As with any sport, player development in hockey isn’t an exact science. Far from it. Indeed, Penguins history is littered with first-round picks who didn’t pan out. For every Sidney Crosby, there’s an Angelo Esposito. For every Evgeni Malkin, a Konstantin Koltsov. For every Marc-Andre Fleury? A Craig Hillier.
Ever heard of Gordie Laxton, Stefan Bergkvist or Chris Wells?
First-rounders all.
On the flip side, the Pens have gleaned more than their share of talent in the later rounds. Kris Letang (62nd overall), Ryan Malone (115th) and top-line bookends Jake Guentzel (77th) and Bryan Rust (80th) are prime examples.
Why do some players develop while others don’t? Obviously, much depends on the individual and how well they adapt to the pro game, which can be quite a challenge. Last season erstwhile junior hockey stars Samuel Poulin and Nathan Legare struggled at times to adjust to the rigors and speed of the pro game, especially the latter. Unless you’re a gifted generational talent like Mario Lemieux, you can no longer rely solely on ability to dominate opponents. A player must develop the details in his game in order to succeed.
Another key factor? Opportunity. Are players given a fair shake? Does a coach show confidence in them and use them accordingly?
Rust is a classic example of a player who was afforded the chance to fully develop. A good player but hardly a star at Notre Dame, Rusty was projected to be a fourth-line energy player…if he made it to the NHL. There was nothing in his performance at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton early on to alter that perception.
Indeed, when he was called up to the Pens during the 2015-16 season, his numbers with the Baby Pens were hardly dazzling…three goals and six points in 16 games to go with a minus-five. Yet Rust gained traction, thanks in no small part to the faith coach Mike Sullivan placed in him. The hustling winger gradually evolved into…if not a full-blown star…a very good NHL player capable of filling a variety of roles.
Certainly Rust’s intangibles, including a non-stop motor and sled-dog tenacity, played a huge part, as did his underrated skill set. And credit Rusty for seizing the opportunity presented to him.
Unfortunately, in terms of developing young players, that was then and this is now. Initially, I thought Sullivan did a very good job of cultivating the kids…Conor Sheary, Tom Kuhnhackl and especially Rust and Guentzel come to mind. Matt Murray, too. However, there’s been a drop-off in that area over the past few seasons. Actually, ever since we won those back-to-back Cups.
While Sullivan and his staff shoulder some of the blame, the fact that the Pens as an organization have been in win-now mode for quite some time has severely restricted the opportunities afforded to youth. There’s a tendency to plug holes with veterans who have a proven track record over kids who might make a rookie blunder at a crucial juncture. Hall-of-Fame GM Craig Patrick operated in much the same manner in the mid-to-late 1990s.
Yet something’s lost when something’s gained. Have the Pens whiffed on opportunities to develop another Rust?
Maybe.
I’m thinking specifically of power forward Anthony Angello (pictured above), who recently signed a free-agent deal with St. Louis after washing out with the Pens. Actually, washing out may be a bit harsh. Angello was never really afforded an opportunity to fully display his wares. Over three seasons with the Pens, he skated in 31 games and produced three goals and five points. Less-than-inspired production, for sure. So was the 7:13 of ATOI he received.
For the sake of comparison, Rust had five goals in his first 55 games with the black and gold while averaging over a dozen minutes of ice time.
Obviously, there’s a chicken or egg element to all of this. To gain confidence and trust from a coaching staff you have to earn it. At the same time, you have to be given the opportunity to earn it. I’m not sure if Angello was. Especially from a coach who seems to have an aversion to bigger players, which the 6’5” 210-pound native of Manlius, New York most assuredly is.
I’m not suggesting Angelo would’ve morphed into another Rust, capable of top-line duty. But a rugged bottom-sixer in the Brian Boyle mold with decent speed for his size, capable of notching 10-12 goals?
I could see that.
What brought this on? I was looking specifically at the career tracks of two young power forwards, Mason Marchment of Dallas and the Predators’ Tanner Jeannot. Both of these guys struggled early in their pro careers. Both spent time in the ECHL. Both posted scoring rates in the AHL similar to Angello’s. Both became valuable members of their respective teams while providing a coveted and necessary power element.
Was it simply a matter of these guys blooming late? Or were they afforded a fair opportunity to develop at a tipping point in their careers?
Perhaps a combination.
It’s too late for Angello…at least in the ‘Burgh. But the Pens have another sizeable 26-year-old forward who’s been on the fringe for a couple of seasons, Radim Zohorna. The hulking Czech possesses an NHL-worthy tool kit, and he’s posted some dazzling underlying numbers.
Will he be given a fair shake a la Rust? Or will “Big Z” go the way of Angello?
Given the Pens’ recent track record, I’m betting on the latter.
1. Maybe it’s the one instance because Marino was the only player good enough to use. People act like O’Connor, Zahorna, Puustinen are some kinds of hotshots. In fact, they are players who were not deemed good enough to draft or are later round selections. They are low odds players to begin with.
2. You have no proof that the Pens pushed Marino to have more offense or that it in any way impaired his development.
3. As in any scientific research, it only takes one instance to disprove a hypothesis. It proves the repeated blanket statement that Sullivan won’t play younger guys wrong.
No, O’Connor, Zohorna and Puustinen aren’t hot shots. But neither was Rust early on.
And that’s the point of the article. Until you give these guys a fair shake and not just bury them on the fourth line in a role they may not be suited for, how do you really know what you have?
O’Connor’s averaged a hair under a point-per-game with the Baby Pens following a strong senior season at Dartmouth. He was a late bloomer, physically, much like top-pick Owen Pickering, which may have contributed to him not being drafted. He’s got size and can skate, which makes him a rarity on the Pens.
Zohorna’s metrics are strong…he was fourth on the team in P/60 (2.17), just behind Crosby (and a notch ahead of Rust). Malkin, Carter and Blueger all had better Corsi’s with him than without. Geno substantially so. And Z’s got that size, plus a nice skill set for such a big man.
These guys are worth a decent look.
You’re right, there’s nothing definitive in the stats to indicate an increase in offensive activity on Marino’s part or to prove Sullivan and his staff encouraged him to push the offense. His shot rates were consistent throughout his three seasons with the Pens. However, there was a point in time when the Pens were looking at him as a potential top-pairing defenseman (possibly as a replacement for Letang?). Given our push-the-attack-style, a certain degree of offensive involvement is implicit. Interesting, too, that Marino was traded for a defenseman known primarily for his offensive prowess.
Rick
Hey Rick,
Very interesting subject. You know me, I am always trying to look forward. Pens4ever touched on some good stuff too.
In the case of draft picks, some picks are no brainers; Lemieux, Crosby, Malkin, and MAF. However, once past the top 5 or 10, it can get hairy. Player like the afore mentioned 4 really don’t need that much development. In the case of Hillier, as I recall he was anachronistic, a stand-up Goalie, a dinosaur, in a world of butterfly goaltending – perhaps a testament to a team thinking they were smarter than the rest of the league. In the middle of these extremes lies the bulk of draft picks and prospects (undrafted FAs like over-aged Juniors, ie Jordan Frasca and Taylor Gauthier). In these cases development becomes the key.
I agree with what Pens4ever said, a player has to come in with the right attitude; they have to be opened to learning their trade. However, the buck doesn’t stop there. The onus isn’t simply on the player, the team must have a quality coaching staff, up and down its organization. As I have written a couple of times, teaching is inherent to coaching; it is part of the definition. If a team is having limited success in developing players then it is the coaching. Some failures are expected but when the last player(s) a team drafted and truly developed is(are) now 27, then a microscope needs to be brought out and the organization examine itself. The team needs to look at its scouting program and or training protocols.
Finally, even if you draft the right players and the coaches teach the players, they have to be given the opportunity to actually play. There is only so long a player can develop playing with AHL calibre team mates, against AHL calibre opponents. What is the old saying, “Iron sharpens iron.”
A team cannot survive relying on high priced FAs. They have to develop their kids. When a team’s superstars are young, their supporting cast and/or bottom 6 can be old (ie 2008-09 bringing in Billy Guerin) but when the superstars are aging, that supporting cast needs to be liberally populated by the young and not high priced veterans.
oh man…. Craig Hillier, he was the future goalie for Pitt. Played with the Ottawa 67s…. Bergkvist, Koltsov… I remember those names.
Great article again, very insightful.
Developing young prospects, draft picks isn’t easy, especially if the individual has a chip on his shoulder and thinks the spot on the team should be handed to him.
The player needs to put in the work, off ice training, on ice practice, eating properly, taking care of themselves.
But the also need the ice time to improve.
The team also needs to pick players that will work within the team systems.
And don’t forget Robert Dome.
Yeah, Sullivan never gives young players a chance. That’s why Marino never got a chance.
Oh, wait.
Amazing how you always seem to pick out the one instance to the contrary, as if to establish some sort of superiority.
Since he played so well out of the chute during his first season, I’d classify Marino as a no-brainer. In more recent instances where a player’s development could go either way, Sullivan doesn’t have an especially good track record. And I’d argue that, in trying to push Marino into more of an offensive role, Sully and his staff may have actually stunted his development and destabilized his overall game.
Rick
Rick
Spot on – the problem I see with “Big Z” is he’s currently a 2nd and 3rd line tweener. He has the skill set and skating
ability but probably won’t get a look with either Malkin or Crosby and he falls into the category that I mentioned in
your previous post – is he the type of player you want patrolling the wing on your 4th line? I do believe he could
excel on the 3rd line with Carter – maybe it’s time to see what “Big Z” has and plug him in on the 2nd line with
Malkin and start the season (if still a Penguin) with Zucker on Carter’s line. The problem here as you well no is we
always have to remember the SULLY FACTOR which means Z and our young players will fall victim to the Simon’s
and Archibalds of the world. GO PENS
I look forward to you feedback.