isn't a case of 'not rushing' him, it is simply the only option available for a prospect that isn't ready (like the vast majority of prospects).

As an example of my point, having Granlund in the AHL last year was simply the correct (and only) option - no 'not rushing' there. However, if Granlund is in the AHL this year (likely), it could very well be argued that he is being 'not rushed' as he has demonstrated that he is now NHL-ready.

Granlund has far from demonstrated he's NHL ready.............he's demonstrated IMO that he's: "ready for an opportunity to show he's NHL ready."

But there's a big difference between being NHL ready, and being ready to be given a shot.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Granlund has far from demonstrated he's NHL ready.............he's demonstrated IMO that he's: "ready for an opportunity to show he's NHL ready."

But there's a big difference between being NHL ready, and being ready to be given a shot.

He looked pretty damn NHL-ready in the games he played on the big club last year. I think he would've stayed if his shoulder didn't get screwed.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Granlund has far from demonstrated he's NHL ready.............he's demonstrated IMO that he's: "ready for an opportunity to show he's NHL ready."

But there's a big difference between being NHL ready, and being ready to be given a shot.

This post makes no sense. Every kid is being given a "shot" in camp whether they end up being ready for the nhl or not. And Granlund has already been awarded nhl time which would've been extended hadn't he been injured, so I think we're way past the point of being given a "shot". What a silly statement.

[Da_Chief]

Granlund, Sven, Max, Knight, Gaudreau...who will step up and muscle their way onto this team?