Training Camp - Sept 11

[bustaheims]

And there's a real purpose to that when you're dealing with guys whose ceilings, realistically, are bottom-end guys on the second line and fourth defensemen. Especially if the club has no pressing need for young talent. I really question, though, if Detroit would be all that rigorous with the application of that philosophy if they had a young player who was capable of contributing right away.

My guess is they'd have a similar opinion to mine - either he sticks full-time or he goes back to junior. I don't think they'd do the 9 game sampling and then send him back.

 

[Deebo]

There's nothing wrong with keeping Rielly out of the NHL until he's more than just ready, and there's certainly nothing wrong with not putting him in the NHL lineup if they already know he's not going to stick - and, I still believe, in that case, it's better for him if they don't.

I guess that's where we disagree, I definitely see value in exposing him to the pace and intensity of the professional game at the NHL level.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I'm a little surprised they cut Biggs and Blacker, maybe they have knocks.

They play Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, I thought they might want a few more bodies to spread over the three games.

 

[Kin]

My guess is they'd have a similar opinion to mine - either he sticks full-time or he goes back to junior. I don't think they'd do the 9 game sampling and then send him back.

No, that's probably true.

 

[Corn Flake]

I'm a little surprised they cut Biggs and Blacker, maybe they have knocks.

They play Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, I thought they might want a few more bodies to spread over the three games.

Biggs looked really good at the rookie camp but not so great in the pre-season game.  Was skating really well and moving his feet with speed I hadn't seen before but it wasn't there in the pre-season game.

 

[Bender]

Maybe not the same method, but you can certainly apply a similar philosophy. What the Wings seem to be striving for is to "over develop" their prospects. They like to leave guys in junior and in the AHL until they're more than just ready for NHL duty, but ready for full-time significant roles.

And there's a real purpose to that when you're dealing with guys whose ceilings, realistically, are bottom-end guys on the second line and fourth defensemen. Especially if the club has no pressing need for young talent. I really question, though, if Detroit would be all that rigorous with the application of that philosophy if they had a young player who was capable of contributing right away.

And that's the thing: The player will eventually have to get their feet wet regardless. I don't think every potential star player will be slotted in a top role right from the get go. At what point are they considered "ready enough" without giving them a shot at the position?

 

[Corn Flake]

There's nothing wrong with keeping Rielly out of the NHL until he's more than just ready, and there's certainly nothing wrong with not putting him in the NHL lineup if they already know he's not going to stick - and, I still believe, in that case, it's better for him if they don't.

I guess that's where we disagree, I definitely see value in exposing him to the pace and intensity of the professional game at the NHL level.

I agree with you on this. It will give them a chance to see if he can handle the NHL at full tilt or not, and worse case if he can't he can go back with some experience under his belt.

 

[Bullfrog]

I keep flip-flopping on the idea, but I think I'm leaning toward the "if he's going to get sent back, send back right away" crowd. I do see the value in exposing him to some games. However, it's more the team I'm thinking about. We've got quite a few defensemen that can play on the team. I don't want them to lose out on a lot of icetime solely to get Rielly some experience. This team needs to gel quickly.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I've been impressed by Rielly in the preseason games. I've said this earlier, but his passing and skating abilities really have come exactly as advertised, and a lot of the time with prospects that doesn't happen this early. With that said, he hasn't exactly excelled beyond belief. He's shown that he can probably handle the NHL, but when he finally plays I don't want him to just "handle" it. I want him to be one of the best players on the team. And I don't really think that's expecting too much from a highly touted 5th overall draft pick.

I remembered there was a quote from an interview Maple Leaf Hotstove did with one of the Leafs executives that said that going back to the WHL won't be a bad thing for Rielly because it will allow him the opportunity to know what it feels like to dominate a league. And that can be a big positive for a young player. When I was looking for that quote I found this one by Dave Morrison instead:

It?s not just that they?re an NHL player ? it?s that they can play in the NHL and help us win.  Playing in the NHL is one thing, but playing and helping your team win is a whole different thing.

That's pretty much where I'm at with Rielly right now. When he joins the team I want him to be a top-4 defenceman and be on the top powerplay unit, not a bottom pairing guy and on the second PP group.

 

[Kin]

I want him to be one of the best players on the team. And I don't really think that's expecting too much from a highly touted 5th overall draft pick.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The issue, I think, is more about what is the best way to transition him into being one of those best players.

I remembered there was a quote from an interview Maple Leaf Hotstove did with one of the Leafs executives that said that going back to the WHL won't be a bad thing for Rielly because it will allow him the opportunity to know what it feels like to dominate a league.

I don't know how much stock I put into that. I buy the idea that more development time isn't necessarily the worst thing but I don't know that there's a ton of value in letting Rielly dominate the WHL. For starters, I don't know how likely it is that he's going to be able to be significantly more "dominant" than he was last year as a nearly PPG defenseman but also, I mean, it does kind of run contrary to the theory of development that holds pretty true in just about every field where you want to be consistently challenging someone who's gifted. Rielly's shown that he can be a very good WHL defenseman. Considering the fact that no matter what he isn't likely to dominate the NHL I don't know what instructional or learning purpose gets served by a year with him as a 1.3 or 1.4 ppg defenseman. 

It?s not just that they?re an NHL player ? it?s that they can play in the NHL and help us win.  Playing in the NHL is one thing, but playing and helping your team win is a whole different thing.

That's pretty much where I'm at with Rielly right now. When he joins the team I want him to be a top-4 defenceman and be on the top powerplay unit, not a bottom pairing guy and on the second PP group.

But is that realistic? Most defensemen, no matter how talented they ultimately wind up being, usually have to find their footing.  Sure, there are guys who step in and make immediate impacts right away but typically they're the guys who have so much talent that they make the NHL in their first or second camps. I don't see what's inherently problematic about guys developing parts of their game in the NHL while being used in a complimentary role.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I don't know how much stock I put into that. I buy the idea that more development time isn't necessarily the worst thing but I don't know that there's a ton of value in letting Rielly dominate the WHL. For starters, I don't know how likely it is that he's going to be able to be significantly more "dominant" than he was last year as a nearly PPG defenseman but also, I mean, it does kind of run contrary to the theory of development that holds pretty true in just about every field where you want to be consistently challenging someone who's gifted. Rielly's shown that he can be a very good WHL defenseman. Considering the fact that no matter what he isn't likely to dominate the NHL I don't know what instructional or learning purpose gets served by a year with him as a 1.3 or 1.4 ppg defenseman.

Well, obviously his development won't just be about how many points he puts up. Aside from the fact that he can still work on other parts of his game while still trying to maintain that offensive prowess he showed last season, I think it would benefit him a lot to be a part of a winning team in junior for a season. And not just be a part of it, but be the best player on that winning team. Last season Rielly was the best player on a team that missed the playoffs. He was an 18-year old on a team that's usually led by 19-year old players that struggled in the WJC. I think there's value in him going down there and not just dominating but winning and leading that winning team as opposed to being a spare part on a NHL team.

But is that realistic? Most defensemen, no matter how talented they ultimately wind up being, usually have to find their footing.  Sure, there are guys who step in and make immediate impacts right away but typically they're the guys who have so much talent that they make the NHL in their first or second camps. I don't see what's inherently problematic about guys developing parts of their game in the NHL while being used in a complimentary role.

I've compared his development in the past to Alex Pietrangelo. He was a 4th overall pick and was sent back to the OHL in both his first and second seasons after being drafted. In his rookie year he finished with 40-points, was top-4 in TOI/G among defencemen and led his team in PP TOI/G among defencemen. Yes, it's just one example, but Petro is really the only other top-5 drafted defenceman that's gone this route.

And I'm not saying there's anything problematic about Rielly playing in the NHL this year. I do think that more defencemen who have played in the NHL too early as opposed to too late, but that's partly because of the smaller sample size. I do however think that it benefits the Leafs to wait another season before using up a year on his contract. ELC's are arguably the most valuable deals in the NHL these days and there's a small window to take advantage of the savings from them.

 

[Kin]

Well, obviously his development won't just be about how many points he puts up. Aside from the fact that he can still work on other parts of his game while still trying to maintain that offensive prowess he showed last season, I think it would benefit him a lot to be a part of a winning team in junior for a season. And not just be a part of it, but be the best player on that winning team. Last season Rielly was the best player on a team that missed the playoffs. He was an 18-year old on a team that's usually led by 19-year old players that struggled in the WJC. I think there's value in him going down there and not just dominating but winning and leading that winning team as opposed to being a spare part on a NHL team.

I'd be the first to admit that I didn't watch much of him last year but I think the problem there is assuming that there's enough of a challenge in the WHL to force him to work on the parts of his game that need improvement and, if there is, that does seem a little incongruous with the idea that he'd dominate the league. Personally, between the two options, I'd rather a guy be forced into a role where he doesn't dominate than one where he does for the purposes of learning.

And while I agree there's some value in the playoff experience how good Moose Jaw is this year isn't something the Leafs can control. I have no idea how WHL previews are looking but if Rielly's a dominant force on a so-so team I'd really wonder about how great that is as an environment.

I've compared his development in the past to Alex Pietrangelo. He was a 4th overall pick and was sent back to the OHL in both his first and second seasons after being drafted. In his rookie year he finished with 40-points, was top-4 in TOI/G among defencemen and led his team in PP TOI/G among defencemen. Yes, it's just one example, but Petro is really the only other top-5 drafted defenceman that's gone this route.

Agreed, he's a good example. I think it's worth mentioning though that in those two OHL seasons after he was drafted he only played 61 games combined so there's a part of me that thinks that if Rielly had gotten hurt and only played half the season last year there'd be a better reason to give him more CHL experience. As is....I'm not sure that's the case.

I do however think that it benefits the Leafs to wait another season before using up a year on his contract. ELC's are arguably the most valuable deals in the NHL these days and there's a small window to take advantage of the savings from them.

Again, agreed. I'd weigh that consideration pretty lightly against the much larger consideration of what's best for Rielly's development as a player but, as you say, there are arguments both ways there.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Agreed, he's a good example. I think it's worth mentioning though that in those two OHL seasons after he was drafted he only played 61 games combined so there's a part of me that thinks that if Rielly had gotten hurt and only played half the season last year there'd be a better reason to give him more CHL experience. As is....I'm not sure that's the case.

Pietrangelo's low game totals in those two seasons weren't caused by injury. In 08/09 he played 8 games with the Blues at the start of the season and was sent back in the middle of November. He then missed most of December because of the WJCs. But he was healthy and played the rest of the season.

In 09/10 the Blues actually kept him on the roster until December before loaning him to the WJC team and sending him back to the OHL for the remainder of the season. He only played 9 NHL games in the three months with the Blues. I originally thought this would be a poor route to take with Rielly but it's starting to grow on me a little. It's kind of the best of both worlds, but the team essentially has to decide that this is the plan for Rielly at the very beginning of the season otherwise there's no point in spreading his 9 games out over 3 months.

 

[Kin]

Pietrangelo's low game totals in those two seasons weren't caused by injury. In 08/09 he played 8 games with the Blues at the start of the season and was sent back in the middle of November. He then missed most of December because of the WJCs. But he was healthy and played the rest of the season.

I know. I was just using "If Rielly got injured" as shorthand for an explanation as to why he could play a similar number of games. I could have used "If the Leafs take the same approach with Rielly as the Blues did with Pietrangelo" though.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Pietrangelo's low game totals in those two seasons weren't caused by injury. In 08/09 he played 8 games with the Blues at the start of the season and was sent back in the middle of November. He then missed most of December because of the WJCs. But he was healthy and played the rest of the season.

I know. I was just using "If Rielly got injured" as shorthand for an explanation as to why he could play a similar number of games. I could have used "If the Leafs take the same approach with Rielly as the Blues did with Pietrangelo" though.

Ok, sorry, I just assumed you thought he missed games because of an injury.

 

[ZBBM]

That Morrison quote is just typical half-baked sportspeak.  Why would any GM put a player on the roster if he didn't think he could help the team win?  "Yeah, let's put Grinder X on the squad, even though we don't think he'll really add anything...."

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

That Morrison quote is just typical half-baked sportspeak.  Why would any GM put a player on the roster if he didn't think he could help the team win?  "Yeah, let's put Grinder X on the squad, even though we don't think he'll really add anything...."

They already do that.

 

[ZBBM]

That Morrison quote is just typical half-baked sportspeak.  Why would any GM put a player on the roster if he didn't think he could help the team win?  "Yeah, let's put Grinder X on the squad, even though we don't think he'll really add anything...."

They already do that.

No, they don't. 

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

That Morrison quote is just typical half-baked sportspeak.  Why would any GM put a player on the roster if he didn't think he could help the team win?  "Yeah, let's put Grinder X on the squad, even though we don't think he'll really add anything...."

They already do that.

No, they don't.

They may not think it, but they do.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It sounds like Kevin Marshall and Spencer Abbott have been cut from training camp. Marshall will have to go on waivers, Abbott won't. Neither player had a chance of making the roster out the gate but I was somewhat pleasantly surprised by both. Especially Marshall, who showed more of a physical game than I was expecting. I think they'll both have big roles on the Marlies.