How many games should Grabner be given to show that he belongs?
I'm thinking 80 games over the course of 2 seasons should be a minimum, based on his AHL performance and being drafted 14th in 2006. If he can't score and can't play two-way hockey, then I'm all for the team trading him for a hockey bag after he's had 80 games to prove himself.
To put this in context, Columbus gave up on Brule a 6th pick in 2005 after 140 games and now it appears he's on the cusp of a breakthrough season with Edmonton. Obviously its too early to tell if he will work out in Edmonton but it seems Columbus gave up on him too early although they did give him 140 games to prove himself.
Grabner's done nothing to play himself off the team - however if we have enough bodies back that he's the odd man out again then the AHL is the best place for him.
Assuming he improves on what he's shown us so far I don't think that will happen - unless we get both Daniel and Demitra back soon (and apparently Demo's rehab is not going well).
I don't think we should 'give' him any games at all. He should either earn them by making the roster in training camp or being the best player on the Moose so that he's the first call-up.
I think the question you're trying to ask, however, is how many games do we give him before labelling him a bust.
First of all, there is no way to gauge that in # of games. My answer to that is when he loses his place (whether it be a solidified roster spot, bubble spot, or 1st call-up) in the organization by playing himself off the team or being pushed out by another young player.
I don't think we should 'give' him any games at all. He should either earn them by making the roster in training camp or being the best player on the Moose so that he's the first call-up.
I think the question you're trying to ask, however, is how many games do we give him before labelling him a bust.
First of all, there is no way to gauge that in # of games. My answer to that is when he loses his place (whether it be a solidified roster spot, bubble spot, or 1st call-up) in the organization by playing himself off the team or being pushed out by another young player.
That's what I meant, yes.
You do realize there's a catch-22 at work here. He needs a certain # of games to adjust to the league. Its possible that during those "transition" games, the team could dress "better" players than him but doesn't because of the future potential he has. A team has to look at the entire career, not only the present, in making its decisions regarding a prospect.
Eg. Brule and more painfully for the Canucks, Cam Neely - gave up on him after 201 games and then he went on to be a PPG+ power forward for 6-7 seasons with the Bruins.
You do realize there's a catch-22 at work here. He needs a certain # of games to adjust to the league. Its possible that during those "transition" games, the team could dress "better" players than him but doesn't because of the future potential he has. A team has to look at the entire career, not only the present, in making its decisions regarding a prospect.
Eg. Brule and more painfully for the Canucks, Cam Neely - gave up on him after 201 games and then he went on to be a PPG+ power forward for 6-7 seasons with the Bruins.
No, you've got it completely backwards. When a prospect earns his spot on the team, that measures whether or not he is actually ready. When a prospect doesn't earn a spot, it means he is not ready for the NHL; putting him in regardless will do nothing but contravene in his development. So let's put to bed the misconception that you should just give prospects NHL experience, whether they are ready or not, because it will pay off in the long run.
The reason Brule struggled in Columbus was because he was put in the lineup way too soon and it severely hindered his development. The reason he's doing so well this season? He actually earned his spot on the roster instead of it being given to him in Columbus all those years.
I don't know why people are obsessed with nine games. That's just for juniors.
I can't pick any of them, because you have to pick the best team available. Right now, he is working well with Raymond and Kesler. No need to change that. If he starts to coast or is obviously in need of some AHL goal potting confidence, then he will be sent down regardless of how many games he's played.
Actually, how long is still waiver exempt? If he stays up until then, we'll know that he belongs.
I started to do a happy little dance in my head when I thought of Daniel and Hansen coming back. Then I realised that we probably have too many players.
