I'm just not sure how much weight we can put behind the idea that "The team drafted him, ergo he's got the mental fortitude to play today." Sure, they go through a battery of interviews and evaluations, but one need not look any further than at one's self to realize that who you were at 18 isn't who you were at 25, 28, or 38. Yes, their personalities have been forced into developing a bit quicker than someone's who is not in the limelight all day, but flights every other day, the more intense scrutiny, the machinery that is a professional team, the exponential increase in expectations, and just the sheer fact that no one is fully developed at 18 makes it tough for me to just call that a safe assumption.

I'm not saying "keep everyone in junior" because I don't think, for example, an extra year with the Mooseheads turned Drouin into a sure thing, but if one believes the rumours that swirl about why Cooper doesn't really think he's ready, would rushing him into a lineup where he doesn't have the coach's confidence and doesn't really have a good understanding of his expectations have been better? Didn't think so.

I know, we can't just generalize based on the experience of one player, but I don't think we can just blow off the concept of being "ready" by saying it's all about saving a contract year, or that they're usually mature for their age. Let's not underestimate the stepping stone between playing in a somewhat decrepit arena in a small Canadian town, and playing in front of 15,000 people, hundreds of journalists, and all those family and friends in a big city centre, all while maybe/maybe not having yet earned a high school diploma.

Yes and no. Tavares is a great example in this case. Obviously Strome and Johnny T are different players on VERY different teams but I can almost guarantee you that Strome will be cheaper to resign if he plays out his ELC starting next year than if AZ were to wait. There is literally 0 proof to back up that last statement about bringing them up too quickly. Too many other factors are involved.
- JakeTech19

When a team isn't competing it absolutely makes no sense to rush them. Eating UFA years costs more on RFA contracts too. There's zero evidence bringing prospects up too early helps with development and it definitely sets fewer years to UFA status.

When a team isn't competing it absolutely makes no sense to rush them. Eating UFA years costs more on RFA contracts too. There's zero evidence bringing prospects up too early helps with development and it definitely sets fewer years to UFA status.
- jfkst1

There's zero evidence it hurts to bring prospects up early as well. All I'm saying is 'don't burn a year of the ECL' is a bad excuse. As someone else said, if you burn through that year while they're younger, you'll probably get a better deal on a long term contract through their prime, especially if you factor inflation.,

James.

I didn't even read this last blog. I used to find your arguments amusing but I'm tired of your thoughts. Good luck & good bye.

Interesting read and perspective. You've displayed a lot of courage authoring your opinion so vehemently.

I think the biggest issue with rushing top-end drafted talent to the NHL before they get into a substantial amount of professional hockey games (AHL) is realizing the work ethic/dedication to daily routines as there's a more tightly packed schedule compared to juniors and incidentally they are actually being paid at that point.

I agree that a lot of times coaches will try and force top-end talent to play in role-playing situations as opposed to being the go-to-guy that they're accustomed to being.

I think they would say "Hey man, Randy Newman is the bee's knees."
- James_Tanner

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Newman. It's way better than listening to that Fetty Wap dude.

You mean the guy who scored at a 30 goal pace in his rookie season and then had a rookie coach put him on the third line?
- James_Tanner

I mean the guy who shoulda spent another couple years in juniors or russia whatever.
you know the guy who has only 25 total goals the last 2 years and a -68 rating.

foolish to think ice time is the only reason he is not doing well

Your ELC tidbit makes zero sense.

The Yotes are far more likely to be a better team in 2018-19 than 2015-16. Why wouldn't you want a more-experienced Dylan Strome on a tiny cap hit on that presumably more competitive team more than an 18 year-old Dylan Strome on next year's likely bottom-of-the-barrel team?

For a direct comparison, look at the kid's older brother Ryan Strome and the Isles. They kept him in Niagara for 2 years and now he is a legit top-six forward still on an ELC on a good team. If the Isles had called him up as an 18-year old, they still would've sucked in 2011-12, he probably wouldn't have been any better as a 19-year old than Matt Moulson or Brad Boyes were in 2013 when the team finally made the playoffs, and then they would've had to pay him in the summer of 2014, which would've prevented the team from spending money in other areas.

There's zero evidence it hurts to bring prospects up early as well. All I'm saying is 'don't burn a year of the ECL' is a bad excuse. As someone else said, if you burn through that year while they're younger, you'll probably get a better deal on a long term contract through their prime, especially if you factor inflation.,
- James_Tanner

Talk about something with zero evidence...locking up quality RFAs into their UFA years is what can save money in the long run.

You won't ruin players, but it certainly can alter their development pattern, for better or worse.

Football has been trending in this direction with QB's and baseball is also getting younger. For hockey to just discredit it is short sited. Going back to junior and dominating inferior talent seems like a waste and any team not using the 9 game window to evaluate a top 10 pick is idiotic. Though Draisital is a prime example of what not to do.

Ok here's my two cents, first off your own GM said right after they drafted Strome that he is gonna need sometime to develop. Scouts said he was an average skater in junior so he would be a below average skater in the show which in today's NHL is not a recipe for success. No disrespect to you but I'll trust NHL GMs and scouts over a blogger anyway. Second, I believe Arizona doesn't have an IMMEDIATE need at centre. Vermette, Hanzal, Gordon, Richardson and Chipchura. Unless you can guarantee him top six minutes every game, which isn't likely under Tippett, he would be best suited going back to junior to be the go to guy and try to lead Erie to the Memorial Cup. One more year to work on his skating and to physically mature will do wonders for him in 16-17.

PS you don't even have Mikkel Boedker in your 4 forward lines

You're probably right about the name calling, but it was specific to that one guy. Honestly, think what you want, it's no skin off my back.

Top Seven no one can argue, no order: Karlsson, OEL, Hedman, Keith, Doughty, Subban, Giordano.

Next tier: Boychuck, Shatenkirk, Pietrangelo, Weber, Muzzin, Brodie, Stralman, Kronwell, Suter , Ekblad, Carlson,Faulk, Byfuglien, Leddy, Letang, Sekara, Hamilton

After that, before you start getting into your Klefboms, Riellys, Klingbergs and Vatanens, I guess you could throw Josi in around 20-25.
- James_Tanner

Roman Josi is Tied for 6th in goals, Tied for 9th in assists, Tied for 5th in points, is second in blocked shots and his other stats are really good. He is everything you preach to us about OEL(maybe better) But yea! lets throw him in around 25th overall?

the master of writing atrocious blogs to get hits is at it again well done

Sure, there are a few exceptions to the rule who were rushed into the NHL because of their skill and stature. But it is far from clear that Strome is one of those. Crosby came into the NHL and did great, and so will McDavid, and a handful of other top prospects.

The main concern with rushing prospects is two-fold (three if you include contract concerns): A: the player's body is not ready for the NHL. Is Strome ready for the NHL? Will he prosper in a league where most players are about 20 lbs heavier than him? And B: will it possibly hurt his confidence playing on a very bad team? Does he have the experience in dealing with being checked by NHL quality players, and being defended by NHL quality defence? He does not. Can he gain that skill on the job? Maybe, but that's a high risk depending on each individual player and team circumstances. Phoenix has a lot of unproven prospects who they are counting on and if that doesn't go right then it can have a bad result on the young players confidence. It's a risk that most teams don't want to take unless they have no choice, which I believe Phoenix feels that they don't have much choice anyways.

Should Strome be a full-time NHL-er next year? No. Not if they can help it. Will he be? Probably. A classic example of rushing is the NY Islanders. They had a number of young players who they rushed and it had a negative effect (Tavares is a generational talent, exception). A more recent example, Oilers. Both times I don't think they felt like they had much choice.

I believe that if they rush all these players, they will just be hoping for some success to draw attention to try to avoid eventually being moved (sorry but that's a legitimate point). They have nothing to lose.

Ideally you want to build a team where you can put Turris on the second line because that means you're #1 is a truley elite top-ten player and you can now try to win a championship.

BUT, he's a top 30 C and definitely a #1 C quality and miles ahead of most second line centres. I do see your point though.
- James_Tanner

^^^THIS ^^^

There's zero evidence it hurts to bring prospects up early as well. All I'm saying is 'don't burn a year of the ECL' is a bad excuse. As someone else said, if you burn through that year while they're younger, you'll probably get a better deal on a long term contract through their prime, especially if you factor inflation.,
- James_Tanner

There is no right way to do it, but ultimately teams should use their ELC strategically. If you can have an elite player on an ELC thats a huge salary cap advantage.
Pittsburgh won the cup with these guys on ELCs:
Malkin, Letang, Staal, Goligoski
The great teams have several elite players on ELCs as it allows them to invest their funds on more, older & veteran talent. I don't buy that you get a better contract if you burn younger ELC years. You just speed up the road to FA. Contracts like Tavares are more the rarity rather than the norm. Most players get paid their due, if not more.

Phoenix would be foolish to bring in a guy like Strome into a losing environment, burn a year of his ELC, when they can let him develop another 1-2 years and bring him in for three years at his ELC when they may start competing for the playoffs. Especially since let's be honest Phoenix ain't a very good FA market, why speed up his road to FA?

Sure, there are a few exceptions to the rule who were rushed into the NHL because of their skill and stature. But it is far from clear that Strome is one of those. Crosby came into the NHL and did great, and so will McDavid, and a handful of other top prospects.

The main concern with rushing prospects is two-fold (three if you include contract concerns): A: the player's body is not ready for the NHL. Is Strome ready for the NHL? Will he prosper in a league where most players are about 20 lbs heavier than him? And B: will it possibly hurt his confidence playing on a very bad team? Does he have the experience in dealing with being checked by NHL quality players, and being defended by NHL quality defence? He does not. Can he gain that skill on the job? Maybe, but that's a high risk depending on each individual player and team circumstances. Phoenix has a lot of unproven prospects who they are counting on and if that doesn't go right then it can have a bad result on the young players confidence. It's a risk that most teams don't want to take unless they have no choice, which I believe Phoenix feels that they don't have much choice anyways.

Should Strome be a full-time NHL-er next year? No. Not if they can help it. Will he be? Probably. A classic example of rushing is the NY Islanders. They had a number of young players who they rushed and it had a negative effect (Tavares is a generational talent, exception). A more recent example, Oilers. Both times I don't think they felt like they had much choice.

I believe that if they rush all these players, they will just be hoping for some success to draw attention to try to avoid eventually being moved (sorry but that's a legitimate point). They have nothing to lose.
- scoremoregoals

Completely agree with this. The problem with the stats on younger players and perhaps Tanner's perception, is generally that only the top picks in a draft (the best of the best) can even make the NHL in year 1. And despite the fact that only the best of each draft class makes the NHL in Year 1, the majority of those players aren't successful. So now imagine if you start rushing in 18 year olds who are mid to later first round picks, it's just not gonna go well. As a hockey player, I have made teams that were in fact out of my league and to be honest it did just hurt my game. The best development for these guys is to play at a level where they can continue growing and building confidence.

Duclair - Stome - Domi
Dvorak - Samuelsson - Perlini
Rieder - Vermette - Doan
Downie - Richardson - Chipchura

Damn that is a young top six .
- KINGS67

Veteran teams would have a field day with that lineup

James.

I didn't even read this last blog. I used to find your arguments amusing but I'm tired of your thoughts. Good luck & good bye.
- striker777

Oh no! We're really going to miss you!

Talk about something with zero evidence...locking up quality RFAs into their UFA years is what can save money in the long run.
- jfkst1

Yes, and if you do it younger.........

Ok here's my two cents, first off your own GM said right after they drafted Strome that he is gonna need sometime to develop. Scouts said he was an average skater in junior so he would be a below average skater in the show which in today's NHL is not a recipe for success. No disrespect to you but I'll trust NHL GMs and scouts over a blogger anyway. Second, I believe Arizona doesn't have an IMMEDIATE need at centre. Vermette, Hanzal, Gordon, Richardson and Chipchura. Unless you can guarantee him top six minutes every game, which isn't likely under Tippett, he would be best suited going back to junior to be the go to guy and try to lead Erie to the Memorial Cup. One more year to work on his skating and to physically mature will do wonders for him in 16-17.

PS you don't even have Mikkel Boedker in your 4 forward lines
- AdamFlamesFan91

1) I don't really care what Maloney says at this point. 2.) I've read virtually every word written about Strome and seen him play, his skating isn't bad so much that it's really the only part of his game you could really criticize, also, he's the kind of player who slows the game down - a good comparison would be Thornton who isn't really a great skater either. 3) AZ doesn't need immidiate help at centre? That is laughable they have the least offensive, saddest group of forwards in the NHL by a mile if you don't count any of the six rookies they could dress. 4) You're right about listening to professionals over me. 5.) None of my suggestions are likely under Tippet or Maloney because they do everything like it's 1974.

Roman Josi is Tied for 6th in goals, Tied for 9th in assists, Tied for 5th in points, is second in blocked shots and his other stats are really good. He is everything you preach to us about OEL(maybe better) But yea! lets throw him in around 25th overall?
- camfor

The difference is OEL makes his teammates better and prevents offense. I got nothing against Josi, but who do you rank him with on that list?

There is no right way to do it, but ultimately teams should use their ELC strategically. If you can have an elite player on an ELC thats a huge salary cap advantage.
Pittsburgh won the cup with these guys on ELCs:
Malkin, Letang, Staal, Goligoski
The great teams have several elite players on ELCs as it allows them to invest their funds on more, older & veteran talent. I don't buy that you get a better contract if you burn younger ELC years. You just speed up the road to FA. Contracts like Tavares are more the rarity rather than the norm. Most players get paid their due, if not more.

Phoenix would be foolish to bring in a guy like Strome into a losing environment, burn a year of his ELC, when they can let him develop another 1-2 years and bring him in for three years at his ELC when they may start competing for the playoffs. Especially since let's be honest Phoenix ain't a very good FA market, why speed up his road to FA?
- belgrave

The ECL argument would be valid if Arizona had any chance of taking advantage of dressing six rookies on ECLs and then supplementing them by spending to the cap on other star players.

Also, the Penguins are sort of a ridiculous example because drafting Malking Crosby, Letang, Fleury, and Staal all in a row is a one in a million occurrence. I see your point, I'm just saying, realistically, if you have smart cap management, burning the year isn't a big deal because most cases where you can take advantage of having them are long-shot best case scenarios.

The difference is OEL makes his teammates better and prevents offense. I got nothing against Josi, but who do you rank him with on that list?
- James_Tanner

Oh ok, the difference is OEL makes all of his team-mates better, but doesn't do a good enough job for his team to even be remotely good, let alone make the playoffs.

Roman Josi plays half the game and in all situations on a much better team, but he's just an offensive dman who doesn't make anyone around him better. Brilliant.

You will never be able to effectively quantify how much a player "makes his team-mates better" in the game of ice hockey. Never.