Good job on the article, one thing I disagree somewhat is to say that Brown and Barney have had a successful 1st year of Hockey. Barney did pretty well and I'm excited to see him play a larger role, but Brown didn't have much success imo. Sure he is one of the youngest players in the league, but he rarely played more than 5 mins a game and was hurt the majority of the season. Most people here thought that he should have been in juniors playing rather than sitting with the Kings. I'd put him with the likes of Clarke and Grebs in the fact that this year will be good for him in Manchester and next season be able to contribute to the Kings.
Good article though.
Good job on the article, one thing I disagree somewhat is to say that Brown and Barney have had a successful 1st year of Hockey. Barney did pretty well and I'm excited to see him play a larger role, but Brown didn't have much success imo. Sure he is one of the youngest players in the league, but he rarely played more than 5 mins a game and was hurt the majority of the season. Most people here thought that he should have been in juniors playing rather than sitting with the Kings. I'd put him with the likes of Clarke and Grebs in the fact that this year will be good for him in Manchester and next season be able to contribute to the Kings.
Good article though.
Great Article! I disagree, I think Brown had a pretty succesful season. First of all he got a taste of what it takes to play in the NHL and be apart of the competition. He didn't have a 30 point season but he did everything else. He drew penalties and crushed people with his physical play. It's only a matter of time before he becomes the next Deader IMO. It was unfortunate he got injured so often but I was satisfied with his season.
K4L, most of us agree that he has a bright future. Most of us also thought that last year he would have been in Manchester had he been old enough. This year he is right where he should be, playing in every possible situation on the ice pk-pp playing in the A. He will be better for it in the near future by playing in the A this year. I would not call his season last year a success, he showed glimpses of what to expect but he did not get the chance to show it on a regular basis. I guess AM can be guilty of his season being not as strong as it might have been.
K4L, most of us agree that he has a bright future. Most of us also thought that last year he would have been in Manchester had he been old enough. This year he is right where he should be, playing in every possible situation on the ice pk-pp playing in the A. He will be better for it in the near future by playing in the A this year. I would not call his season last year a success, he showed glimpses of what to expect but he did not get the chance to show it on a regular basis. I guess AM can be guilty of his season being not as strong as it might have been.
I dont disagree, I think he wouldve been at Manchester but I dont think you can blame anything on AM because Brownie was injured a lot last year. If he was with his junior team last year I think he wouldve just conitued to dominate if he stayed healthy but since I think his time in the NHL was huge and now he knows what he has to do and the stlye of hockey played at the highest level. It was too bad that he got injured but hey, it happens and now I think since he played in the NHL at such a young age I believe he will make it to the NHL as a full time player even sooner then if he played in the OHL last year. Thats why I label it as a succesful season.
Since I seem to be fielding a lot of e-mails on this topic, I figured I would just post it and get it out in the open.
Why did I not include Lehoux as part of this second wave?
1.) When I said that my Magic 8-ball read "too early to tell", I meant it. Just as I would not judge a prospect's entire career on a couple of games, I would not be quick to wipe two bad seasons clean with a short 7-game stint of relative perfection. I am generally slow to jump onto band-wagons and slow to jump off. I want to see Lehoux prove himself over the course of an entire season because, well, to be honest, I don't want a player who only shows up for half the year.
2.) A large part of the body of the article was written a couple of days before the AHL season began, and Lehoux's start was not entirely anticipated. It was not intended to be an article about who is hot in Manchester, but an article of who has developed to a level where they are ready for the NHL (other than those who I included in the first wave, like Brown, Cammy, Gleason, Barney, etc.).
3.) The article was largely conceived during the Rookie Tourney. The 4 prospects that stood out significantly during the tournament for the Kings was Hogeboom, Clarke, Grebs, and Kanko. But, going into the tourney, this was no surprise to me as I thought each of the four had developed to a level where they would star in the tourney. For me, it was just a matter of sitting back and watching it unfold. I consider stardom in that tourney a HUGE step towards being NHL ready. Lehoux was not there.
It is not to say that Lehoux will not develop rapidly and join the other four in this second wave. Or he might usher in a third wave with Petiot and Tambellini as being those who are still about 2 years away. But I still consider him too big of a question mark to include in an article like this. To be honest, maybe he needs an article all his own.
To be honest, maybe he needs an article all his own.
Kevin Provencher from the Union Leader has provided us with that and a little more...I put the link up on the main board, but by chance folks miss it...
Kevin Provencher from the Union Leader has provided us with that and a little more...I put the link up on the main board, but by chance folks miss it...
I saw it, thanx. Rosa his biggest influence? :lol That's just going to add fodder for the doubters.
I saw it, thanx. Rosa his biggest influence? :lol That's just going to add fodder for the doubters.
Yea, I know and the funny/sad thing about that is that Rosa'a NHL numbers aren't that bad 1/2 pt. a game guy, 18 pts. in 36-games...and a plus one. If Lehoux shows up in LA and throws up 40-points in 80-games, the doubters will still complain...
how do u get that? i think u will probably classify me as a doubter, but u act like it's unfounded. forgive me if i don't jump on the lehoux bandwagon after a good training camp. forgive me if i don't forget 2 years of mediocrity and laziness just becuase he starts the year off well. i am not attacking lehoux's current performance, i am attacking eveyrone jumping on the bandwagon of some guy who has the reputation of being inconsistent. i don't think the value of a prospect can shoot up the charts after 5 games, ESPECIALLY after having 2 mediocre years.
KPD I wasn't directing my comments at you...I know where you're coming from. Actually, someone over on LGK made me a dollar today, I bet someone back here that someone on that board would actually say that as long as Pavel Rosa is an influence in Lehoux's life/career, Lehoux will never amount to anything...Someone said it...
well in that case, i agree with you. there are always those doubters who will never accept a player irregardless of what they accomplish. i actually liked pavel rosa, i dont know why, but i did. haha. the bottom line is that the better lehoux gets, the better the kings get. i dont think any kings fan should hate the ascension of any player, no matter how skeptical he may be of his future in the NHL.
how do u get that? i think u will probably classify me as a doubter, but u act like it's unfounded. forgive me if i don't jump on the lehoux bandwagon after a good training camp. forgive me if i don't forget 2 years of mediocrity and laziness just becuase he starts the year off well. i am not attacking lehoux's current performance, i am attacking eveyrone jumping on the bandwagon of some guy who has the reputation of being inconsistent. i don't think the value of a prospect can shoot up the charts after 5 games, ESPECIALLY after having 2 mediocre years.
you? haha, i dont know why u thought i was talking about u or even anyone specifically. i acutally am very glad ur our writer becuase you take his development with cautious optimism. the best example of this is on ur response about why lehoux is not in the second wave discussion. i thiunk that post proves ur trying to stand away from bias and be as honest as u possibly can, which is all i can ask for.
you? haha, i dont know why u thought i was talking about u or even anyone specifically. i acutally am very glad ur our writer becuase you take his development with cautious optimism. the best example of this is on ur response about why lehoux is not in the second wave discussion. i thiunk that post proves ur trying to stand away from bias and be as honest as u possibly can, which is all i can ask for.
