http://nyti.ms/Vewh1A

An interesting debate on whether keeping a top teenaged draft pick with the big club helps or hinders their development and also explores the financial ramifications of having them on the big league roster. 

There's quite a list of ex-Islanders mentioned towards the end with an honest explanation given by their former GM.  Pretty much explains why that team has been near the bottom of the standings for the last several years.

Nice article still think dougie is ready though

Alot of it depends on the situation they are brought into..Also depends on the coach as well. A high draft pick can go to a bad team and still develop properly.

It's always a balance between what's best for the prospect and what's best for the team, and there are a lot of options - it's not a simple question of NHL or back to Jr. (and no, I don't mean send them to the AHL).  If Hamilton or, say, Spooner were able to make the team better by playing a particular role, then it makes sense to keep him. If he also develops faster because he gets a chance to learn the NHL game, so much the better.  But playing him at the expense of the team's record just to get him that experience, or because it seems like the best way to develop a guy? That's what the Isles or the Whale would do.  It has to be a risk for the Oilers, too.  How many years will they have four or five dynamic young offensive players who are told constantly how fantastic they are and what a juggernaut they will become before it becomes virtually impossible to tell them that the reason they aren't a contender is that they give up way too many chances and play a high-risk game?   

As of now, Hamilton makes the Bruins significantly better, and as I wrote on another thread, even if the Bruins had signed Redden and he had played as well as he has in St. Loo, Hamilton should still see the same amout of ice at the expense of Boychuk, Ference or McQuaid.  I think his play has earned that.  (And is it just me or is Chara having a bit of a rocky start?)  

Yup, Hamilton over Redden is my view now.  I would not have said that three weeks ago.  Patience though as Hamilton will have a wall somewhere around March when the schedule becomes more grueling, team positional play becomes more apparent, and the push for the playoffs makes teams more competitive.  

The Chara comment (bold print) is what I have been seeing but only on TV, playing with Hamilton could be the reasoning.  It would be interesting to find out what others think who have been watching the games at the Garden.  Let us not forget Rask's play does change the style of play for the defenseman albeit more structured than TTs style.  Interesting stats on the value of Chara in different game situations in the link below.  

http://hockeyanalysis.com/2013/01/24/player-toi-usage-charts-with-performance-metrics/

The metrics argument does give credence to the value of Chara and what he means to the team. Certainly his value is even more so with the younger players the Bs have had on the team in the past few years.  

In response to Bookboy007's comment:

Hamilton should stay w/ the Bs. His passing is great and so far situational awareness seems pretty good.

Remember the Bruins did hold Hamilton back one year, and because of the Lock out, another 1/2. So he's had the extra time to grow and develop away from the NHL.  Smart on B's Management, and lucky on the other part for Dougie. I didn't think he looked that great in the WJC, but maybe the NHL is easier.

But aside from the Bruins angle, I do tend to agree that too many players are brought up too soon. For every Skinner, there are 10 to 20 guys that could use the extra year to physically grow up.  You could easily argue that Hall and Seguin were not ready. RNH was okay, but still didn't dominate on a team that let them run loose. If in doubt, send them back, at least until they are 19, better yet, 20.   

 

In response to perrysound's comment:

Agree most players should be given the extra time in jrs and sometimes even the ahl to develop. Unless the team has a situation were they do not depend on a high draft pick to produce right away. I think allowing seguin to develop in the nhl that first season was just what was needed for him. As well, with dougie if he struggled the bruins could have slashed his ice time and let him develop at his own pace. The problem with most high draft picks is they are going to a bad team and have to learn on the job and will not have time to develop or learn from mistakes. With the oiler most of those kids rnh, hall eberle and nail. They are not in a defensive scheme so as long as they produce pts their defensive play will not matter bcs the team isnt going anywhere anyways. The best thing that could have happened for seguin and dougie was to be taken by the bruins who  can develop them on the job and not expect much from them in their first season. If any of the oilers kids switched teams tommorrow and were in a different scheme they would be out on an island. Seguin has a far more developed game than hall at this stage in their careers.

In response to kelvana33's comment:

Like rookie Mario Lemieux's 100 points with the 24-51-5 Penguins in '84/85, kel.

In response to RichHillOntario's comment:

Got it in his last game of the season if I remember correctly.

Got it in his last game of the season if I remember correctly.

 

 

He did dez.  Question: The article mentions several high draft picks by the Isles who as their former assistant GM said were rushed into the lineup for financial reasons among other things.  All except DiPietro and Branislav Mezei have gone on to play for no less than three teams:

 

Tim Connelly - NYI, Buff, Tor. 

Eric Brewer - NYI, TB, Edm, Stl.

Raffi Torres - NYI, Edm, Cbj, Buff, Vcr, Phx.

Taylor Pyatt - NYI, Phx, Vcr, Buff

Branislaw Mezei - NYI, Fla. (D - 6-5, 236, 10th overall in '99)

Is it purely speculative to suggest these players might have gone on to more noteworthy and impactful careers had they had more development?  What if they just were not the blue-chip prospects as initially hoped and projected by the Isles?  Luongo hasn't done that badly. 

In response to RichHillOntario's comment:

RHO, that's kind of how I read the article and I tend to agree. It's hard to blame your scouts when top 5 picks continuously go to NY to fizzle out. I mean, there are few secrets with the high picks. It's kind of out of the scout's hands with those picks. Everyone usually knows who the 10 really good players are every year but no one can be sure which teams will properly develop them. I don't think they really went off the board with any of their picks. Most of the guys they drafted were highly regarded by everybody. I'd also never take a goalie at #1 unless he was bigger than Chara and had the reflexes of a cat. But that's just me.

In response to dezaruchi's comment:

True, dez.  I'd imagine that staff had the word "cornerstone" flying around inside their heads when their recommendations for picks were standing up on the draft day stage pulling on an Islander jersey.  Still, it can't be a good look for that organization when their ex-assistant GM says those players were in the lineup for financial reasons and not because they were ready to help the team win. 

5 games in - tied for 16th in Def pts 1 behind Karlson (tied for 6th with Z) while playing 7 to 8 mins less.  To send players like him back is a travesty.

 

GOAT!!!