WTF?
- Marwood

Un Fecking Real.

Please see examples I mentioned above.
- Codes1087

Those are success examples. You can't say that after the fact. We are talking about how youth should get a chance in the NHL "if they deserve it" as you say.

So what determines that? Can you clarify the deserve it part on getting to play in the first place?

Like if you get tons of chances and ice time like Megna but no success did you deserve it? Doesn't make sense with the examples you are using. So what determines that from your perpective?

WTF?
- Marwood

Careful.... your head might hurt

so your idea is to let us become the oilers and leafs following years of losing. Great plan there

to not see the coaches role is this crapfest is very short sighted.
- SMBDragon

To change the coach several times during a rebuild would definitely make us the Oilers... MacT, Quinn, Renney, Kreuger, Eakins, Nelson, McLellan (7 year window). It would also make us the Leafs... Maurice, Wilson, Carlyle, Horachek, Babcock (9 year window)

PS those are some pretty decent coaches included in those lists, that many have mentioned they would like to have here in Vancouver, didnt help there... ride out WD until the roster is is strong enough like the Leafs and Oilers did bringing in Babs and McLellan

You're welcome to (frank) off at any time, we're all cheering for that day.

Should we take a poll?
- A_SteamingLombardi

How childish of you to try to turn your obscene act into a popularity contest. Poll yourself troll monger. I'm back to hockey talk and ignoring you again.

Those are success examples. You can't say that after the fact. We are talking about how youth should get a chance in the NHL "if they deserve it" as you say.

So what determines that? Can you clarify the deserve it part on getting to play in the first place?

Like if you get tons of chances and ice time like Megna but no success did you deserve it? Doesn't make sense with the examples you are using. So what determines that from your perpective?
- Nuck4U

: :
: :
: :
: :

To change the coach several times during a rebuild would definitely make us the Oilers... MacT, Quinn, Renney, Kreuger, Eakins, Nelson, McLellan (7 year window). It would also make us the Leafs... Maurice, Wilson, Carlyle, Horachek, Babcock (9 year window)

PS those are some pretty decent coaches included in those lists, that many have mentioned they would like to have here in Vancouver, didnt help there... ride out WD until the roster is is strong enough like the Leafs and Oilers did bringing in Babs and McLellan
- WhiteLie

Yup

How childish of you to try to turn your obscene act into a popularity contest. Poll yourself troll monger. I'm back to hockey talk and ignoring you again.
- Nuck4U

Those are success examples. You can't say that after the fact. We are talking about how youth should get a chance in the NHL "if they deserve it" as you say.

So what determines that? Can you clarify the deserve it part on getting to play in the first place?

Like if you get tons of chances and ice time like Megna but no success did you deserve it? Doesn't make sense with the examples you are using. So what determines that from your perpective?
- Nuck4U

Do you ever read your posts aloud before you submit them?

: :
: :
: :
: :
- Pres.cup

Yes he is..... but he's pretty good at it.

Lol
Ijust noticed my auto correct is turning F...k into Nuck.....
Stupid autocorrect
- Pres.cup

You do recognize talent well.

Plus you get a glimpse into my avatar, call sign and how it's tied into being a Nuck fan for decades. Yes we are all Nucked

To change the coach several times during a rebuild would definitely make us the Oilers... MacT, Quinn, Renney, Kreuger, Eakins, Nelson, McLellan (7 year window). It would also make us the Leafs... Maurice, Wilson, Carlyle, Horachek, Babcock (9 year window)

PS those are some pretty decent coaches included in those lists, that many have mentioned they would like to have here in Vancouver, didnt help there... ride out WD until the roster is is strong enough like the Leafs and Oilers did bringing in Babs and McLellan
- WhiteLie

Bang on

Q: Whats worse posters with a crayon or emoji spam?
A: Neither let kids be kids.

Those are success examples. You can't say that after the fact. We are talking about how youth should get a chance in the NHL "if they deserve it" as you say.

So what determines that? Can you clarify the deserve it part on getting to play in the first place?

Like if you get tons of chances and ice time like Megna but no success did you deserve it? Doesn't make sense with the examples you are using. So what determines that from your perpective?
- Nuck4U

I posted success examples and failure examples? Not sure if you missed that.

This is simple, if a Coach wants you to play a complete game, and you don't, you don't get to play. That is evident with players such as Virtanen and Mccan, cause look at where they are now. Mantha took a while but he finally broke in the league this year.

If you look at Pastrnak/Ehlers/Nylander/Marner/Ehlers/Laine, they are all doing what is asked of them by their coach. Nylander has been called out for not doing what he has been told, and he has adjusted accordingly. Its pretty simple, either play a complete game and do what you are told to do to succeed at the pro level, or be sent down. Success in the NHL is measured by more than just points and goals.

Make sense to me: somebody guys need to develop at the AHL others at the NHL. Guys need to develop, that development happens at various levels. I don't see a contradiction, maybe just a misunderstanding
- neem55

Yes and that makes sense. Not the opposite extreme takes that sounded confusing. Now the question is what determines where they belong and how they get there. It's a question of debate within the organization as well.

I posted success examples and failure examples? Not sure if you missed that.

This is simple, if a Coach wants you to play a complete game, and you don't, you don't get to play. That is evident with players such as Virtanen and Mccan, cause look at where they are now. Mantha took a while but he finally broke in the league this year.

If you look at Pastrnak/Ehlers/Nylander/Marner/Ehlers/Laine, they are all doing what is asked of them by their coach. Nylander has been called out for not doing what he has been told, and he has adjusted accordingly. Its pretty simple, either play a complete game and do what you are told to do to succeed at the pro level, or be sent down. Success in the NHL is measured by more than just points and goals.
- Codes1087

Thanks for clarifying. That makes more sense now on what you were getting at. So guess we have to trust those in charge that's what they are doing.

Just a follow up, what sort of leash do you give the youth to get there? Mistakes are made by all players of course. Do you allow them to flourish within their skill set to gain confidence or punish immediately for not executing?

Do you ever read your posts aloud before you submit them?
- neem55

Yes and Codes had no issue answering. What do you want clarified?

Thanks for clarifying. That makes more sense now on what you were getting at. So guess we have to trust those in charge that's what they are doing.

Just a follow up, what sort of leash do you give the youth to get there? Mistakes are made by all players of course. Do you allow them to flourish within their skill set to gain confidence or punish immediately for not executing?
- Nuck4U

There is NO leash. Each player is on a case by case basis.

Adding to we should not have high expectations soon its not out of the question that stranger things have happened. At any time the Nucks could gel as a team & that would be the next step in the process. That said it would need to be a sign & continue to get better & not be a one off blip on progress to regress after. The 1 year cost of drafting would prolly be a worse off scenario on the longterm outlook. Perennial PO or Cup contending teams need more than a good NHL roster to keep it greased & long lasting.
- Nighthawk

The WCE wasn't put together until late in the season and it took until the following year for them to gel.

When they are ready.
- Marwood

What determines that for you?

I posted success examples and failure examples? Not sure if you missed that.

This is simple, if a Coach wants you to play a complete game, and you don't, you don't get to play. That is evident with players such as Virtanen and Mccan, cause look at where they are now. Mantha took a while but he finally broke in the league this year.

If you look at Pastrnak/Ehlers/Nylander/Marner/Ehlers/Laine, they are all doing what is asked of them by their coach. Nylander has been called out for not doing what he has been told, and he has adjusted accordingly. Its pretty simple, either play a complete game and do what you are told to do to succeed at the pro level, or be sent down. Success in the NHL is measured by more than just points and goals.
- Codes1087

I think its pretty obvious who is earning it and who isnt. Molino has looked great, busts his ass for 30-40 seconds and gets off the ice. Gaunce (despite his lack of production) was the same, you credit him with relentless puck pursuit and effort.

Then you look at early JV, early Goldobin (last couple games have looked much better), Boucher and see them take shifts off, thats when I dont have a problem stapling them to the bench. Players will make the wrong reads and I can live with those mistakes, but if a player gets beat by being lazy or not engaged then I support any demotion

What determines that for you?
- Nuck4U

When they can take someones job without it being handed to them because of injury or lack of NHL talent on the team, like the Oilers did.

When they can take someones job without it being handed to them because of injury or lack of NHL talent on the team, like the Oilers did.
- A_SteamingLombardi

When they can take someones job without it being handed to them because of injury or lack of NHL talent on the team, like the Oilers did.
- A_SteamingLombardi

Lol.... yes... this

When they can take on the roll they are given without hurting the team.
- Marwood

I take you meant role and were not trying to be funny.

In general, what you said is a profound statement. I guess you are alluding to the choice of the safe player. So it's a risk reward determination.

The debate gets murky with the youth trying to bridge the gap on development and potential. For example, when the games don't count for the fortunes of the team. Then trying to determine where that youth is at or can develop into. It seems to be a time when it's not hurting the team.