The Blaine Rutland theory: 'Young guys don't play defense.'
by Hawerchuk on Aug 17, 2010 5:42 PM EDT
in Prospects
Email
PrintNot that any of you know this hockey sage, but I played beer league hockey with Blaine Rutland years ago, and he was also my roommate for a couple of years. He was born in Moose Factory, grew up in Pembroke, and spent most of the time I knew him drinking and/or watching the Center Ice package in our living room. His main claim to fame is that he was sitting next to Jonathan Cheechoo's parents at a Sharks game, introduced himself, said he was from Moose Factory too, and Cheechoo's parents just shrugged...Everyone's from Moose Factory, I guess...
Blaine also originated the theory that bears his name: "Young guys don't play defense." Derek Zona and Ranger Smurf put that theory to the test this week and found 18- and 19-year-old NHL players severely lacking in the defense department.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
While I don't disagree...
I must say you have to look at the group of players both analyzed. Yes, the numbers show their defense is lacking because of their age, but the respective players’ defense wasn’t the reason why they are playing at the age of 18 and 19. Those players are there because of their abilities with the puck and to provide a spark (usually offensively).
So yes, 18 and 19 year olds don’t play great defense at the NHL level, but that’s also why they don’t win Stanely Cups at that age. I’d like to see if Mike Green’s or another players defensive stats get better as they grow into their early 20’s (something that should ring true to me).
Blueshirt Banter - End the Sather Era
US Soccer - The Yanks Are Coming
Red Sox Fan behind Enemy lines.
My takeaway is that young guys give so much back at the other end of the ice that you may as well not waste their age 18 and 19 seasons in the NHL.
What if you were sparing in their zone starts, limit ice time to offensive ice time and other ways to avoid the defensive issues and shield it?
This is assuming that you don’t have a better option asides from doing that in your organization. It would also depend how much you’re babying the player to see if it would hurt the development.
by Corey Pronman on Aug 17, 2010 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s cheaper in the long run to give that duty to a league-minimum 31 year old and not burn contracts on the kids.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Well it depends what the role of the 18/19 YO is and how well you can bubble his defensive issues. If he’s an offensive weapon it may be a case they can produce more with the offensive ice time than the cheap pickup which is hypothetical and not always true.
by Corey Pronman on Aug 18, 2010 1:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I can virtually guarantee you that from a contract value standpoint, burning up two years of an entry-level contract on one-way play is not worth it.
Sure, but what if a kid has clearly outgrown the CHL? As a Leafs fan they face this with Kadri. Clearly he belonged in the OHL last year but just as clearly it seems he’s ready to graduate now—another year in the OHL is just as likely to ingrain bad habits as help him develop. You burn a year of his contract whether he’s in the AHL or NHL. So if you’re a non-contender focused primarily on player development, do you stick him in the A or the N? I really don’t know the answer to this question and wonder if studies have been done.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 18, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think you’re allowed to stash him in the AHL while he’s junior eligible.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Aug 18, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought he couldn’t go at 19, but could go when he was 20? Something like that. My mind is hazy.
I don’t know what the answer is, but I would imagine that having a 19-year-old who isn’t ready stay in the W or the O and be near his parents – even if he is learning bad habits – is better than burning an entry-level year.
In the last 20 years, there’s only been six 18-year olds w/ 30GP on defense, and only 14 who even got 1GP. I think most organizations agree there. The link, if you’re curious.
At 19, you’re up to only 39 guys w/30 GP, and 70 total w/ a GP. Link here
So it’s not like it’s common practice among the defensemen.
Still, the group here was actually the best relative to their teams, even if they were the worst on their own. I think that stems from not-so-good teams getting high draft picks and throwing the players right in to be some type of “savior.” Used correctly, it doesn’t seem to be he worst plan.
I’m going to look at some of the 23-25 years olds in the league based on the age their clock started to see if it is actually beneficial for their development to get them up to the NHL quickly.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
by George E. Ays on Aug 18, 2010 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Here’s a thought—is the sophomore slump or rookie wall once the young players start facing tougher competition?
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
Obviously we don’t have the data (we could concoct about 8-9 years of Willis’ Qualcomp, but that still wouldn’t be enough.) But I’m of two minds about this. If a coach is smart enough to give a guy soft minutes, then why would he precipitate a slump by making those minutes harder for a guy who he doesn’t think can handle them?
More likely, a guy sticks in the NHL at 18 or 19 because he has superficially good numbers driven by a little shooting luck. And then we see his regression the following year.
If a coach is smart enough to give a guy soft minutes, then why would he precipitate a slump by making those minutes harder for a guy who he doesn’t think can handle them?
I’m thinking that if a young player makes an NHL team, the team is so bad that he has to take on tougher minutes at some point (due to injuries or something), and gradually giving a guy more minutes in varied situations is looked upon as best for a young player’s development (like with Marc-Edouard Vlasic).
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Aug 18, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Young defensemen
It would be fun to look at Bobby Orr’s numbers at 18-21. Clearly from Ranger Smurf’s chart, Kris Letang would seem to best illustrate progression through age, showing a steady improvement against ever more difficult opponents. Perhaps these were the numbers Ray Shero looked at before signing him to a $3.5M cap hit. If he can duplicate his offensive production in the playoffs for an entire season, is a Norris far away?
Byron Ritchie
It takes longer to develop defensively, no doubt.
I sat next to Byron Ritchie’s brother once. Unfortunately I didn’t realise that until I had slagged him for the better part of two periods.
The Islanders
After reading this I’m hoping that the Islanders don’t do with Nino what they did with Josh Bailey. He’s almost sure to be a liability defensively. The service time thing really stinks. There should be a league where Nino can go play for a year and really develop his defense against bigger stronger players, without his service clock starting. I don’t think juniors really achieves that. Does anyone know if he could sign a one year deal to play professionally in Switzerland say and then come back to the Isles next year?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
