Marchenko placed on waivers, contract to be terminated

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I'm sorry, but the notion that Marchenko was providing anything, even depth, is pretty far out.

Right now they're in a spot where they have too many bodies for the Marlies on defense, it's addition by subtraction and if you can't replace his level of contribution from within, we have more problems than we thought.

 

[Kin]

Well, none.

But I wasn't arguing that they needed to keep him.  I was just suggesting that they'll need to add a d-man, and that addition will take up the contract spot.

But if you can replace his "depth" via the waiver wire then why not wait until the need actually arises and do that instead of using a contract spot you may not need?

 

[Redleaf]

Are there any trade options for D-men with Vegas?

 

[slapshot]

Leafs defence in next 6-12 months.

Gardiner - Zaitsev
Rielly - Carrick
Hainsey - Lilijegren (going to surprise)

In 12 - 18 months

Rielly - Lilijegren (going to surprise even more)
Gardiner - Zaitsev
Dermott - Carrick

 

[hockeyfan1]

Re: Will Butcher

https://sports.yahoo.com/learned-will-butcher-sweepstakes-begins-140510291.html

From the article:

"Contrary to popular belief, it probably doesn?t take defensemen longer to ?learn? how to play at the NHL level...

Find that statement a bit difficult to concede.  Forwards (elite) such as Crosby, Matthews, McDavid seem to have adapted right away to NHL play.

Don't know where the author of said article gets his cue to imput his statement.  Many hockey people know that forwards, particularly elite forwards do seem more "NHL-ready" than defencemen with some exceptions.

Certainly metrics bear this out:
...why defencemen peak slightly later than forwards, because they "rely more on pattern recognition and anticipation ? which improve with experience ? to play a good positional game and to make good passes."

Note: article written in 2014
http://www.cbc.ca/news/when-nhl-players-peak-hockey-metrics-1.2646054

 

[Bullfrog]

From the article:

"Contrary to popular belief, it probably doesn?t take defensemen longer to ?learn? how to play at the NHL level...

I've always thought that statement to be overstated. Perhaps there's some truth to it, but I don't think development time is significantly different for the various positions.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

From the article:

"Contrary to popular belief, it probably doesn?t take defensemen longer to ?learn? how to play at the NHL level...

I've always thought that statement to be overstated. Perhaps there's some truth to it, but I don't think development time is significantly different for the various positions.

The studies in the past have always been pretty flawed. For instance the one quoted above uses regular season points and PLUS/MINUS as the only two statistics looked at.

 

[herman]

Defensemen developing 'slower' than forwards, while technically true if the measure is GP or something like that, the deck is basically stacked against them breaking into the NHL at the same time as their cohort's forwards. Same thing with goalies to a greater degree.

• A team generally carries 13/14 F and 7/8 D. This in and of itself is a higher barrier of entry for defensemen if we measure their NHL capability by GP just because of opportunity.
• It's a thing that front offices believe too, so of course their decisions will reflect the notion.
• Playing defense is more team structure and coaching based than playing forward. This is a generalization from good young hockey players (e.g. Nylander, etc.), everyone who is good at hockey knows how to score coming up the system, to the point where defense is really only played by those who are deemed not as useful.
• Scouting in general still has trouble measuring and projecting defensemen skills (because their performance is so team structure and coaching and teammate dependent). The draft misses make teams wary of picking defensemen high, and for some reason your draft position is held against you for many years even though it is something entirely outside your control.

Truly great players make it right out of the gate regardless of position (except for goalies, but that's more opportunity-based).

Feel free to pick these assertions apart

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Are there any trade options for D-men with Vegas?

Vegas still has 11 (!) NHL defencemen on their team. Only one of them is waiver exempt, Shea Theodore, but he's probably one of their 6 best defencemen so it wouldn't be wise to send him down. Their plan to stockpile defencemen and try to trade them after seems to have backfired. Their problem was that only two of their defence picks were righties, and only one of them is any good.

 

[herman]

Are there any trade options for D-men with Vegas?

Vegas still has 11 (!) NHL defencemen on their team. Only one of them is waiver exempt, Shea Theodore, but he's probably one of their 6 best defencemen so it wouldn't be wise to send him down. Their plan to stockpile defencemen and try to trade them after seems to have backfired. Their problem was that only two of their defence picks were righties, and only one of them is any good.

Vegas' expansion draft was so stupid. Their entry draft was pretty great. Hardballing Schmidt was stupid.

 

[Bullfrog]

Defensemen developing 'slower' than forwards, while technically true if the measure is GP or something like that, the deck is basically stacked against them breaking into the NHL at the same time as their cohort's forwards. Same thing with goalies to a greater degree.
....

I have no issues with anything you've just written, except to say that none of that has anything to do with the rate of development. It's basically just saying "the defense position might be harder to learn at the top level." This is still something that I don't fully agree with but would be more willing to accept.

Learning the team defensive game is challenging for all young players, forwards and defense. I suspect there's a number of factors in play: change in focus, more years of coaching, simple experience (learning on the job.) Kadri came 20th in Selke voting!

I don't know if it's a matter of defense developing later or rather GMs/coaches being more cautious with a position that can be more prominent when mistakes happen. There are four lines of forwards you can break a prospect in; only three for defense. I think that's the bigger issue.

 

[Kin]

From the article:

"Contrary to popular belief, it probably doesn?t take defensemen longer to ?learn? how to play at the NHL level...

I've always thought that statement to be overstated. Perhaps there's some truth to it, but I don't think development time is significantly different for the various positions.

The studies in the past have always been pretty flawed. For instance the one quoted above uses regular season points and PLUS/MINUS as the only two statistics looked at.

Yeah, unfortunately I don't think this is something that could ever definitively be stated with evidence. For most of hockey's history size/strength were attributes valued highly for defense, and it's still true to some extent today, so physical maturity was/is as much a reason to keep younger d-men out of the league as anything.

It's a little bit like the old "Keeping a player in the AHL never hurt his development" idea because, you know, there's no way to test it.

 

[herman]

I have no issues with anything you've just written, except to say that none of that has anything to do with the rate of development. It's basically just saying "the defense position might be harder to learn at the top level." This is still something that I don't fully agree with but would be more willing to accept.

Learning the team defensive game is challenging for all young players, forwards and defense. I suspect there's a number of factors in play: change in focus, more years of coaching, simple experience (learning on the job.) Kadri came 20th in Selke voting!

I don't know if it's a matter of defense developing later or rather GMs/coaches being more cautious with a position that can be more prominent when mistakes happen. There are four lines of forwards you can break a prospect in; only three for defense. I think that's the bigger issue.

You're right that I didn't really address 'rate of development'.

I think we both have the same point here (correct me if I'm wrong). Development correlating directly with in-game puck touches, it seems to all come down to management and coaching staffs giving opportunity. Biases (mentioned by Nik) and a numerical disadvantage basically means defensemen are going to be held back more readily than forwards, and so their development is deemed slower as we'd be spreadsheeting by age of entry.

 

[cabber24]

Re: Will Butcher

https://sports.yahoo.com/learned-will-butcher-sweepstakes-begins-140510291.html

What's happening COL? Geez, Sakic said they WOULD get him signed. Ouch.

 

[leafsjunkie]

Re: Will Butcher

https://sports.yahoo.com/learned-will-butcher-sweepstakes-begins-140510291.html

What's happening COL? Geez, Sakic said they WOULD get him signed. Ouch.

Interesting Lupul tidbit in that article.