Author Topic: Why William Nylander is too good for the AHL & why Red Wings' Model isn't best  (Read 3330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Administrator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 24837
    • View Profile
Feel free to continue discussing this topic on Nylander, like you've all said there's valid arguments on both sides. I don't think we'll be seeing many more posts like that.

TMLfans.ca


Offline Bender

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5671
  • Gender: Male
  • Bender cracked corn and he is great!
    • View Profile
I don't see a compelling enough reason to bring him up. I mean, Nick Ritchie was brought up because he looked good, but he hasn't scored at the NHL level yet. Give Nylander the full season to crush it and let's see what happens. He won't be down in the A next year so who cares. And besides, we might have a significant injury or two going forward and he'll likely be the first to be brought up if it's a top 6 forward going down.
"They say you can judge a man by the company he keeps. So here is the professor's oldest friend, a grotesque, stinking lobster." - Bender

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25950
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile

There's no real appreciable goal that bringing Nylander up would actually achieve so unless people feel his growth is being stunted by the AHL there's no real purpose in bringing him up outside of making the viewing experience marginally more interesting.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline Potvin29

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 14579
  • Gender: Male
  • Auston 20:16
    • View Profile
This is a valid question but I think the thread initiator should post the reasons here, not use this board to flog his blog.  Otherwise it's pretty much like posting clickbait.

I completely agree. It's also not like he's posted here for any length of time. It's for the specific purpose of driving views to his blog. I wouldn't be surprised if this popped up on other forums.

If you google the username it was posted on a whole bunch of other sites.

Online Zee

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 11966
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
I don't see a compelling enough reason to bring him up. I mean, Nick Ritchie was brought up because he looked good, but he hasn't scored at the NHL level yet. Give Nylander the full season to crush it and let's see what happens. He won't be down in the A next year so who cares. And besides, we might have a significant injury or two going forward and he'll likely be the first to be brought up if it's a top 6 forward going down.

The Leafs shouldn't be in any rush to bring guys up given that the team won't be competing for a playoff spot any time soon.  Why waste a year on the player's ELC?  I'd rather have players come up when they're "over-ready" and the team is in such a state that they can benefit with a playoff push.  You control the contract situation which benefits the team over a longer period of time given the cap system such as it is. 

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25950
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
The Leafs shouldn't be in any rush to bring guys up given that the team won't be competing for a playoff spot any time soon.  Why waste a year on the player's ELC?  I'd rather have players come up when they're "over-ready" and the team is in such a state that they can benefit with a playoff push.  You control the contract situation which benefits the team over a longer period of time given the cap system such as it is.

I don't know if you saw it but in the armchair GM thread I wondered if burning a ELC year early might actually be advantageous in terms of long-term cap hit. I think there's a pretty compelling reason to think so provided Nylander has a successful first few seasons.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20779
  • 56!
    • View Profile
There's no real appreciable goal that bringing Nylander up would actually achieve so unless people feel his growth is being stunted by the AHL there's no real purpose in bringing him up outside of making the viewing experience marginally more interesting.

I feel the same way. I don't see a benefit to the team, nor to Nylander in bringing him up right now. Better to keep him in a situation where he's shown he's going to be successful and allow him to continue build confidence in his game. The Leafs don't need him right now. Give him a full year in the A, and have him start with the team next season.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Administrator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 24837
    • View Profile
I agree with some of the other posts that, in terms of Nylander's personal future, it probably doesn't really matter if he starts this season or next season.

So the next concern comes down to which option makes the most sense in regards to his current and future contracts. The conventional wisdom has generally been you want to slide Nylander's contract for as long as possible, so you can take the most advantage of his cheap 3 ELC seasons. But as Nik has pointed out, that might not be the case because by sliding his contract another season he'll be negotiating his first RFA deal at the age of 24 with 3 full NHL seasons under his belt. Would it be more worthwhile to get that deal done when he's 23 and only has 2.25 or 2.5 seasons played? But if the Leafs feel that way then the best plan of action would be to just give him 10-12 games at the end of the season.

I think another issue would be how much you want his first 3 seasons in the NHL overlapping with Marner's. I think that we can all agree that Marner will very likely be up with the Leafs next season. He's completely dominating the OHL for a 2nd straight season and the AHL isn't an option for him. Do we want both him and Marner to be rookies next season? Or would it make more sense to get Nylander now to maybe take a bit of pressure off Marner next season? Or does it even matter? Then you look at the other side of this and think do we want to be negotiating both of their 1st RFA deals at the same time, or would it make more sense to have those two events spread out by a season?

Online Bullfrog

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
I think another issue would be how much you want his first 3 seasons in the NHL overlapping with Marner's. I think that we can all agree that Marner will very likely be up with the Leafs next season. He's completely dominating the OHL for a 2nd straight season and the AHL isn't an option for him. Do we want both him and Marner to be rookies next season? Or would it make more sense to get Nylander now to maybe take a bit of pressure off Marner next season? Or does it even matter? Then you look at the other side of this and think do we want to be negotiating both of their 1st RFA deals at the same time, or would it make more sense to have those two events spread out by a season?

I don't think it matter's too much have both rookies on the team. Even in that case, I think Nylander will still be quite ahead in his development after spending 1.25 seasons in the AHL and playing in the Swedish elite league. I think they'd both be treated as rookies, but Marner would be more sheltered.

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25950
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
I think another issue would be how much you want his first 3 seasons in the NHL overlapping with Marner's. I think that we can all agree that Marner will very likely be up with the Leafs next season. He's completely dominating the OHL for a 2nd straight season and the AHL isn't an option for him. Do we want both him and Marner to be rookies next season? Or would it make more sense to get Nylander now to maybe take a bit of pressure off Marner next season? Or does it even matter? Then you look at the other side of this and think do we want to be negotiating both of their 1st RFA deals at the same time, or would it make more sense to have those two events spread out by a season?

It's an interesting point you make about the grouping of rookies in the league. I was thinking about this with regards to Colorado and the way they haven't really built that well on a pretty impressive collection of young forwards as well as Edmonton.

While I don't think you want too many rookies on a team at any one point I wonder if in a situation where there's a lot of hype attached to any one rookie having another around lessens the pressure rather than increases it.

Although, that said, with fingers crossed the Leafs might have the challenge of integrating three high profile rookies next year and that might be where you're dwelling into overwhelming territory.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline Bender

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5671
  • Gender: Male
  • Bender cracked corn and he is great!
    • View Profile
I agree with some of the other posts that, in terms of Nylander's personal future, it probably doesn't really matter if he starts this season or next season.

So the next concern comes down to which option makes the most sense in regards to his current and future contracts. The conventional wisdom has generally been you want to slide Nylander's contract for as long as possible, so you can take the most advantage of his cheap 3 ELC seasons. But as Nik has pointed out, that might not be the case because by sliding his contract another season he'll be negotiating his first RFA deal at the age of 24 with 3 full NHL seasons under his belt. Would it be more worthwhile to get that deal done when he's 23 and only has 2.25 or 2.5 seasons played? But if the Leafs feel that way then the best plan of action would be to just give him 10-12 games at the end of the season.

I think another issue would be how much you want his first 3 seasons in the NHL overlapping with Marner's. I think that we can all agree that Marner will very likely be up with the Leafs next season. He's completely dominating the OHL for a 2nd straight season and the AHL isn't an option for him. Do we want both him and Marner to be rookies next season? Or would it make more sense to get Nylander now to maybe take a bit of pressure off Marner next season? Or does it even matter? Then you look at the other side of this and think do we want to be negotiating both of their 1st RFA deals at the same time, or would it make more sense to have those two events spread out by a season?

Do you really think Marner will actually be ready next year though? I mean, he looked very, very out of place in camp this year. I know a lot can change in a year but physical development takes time and being acclimatized to playing against full grown men takes time.... I'm not sure what we can do.
"They say you can judge a man by the company he keeps. So here is the professor's oldest friend, a grotesque, stinking lobster." - Bender

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25950
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Do you really think Marner will actually be ready next year though? I mean, he looked very, very out of place in camp this year. I know a lot can change in a year but physical development takes time and being acclimatized to playing against full grown men takes time.... I'm not sure what we can do.

I think it depends on what you mean by ready. He probably won't step into the league and dominate but he'll probably be capable of having the sort of year Jonathan Drouin had last year.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Administrator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 24837
    • View Profile
Do you really think Marner will actually be ready next year though? I mean, he looked very, very out of place in camp this year. I know a lot can change in a year but physical development takes time and being acclimatized to playing against full grown men takes time.... I'm not sure what we can do.

I don't know how much stock I'd put in his preseason performance. If I remember correctly he only played in 2 games I think. Overall his performance definitely wasn't anything to write home about but I remember seeing a flash or two of what he can do.

For me personally I don't even think it's up for debate whether he'll be in the NHL next season or not. I don't want him sleepwalking through his 4 OHL season. And as Bullfrog pointed out, regardless of when Nylander starts there'll be more pressure on him to produce next season and Marner will be the one in a more sheltered role because of their respective experience and age. I'm sure there will be more bumps in the road for him because he's jumping past the AHL, but I don't think that it'll effect him poorly long-term.

Offline WhatIfGodWasALeaf

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 6960
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Carlton, Drance from PPP made much the same case as you regarding bringing Nylander and Marner on board together and the prospect of having to give them both a big pay bump in the same offseason, it's an interesting wrinkle for sure.

I wonder if they'd entertain sending Marner abroad next year to play top line minutes in one of the top European leagues.

The thing I've been thinking about in the whole should they bring Nylander up or not debate, is that Babcock seems a real stickler in terms of faceoff ability of the centers, I could be wrong but I don't think Nylander is great in the faceoff dot yet. So if he comes up to the Leafs, he's unlikely to be a top two center, do they shift him to the wing? At that point isn't he better leavening his craft in the AHL playing twenty minutes a night and taking a ton of draws?

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25950
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
The thing I've been thinking about in the whole should they bring Nylander up or not debate, is that Babcock seems a real stickler in terms of faceoff ability of the centers, I could be wrong but I don't think Nylander is great in the faceoff dot yet. So if he comes up to the Leafs, he's unlikely to be a top two center, do they shift him to the wing? At that point isn't he better leavening his craft in the AHL playing twenty minutes a night and taking a ton of draws?

I really have to think that Babcock is enough of a pragmatist to realize that most centers when they come into the league aren't great on the draw and that he'd have a pretty fair amount of leeway for a top prospect with a long term future at center.

Whether Nylander's future is really there is another question.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

TMLfans.ca