The Development Myth

by Jonathan Willis on Oct 8, 2008 11:02 AM MDT

A common refrain among fans of all stripes, and probably in all sports for that matter, is the need to "play the kids". In this same vein comes a theory that’s espoused by a whole bunch of people, a theory that works something like this:

If a team has an obvious hole and the only options to fill it are either under-qualified veterans or unproven prospects, it’s in the organization’s long-term interest to give the job to the prospect.

There’s nothing obviously wrong with that statement. Clearly, wasting a roster spot on a veteran who can’t keep up is a worse solution than investing it in a player on the upswing of his career; both players will make mistakes, but only one player is going to come out of it better.

The unmentioned third option is acquiring a veteran who can clearly carry the load. It’s probably unsurprising to people who read me with any amount of regularity that I strongly feel that the unmentioned third option is almost always the right one. Sometimes, it’s simply not possible (cap/budget constraints, too many holes, holes that are too big, etc.), but as a general rule, I think it’s the way to go.

Moving out of the abstract, let’s look at the Oilers’ situation in particular (i.e. the third line centre position). Read more...

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

About the only point of disagreement I could throw out is that Brodziak and Pouliot have both made a case for at least a run of a few games on the third line. Brodziak's underwater moment on the third line came at the beginning of the season and then he destroyed people on the fourth line. Pouliot's underwater moment was, again, at the beginning of the year and then he had a stellar run, I believe, on the third line.

I'm not saying either is ready to swim in that position, but both have made a case that they might be ready for a run in that slot; Especially if this is a development year where the playoffs are found money.

Of course, on the list of possible solutions, acquiring a third line center is a lot bloody higher on the list than Pisani at center.

by quain on Oct 8, 2008 12:20 PM MDT reply actions

So if we're still in a re-building phase why did we go out and acquire a contract from the "win-now" tree in Cole? Makes no sense to me to trade away a potential long-term asset we had in Pitkanen for a one-year contract.

Call me crazy, but with the direction your post is taking, the trade looks a lot worse in my eyes.

by doritogrande on Oct 8, 2008 12:26 PM MDT reply actions

Brodziak and Pouliot have both made a case for at least a run of a few games on the third line. Brodziak's underwater moment on the third line came at the beginning of the season and then he destroyed people on the fourth line. Pouliot's underwater moment was, again, at the beginning of the year and then he had a stellar run, I believe, on the third line.

Both have made the case that they could fill the role, but Pouliot spent big chunks of last year in the minors, and Brodziak had the worst GAON/60 of any Oiler not named Geoff Sanderson (incl. Reasoner/Stoll). Thus, I don't think either have shown they should be handed the job to start the season.

by Jonathan Willis on Oct 8, 2008 12:46 PM MDT reply actions

So if we're still in a re-building phase why did we go out and acquire a contract from the "win-now" tree in Cole? Makes no sense to me to trade away a potential long-term asset we had in Pitkanen for a one-year contract.

Looking at this post on The Real Deal, I don't see much I disagree with. I think in terms of contribution, Cole > Pitkanen, but I don't think it fits in with this team's window - which certainly isn't open this season.

by Jonathan Willis on Oct 8, 2008 12:49 PM MDT reply actions

Maybe Cole was acquired to help make the playoffs but no way the Oilers are winning anything this year.

I see your point jonathan but I think the Oilers' thinking is like this - their window is coming but it is not yet here, more important then the difference in winning right now is seeing if either kid (or Pisani?) can handle the job over a longer haul and from there a decision can be made.

Just like last year winnowed out Greene and Stoll and Torres as not being parts of the future this season is going to determine the same for Brodziak and Pouliot, although both may actually have a future on the fourth line, if not on the third. Brodziak certainly has proven his worth there.

If either can do the job then you don't have to spend the money or assets to bring someone in from outside.

by Black Dog on Oct 8, 2008 1:21 PM MDT reply actions

I see your point jonathan but I think the Oilers' thinking is like this - their window is coming but it is not yet here, more important then the difference in winning right now is seeing if either kid (or Pisani?) can handle the job over a longer haul and from there a decision can be made.

Then why not wait until the inevitable attack of the injuries to try them out in the role? MacTavish's use of Pisani would indicate that he doesn't feel either Pouliot/Brodziak is up to the task at this juncture; if there's a desire to use the kids in that role, I don't think it's coming from the coach.

Just like last year winnowed out Greene and Stoll and Torres as not being parts of the future this season is going to determine the same for Brodziak and Pouliot, although both may actually have a future on the fourth line, if not on the third.

Greene and Stoll, yes, but I think Torres' fate has been sealed for a while now; maybe they felt they could up his trade value with a good year, but I don't think he was dealt because of on-ice issues - his performance, particularly on the defensive end of things, was really good.

by Jonathan Willis on Oct 8, 2008 1:25 PM MDT reply actions

Whatchoo talkin about Willis?

Man, I've been waiting a while to use that one. A ha, ha, ha ... yeesh.

Well Mact isn't on board because he wants to win games. That's why he wanted Marty back. A vet will trump a rookie every time unless the coach has no choice (see Oilers 2006/07, 2007/08). So he probably said 'hey I want to try Fernando in that role' and Lowe/Tambo said - sure - we know Pisani can play and if he can do it, good on him.

I do think Torres was found wanting actually. They were waiting for him to get his focus, like Cleary for example, and after the run they figured they had a keeper. One bad year, well ok, we'll give him a mulligan. Two bad years - you're gone. Thing with Torres is that he could play the tough opp. but he wasn't producing offence and on top of that he was inconsistent on the ice. Fernando produced more last season coming off of his illness. Torres, like Stoll, did nothing at ES offensively.

Throw Pitkanen on that list of guys who they found wanting too.

This year its Smid on the hotseat, maybe a guy like Staios, Pouliot, maybe Penner too.

by Black Dog on Oct 8, 2008 7:16 PM MDT reply actions

Doritogrande, I think the Pitkanen trade had more to do with character issues than long term issues. Cole was pretty good return made better if he resigns.

Jonathan, I think your bang on in your analysis. This team has too many veterans to not make some kind of a push for this season. Adding a rental veteran is cheap (if your willing to wait) and would help absorb injuries. All our one way contracts do limit the options however.

by Sean on Oct 9, 2008 11:48 AM MDT reply actions

Jonathan - if Lowe hadn't cut fan-favourite Toby Peterson loose at the end of the 06-07 season, would there have been room for Brodziak to carve himself a niche? I don't care what kind of camp the kid had, I don't see MacT opting for the unknown quantity.

Maybe I'm stretching the definition of a competent veteran solution, but still.

by Schitzo on Oct 10, 2008 8:30 PM MDT reply actions

if Lowe hadn't cut fan-favourite Toby Peterson loose at the end of the 06-07 season, would there have been room for Brodziak to carve himself a niche? I don't care what kind of camp the kid had, I don't see MacT opting for the unknown quantity.

Maybe I'm stretching the definition of a competent veteran solution, but still.

I think MacTavish defaults to "veteran" even more than I do, but I'll go with the notion that you're stretching the "competent" bit. Petersen's fine as a 4th liner, but what's the point of having a player who's fine as a 4th liner?

It's a case of playing a slightly

by Jonathan Willis on Oct 11, 2008 12:10 AM MDT reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Northwest Standings

	GP	W	L	OTL	PT
Vancouver Nucks Misconduct	54	34	15	5	73
Colorado Mile High Hockey	56	28	25	3	59
Minnesota Hockey Wilderness	54	25	21	8	58
Calgary Matchsticks and Gasoline	55	25	22	8	58
Edmonton The Copper & Blue	54	21	28	5	47

(updated 2.11.2012 at 1:04 AM MST)

21 - 28 - 5

Streak: Lost 2

Oilers Schedule

Next 5 Games

@ Ottawa Silver Seven	Sat 02/11	12:00 PM MST
Toronto Pension Plan Puppets	Wed 02/15	8:00 PM MST
Colorado Mile High Hockey	Fri 02/17	7:30 PM MST
Vancouver Nucks Misconduct	Sun 02/19	7:00 PM MST
@ Calgary Matchsticks and Gasoline	Tue 02/21	7:00 PM MST

Last 5 Games

@ Detroit Winging It In Motown	Wed 02/08	L 2 - 4
@ Toronto Pension Plan Puppets	Mon 02/06	L 3 - 6
Detroit Winging It In Motown	Sat 02/04	SO - W 5 - 4
Chicago Second City Hockey	Thu 02/02	W 8 - 4
Colorado Mile High Hockey	Tue 01/31	W 3 - 2