Ghostsof1915 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 A lot of players seem to be touted for their potential. But how long does a player have to be in the NHL before that potential goes to go what have you got? Canuck players, and anything involving trades, there's possible high end growth down the road. I understand every player is different. Some can handle the NHL at 18, some have to be 5-6 years before they break out. But is there a time when you can stop talking about potential, and say well player x is just what he is? Is four years a good gauge of what a player is? 5-6? Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Is Edler still only 23? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 HA, oh boy here we go. Potential exists for me until their 3-5 years in the league. You get a good idea. But somehow someway that word pops up and some of these jokers are ready to offer our best prospect plus picks plus more for said potential. Remember that patrik Stefan guy? He had potential, should have given up an Ohlund and a 1st for him. Potential and draft position only get you so far. Results and proven records get you championships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 I'd say 5-6 is fair to be wishful for potential, at least in the case of forwards. Defenseman are a whole other story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 5-6 is probably safe, but of course there's more texture and detail that needs to be applied. For example, Etem has had a bunch of part years already and still doesn't look like he's going to live up to his pedigree as a 1st round pick. I think in a year or two that story will have been re-written and he will have flourished into a very good hockey player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoseTruckWasIt Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 People always improve at things the more they do them. The issue with aging is that you slow down. But Hansen is a better player now at 30 than he has ever been - many people have said that they know what player he 'is' along the way. If I had said four years ago that he would pot 20 goals and have a crazy one-timer at 30 I would have been mocked. What about Burrows? How many people would have been wrong in their assessment of his potential and career curve? The Sedins are better players than they have ever been, in many ways, but they also have never been slower. Also, Daniel's shot certainly seems to lack the zing of five years ago. At 36, I'm still improving at hockey; all of the reps add up, and so does the reflection and advice, but it gets harder and harder. My peak performance doesn't last until the end of the game. Does that make me a worse player, if my peak performance is a lot better than it was 5 years ago? I used to rely on speed, now I try to make a smarter play. It's a complicated picture. But I get better results now, in a beer league where I'm below average. When I was in competitive hockey, I had the tools, but struggled to put it all together, like a lot of players. Crosby is pretty smart. I expect that he will make plays in ten years that will make our jaws drop. He'll be less physically capable, but he'll probably have grown as a player - that's a lot of coaching and experience. To answer your question, you're asking the wrong question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 I think the ceiling for a player becomes clear within about 5 years. Although there are some cases where it takes a bit longer and the players continue to develop rapidly. For example, the Sedins were second liners until 2007, their 7th year in the league when they scored at PPG rate. But as long as the player works hard to adjust/improve certain aspects of his game, they may break their own ceiling (slightly). For example, there is no way that Tanev will score like Karlsson. That ceiling is set, Tanev is most likely a 20-30 point guy. But over time, he may be able to improve his shot and break 30 points one day. So in that regards he is still improving and has potential to improve. At the same time, Tanev isn't going to Sedin us by becoming a 50 point player so he will only break his ceiling only so slightly. Maybe 35 points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoeyj86 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 I think when talking about evaluating potential, like the posters before me, it takes 4-6 years of pro hockey (AHL/NHL combined) to gauge what a players FLOOR is. From there you can estimate his ceiling, but its a hard game to play because there are so many variables such as: deployment/usage, linemates/chemistry, injury history to name a few...Also, I think and have heard from friends involved at the highest level, that there is a 2 yr learning curve before a player can really begin to develop his own game and develop within the confines of that. But I believe in looking at number of years pro experience to age and then gauging a floor for that player...For example: Horvat has 2 years of pro experience and its safe to say his floor at the NHL already is as a solid 3rd line center, his ceiling however is really up in the air. He could become a 60-70 pt first line center with the right line mates or he could top out at 50 pt 2nd line center....its relaly impossible to tell, but for sure we know hes a bonafide 3rd line center in NHL...vs a player like Gaunce for example..I think its fair to say he will at the very least be a 4th line player in the NHL for a number of years, probably get 200+ games over his career, but his ceiling is impossible to tell, since he could develop amazing chemistry with a player like Bo or Rodin and take off (ie. Burrows with the Sedins), you just never really know what level a player can get their game to. The beauty of speculating!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoseTruckWasIt Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 29 minutes ago, shoeyj86 said: I think when talking about evaluating potential, like the posters before me, it takes 4-6 years of pro hockey (AHL/NHL combined) to gauge what a players FLOOR is. From there you can estimate his ceiling, but its a hard game to play because there are so many variables such as: deployment/usage, linemates/chemistry, injury history to name a few...Also, I think and have heard from friends involved at the highest level, that there is a 2 yr learning curve before a player can really begin to develop his own game and develop within the confines of that. But I believe in looking at number of years pro experience to age and then gauging a floor for that player...For example: Horvat has 2 years of pro experience and its safe to say his floor at the NHL already is as a solid 3rd line center, his ceiling however is really up in the air. He could become a 60-70 pt first line center with the right line mates or he could top out at 50 pt 2nd line center....its relaly impossible to tell, but for sure we know hes a bonafide 3rd line center in NHL...vs a player like Gaunce for example..I think its fair to say he will at the very least be a 4th line player in the NHL for a number of years, probably get 200+ games over his career, but his ceiling is impossible to tell, since he could develop amazing chemistry with a player like Bo or Rodin and take off (ie. Burrows with the Sedins), you just never really know what level a player can get their game to. The beauty of speculating!! Well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 3 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: A lot of players seem to be touted for their potential. But how long does a player have to be in the NHL before that potential goes to go what have you got? Canuck players, and anything involving trades, there's possible high end growth down the road. I understand every player is different. Some can handle the NHL at 18, some have to be 5-6 years before they break out. But is there a time when you can stop talking about potential, and say well player x is just what he is? Is four years a good gauge of what a player is? 5-6? Discuss. 35.6 months. Not an average for all the different development paths of players, but that exactly for everyone. But seriously, there is no rule of thumb that works ubiquitously. You can't just say, "well, he's 25 now, clearly he's reached his ceiling." A change of scenery might allow a player to develop more, as could finding the right chemistry of linemates and changed usage (see: Burrows). So long as a player is continuing to improve, they're probably still working to their potential. You just have to assess each case and see how much potential might be left to where you could say they're at or near their ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Bertuzzi is a good example, as well as many others. It took him five years in the league from 20-25 to access his potential. And that was mainly at the NHL level the entire time except for a brief stint in the AHL. Even with the Sedins, it seemed like it took forever for them to realize their potential but it was still a good five to six years. Today's NHL is kinda moving into dangerous territory with the movement to put younger and younger prospects into the line-up quickly. We live in an age where there's less patience and attention so fans need to be careful with their expectations as well. If we don't allow guys to grow into their potential, we'll be writing off players by the time they're 25. Interestingly, that's kinda where I see this going anyway, which is radically changing the game, and the development pipeline. I wouldn't be surprised in a decade's time the norm will be young prospects making the jump straight to the NHL. By that time, though, the league will be a lot younger and they'll be able to have more of an immediate impact. So, I kinda see two levels of potential ... immediate impact and then full potential by 25/26. What that will do will lower the threshold for potential because there will be more 19-26 year olds in the league. There will be less waiting time for potential in the future. Young guys won't be entering teams with predominantly 26-32 year olds. Instead they'll be entering teams filled predominantly of 19-28 year olds. You can already see the radical movement happening with guys 30+ today. There will be much less dead wood. Everyone's different though. The key is, you have to allow guys to grow and give them every opportunity to succeed. It's going to be really something to see if our young guys all reach their full potential near the same time. That's still a few years away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numb3r 16 Posted August 26, 2016 Share Posted August 26, 2016 Until they're 27 years old just like in NHL 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted August 26, 2016 Share Posted August 26, 2016 I think the word "potential" actually gets overused as there are so many other factors that can impact a player's career immensely: who they play with, the system are they developing in, who they are learning from, etc. All of those factors can affect even a player's drive to succeed. While it's nice to be able to determine one's "potential", it's also arguably lazy as a result. I tend to like to believe anyone can achieve anything if they put their mind to it. Case in point: did anyone really expect Kesler to break out with the goals he did a few seasons back? Before then he was a heart-and-soul player and no one really seemed to expect him to be able to score like he did. Another example is Burrows who was never drafted and had to go up through the ECHL, What was his potential considered to be before then? So, to me, this whole potential thing is just a way for the "kids to compare young possible stars with existing stars". It means nothing other than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted August 26, 2016 Share Posted August 26, 2016 300 games.......if they play 82 games, that's 3.65 years but who starts out with full seasons? Horvat has played 156 Etem 193 Sbisa 403 Tanev 311 Gudbranson 322 Edler 685.....sorry guys, he is what he is There's got to be an age limit to upside improvement. Larsen 26 and Rodin 25 probably will improve a bit as they adapt to the NHL game but they have to be close to their ceiling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2016 Share Posted August 26, 2016 It's when you hit drinking age. 18 here, 21 where you are. If you can drink, play like a man. The kid inside you is now dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 26, 2016 Share Posted August 26, 2016 9 hours ago, Crabcakes said: 300 games.......if they play 82 games, that's 3.65 years but who starts out with full seasons? Horvat has played 156 Etem 193 Sbisa 403 Tanev 311 Gudbranson 322 Edler 685.....sorry guys, he is what he is There's got to be an age limit to upside improvement. Larsen 26 and Rodin 25 probably will improve a bit as they adapt to the NHL game but they have to be close to their ceiling What ages and game experience did the Twins make their big jump? I thought they were older, and more experienced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 1 hour ago, Alflives said: What ages and game experience did the Twins make their big jump? I thought they were older, and more experienced? Try google Alf. Just type somebody's name in and it'll find the info for you. It'll give you all sorts of links. Just click on one. I'm sure even you can do this. You don't even have to spell the name correctly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Potential usually ends when the next guy up is ready to play. Then its back to the farm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.