Winning & Player Development

[Redleaf]

Winning is such a wonderful thing all around. Isnt it? Aside from the obvious reasons that it expands the fan base and brings a form of fulfillment to longtime fans, it also props up the team standings, banks important points for a playoff run and usually pads the individual stats of players.

Even more importantly, it provides time for rookies to acclimatize to the NHL, and to grow and learn under the umbrella of a winning environment. They learn how to win as they gain experience and confidence. However, the most important aspect of winning is the time it creates for management to see through to the full potential of their drafted players. They are not forced to make rash decisions to trade away young talent before they reach their true potential. 

Some kids just need longer to develop than others. Case in point: Nazem Kadri vs. Jake Gardiner.

Jake made the Leafs out of the gate this year. His play tailed off after the first 10 or so games, but has since returned, and he has looked like a 5 year pro on the ice of late. Kadri, on the other hand has struggled to make this team for three seasons now, coming in and out of the lineup. He was not one of the call ups when the Leafs were devastated with injuries. But as recently as Friday, coach Eakins had this to say about Nazem. ?Forget about the fact that he had two goals and two assists. Even if he did not have any points, this was Nazem Kadri?s best game since he?s been here.? Kadri may finally be developing into the player Burke drafted in 2009. Instead of trading away Kadri, like many suggested they do when the team was struggling, they held on to him, and the patience afforded by the teams recent success appears to be paying off for everyone. The winning is wonderful!!!

 

[Kin]

So...you don't suppose waiting until Kadri actually plays well in the NHL before declaring people who wanted to deal him wrong would be the way to go here?

 

[Zee]

So...you don't suppose waiting until Kadri actually plays well in the NHL before declaring people who wanted to deal him wrong would be the way to go here?

I recall Jeff Farkas putting up good numbers at the AHL level too.

 

[Redleaf]

So...you don't suppose waiting until Kadri actually plays well in the NHL before declaring people who wanted to deal him wrong would be the way to go here?

Yeah. Kadri was just an example of my point that winning buys time for players and management. He may be a gem or may never become a full time NHLer, but the outcome won't be subject to the amount of time he was given to develop in the Leafs system.

 

[Kin]

Yeah. Kadri was just an example of my point that winning buys time for players and management. He may be a gem or may never become a full time NHLer, but the outcome won't be subject to the amount of time he was given to develop in the Leafs system.

Yeah, I was really referring to your statement that "the patience is paying off" which, you know, isn't especially true unless you're a Marlies season ticket holder.

As to the general point I think it's a chicken and the egg statement. Are good teams better at developing players? Maybe, but it'd be hard to separate that from the reality that they're probably only good teams in the first place because they're good at developing players.

Either way, it strikes me as a pretty premature argument to make based on a pretty good first third of the season or so.

 

[Redleaf]

Yeah. Kadri was just an example of my point that winning buys time for players and management. He may be a gem or may never become a full time NHLer, but the outcome won't be subject to the amount of time he was given to develop in the Leafs system.

As to the general point I think it's a chicken and the egg statement. Are good teams better at developing players? Maybe, but it'd be hard to separate that from the reality that they're probably only good teams in the first place because they're good at developing players.

I don't really see it as a chicken and egg thing. To me its more like a revolving door. Winning management select best pick they can. Draftee enters system, and develops at his own pace, enters NHL continues to learn to play a winning style of hockey, cycle continues..... Of course Detroit is my example.

Are we there yet? No, but I like that we are seeing the patience by Burke and co. In order to implement this type of formula.

 

[Kin]

I don't really see it as a chicken and egg thing. To me its more like a revolving door. Winning management select best pick they can. Draftee enters system, and develops at his own pace, enters NHL continues to learn to play a winning style of hockey, cycle continues..... Of course Detroit is my example.

But good teams and bad teams, in the NHL as with all sports, don't remain constant. Teams rise and fall and the teams that become good teams do so through player development which then feeds into itself. Any team with decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless of what's happening on the big league club.

 

[Redleaf]

I don't really see it as a chicken and egg thing. To me its more like a revolving door. Winning management select best pick they can. Draftee enters system, and develops at his own pace, enters NHL continues to learn to play a winning style of hockey, cycle continues..... Of course Detroit is my example.

But good teams and bad teams, in the NHL as with all sports, don't remain constant. Teams rise and fall and the teams that become good teams do so through player development which then feeds into itself. Any team with decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless of what's happening on the big league club.

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound. Teams go up and down like you said, but the well run teams don't fall too far from the pack and often run up very long strings of consecutive playoff appearances. And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.We've seen it first hand here in Leafland.

 

[Kin]

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound.

I don't see a formula, exactly. "Winning begets winning" doesn't say much about how to get to be a good team in the first place.

And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.

But it's still the smart thing for a struggling team to do. So, say the Leafs, who still haven't made the playoffs under Burke have shown that despite "winning" being a rare occurrence for them they don't panic. It's not like not rushing prospects or trading them frantically happened before this good start to the season.

 

[Bender]

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound.

I don't see a formula, exactly. "Winning begets winning" doesn't say much about how to get to be a good team in the first place.

And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.

But it's still the smart thing for a struggling team to do. So, say the Leafs, who still haven't made the playoffs under Burke have shown that despite "winning" being a rare occurrence for them they don't panic. It's not like not rushing prospects or trading them frantically happened before this good start to the season.

Yeah, I mean you don't have to look very far at some teams we used to talk about that had winning ways only to be shadows of their former selves right now. I mean, look at how far Anaheim has fallen even with pretty good players who are accustomed to success.

 

[Redleaf]

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound.

I don't see a formula, exactly. "Winning begets winning" doesn't say much about how to get to be a good team in the first place.

And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.

But it's still the smart thing for a struggling team to do. So, say the Leafs, who still haven't made the playoffs under Burke have shown that despite "winning" being a rare occurrence for them they don't panic. It's not like not rushing prospects or trading them frantically happened before this good start to the season.

Yeah, I mean you don't have to look very far at some teams we used to talk about that had winning ways only to be shadows of their former selves right now. I mean, look at how far Anaheim has fallen even with pretty good players who are accustomed to success.

I'm starting to think Burke leaving had a greater impact then people think.

 

[Zee]

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound.

I don't see a formula, exactly. "Winning begets winning" doesn't say much about how to get to be a good team in the first place.

And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.

But it's still the smart thing for a struggling team to do. So, say the Leafs, who still haven't made the playoffs under Burke have shown that despite "winning" being a rare occurrence for them they don't panic. It's not like not rushing prospects or trading them frantically happened before this good start to the season.

Yeah, I mean you don't have to look very far at some teams we used to talk about that had winning ways only to be shadows of their former selves right now. I mean, look at how far Anaheim has fallen even with pretty good players who are accustomed to success.

I'm starting to think Burke leaving had a greater impact then people think.

It's amazing to me that Burke doesn't get more credit for Anaheim's success.  I mean he put the final pieces in place to win the Cup yet so many people still say he inherited Murray's team.  I really think Burke's legacy will be defined with the Leafs now.  He took a franchise going nowhere, with no prospects, and built up a good team with plenty of good youth developing the minors.  IF the Leafs can win a Cup under his guidance he'll be universally recognized as one of the greatest GMs of the modern era.

 

[Bender]

I agree that teams fall out of the rotation and have to start again, but overall the formula is sound.

I don't see a formula, exactly. "Winning begets winning" doesn't say much about how to get to be a good team in the first place.

And I disagree that decent management will let players develop at their own pace regardless. Decent management is subject to the same things poor management are subject to. Namely losing. When a team is struggling long term, no one's job is safe.

But it's still the smart thing for a struggling team to do. So, say the Leafs, who still haven't made the playoffs under Burke have shown that despite "winning" being a rare occurrence for them they don't panic. It's not like not rushing prospects or trading them frantically happened before this good start to the season.

Yeah, I mean you don't have to look very far at some teams we used to talk about that had winning ways only to be shadows of their former selves right now. I mean, look at how far Anaheim has fallen even with pretty good players who are accustomed to success.

I'm starting to think Burke leaving had a greater impact then people think.

It's amazing to me that Burke doesn't get more credit for Anaheim's success.  I mean he put the final pieces in place to win the Cup yet so many people still say he inherited Murray's team.  I really think Burke's legacy will be defined with the Leafs now.  He took a franchise going nowhere, with no prospects, and built up a good team with plenty of good youth developing the minors.  IF the Leafs can win a Cup under his guidance he'll be universally recognized as one of the greatest GMs of the modern era.

Even look at Vancouver. If it wasn't Burke who set them up for success, it was Nonis. It's insane that anyone would say that the Canucks weren't better off with him as their General Manager. They were barely treading water by the time he got there.

Even with Anaheim he did enough wheeling and dealing to have the team look different enough from the one he inherited.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0002222006.html

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0043122007.html