Yzerman vs Boucher

by TBL Fat Tony on Sep 8, 2010 5:01 PM EDT

This prospect camp should be an interesting one...and this is a big reason why.

Yzerman has created lots of competition for roster spots on the lightning and at the same time he hasn't. Reason being hes known for saying that he wants to have a methodical approach and he wants to let the prospects develop until they are ready to make the big team.

On the other side of things you have Guy Boucher. A former major junior coach and an AHL coach who has been coaching mostly younger players for the past 4 years and has had lots of success in doing it. So who is to say he wouldn't be confident in one or two of the younger guys that he could mold into the NHL on the fly.

So come time for the end of training camp it will be interesting to see if there are some younger players that they both don't agree on that should have longer looks in preseason or even a few games to start the season because remember players can play up to 9 games and still be sent down to juniors. Say guys like Ashton, Connolly, Hutchings, and Panik. Ashton looks like the only one who would logically make the jump because he has already been signed a contract with the lightning this time last year, and all the others would have to be signed.

Yes 9 games isn't a lot but it would be fun to see what these kids are made of and what the future holds.

Poll

Would you like to see some of the prospects put into the lineup this year to see what they've got early in the season?

yes

21 votes

no

4 votes

25 votes | Poll has closed

This post was written by a member of the Raw Charge community and doesn't necessarily express the views or opinions of Raw Charge staff.

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Talking about young guys and their chance to impress and possibly make a surprise appearence on the roster — I think we’d sooner see Mark Barberio on defense than see Ashton, Connolly, Panik or Hutchings on the roster.

The depth was added, as you noted… Not so much that it prevents young players from stealing a roster spot… But the thing is — the junior players remaining ont eh roster come at a cost of a roster spot for players who may have to pass through waivers in order to go to Norfolk. The Bolts would risk losing players for the sake of a temporary tickling of the fancy to see what these young guys have?

No, I don’t think that will be how it plays out. Connolly has a lot to prove after being so severely limited last season. Carter still needs to develop. I don’t know how overage players factor in with juniors… If we want them available in-case-of-crap, it’d be better to have them in Norfolk

"Seen Cincuenta" -- 04.10.10 -- Raw Charge.

by John Fontana on Sep 8, 2010 8:48 PM EDT reply actions

I'm not seeing it

But you never know. Of the younger guys, Wright and Tyrell have the best chance because of their 2 way game. You won’t see Yzerman or Boucher wanting Connolly playing as a grinder on the 3rd or 4th line. Unless a top 6 forward is injured, I agree with John that most of the eligible players will be back in juniors for another season. Panik is a tweener and if impressive could play at Norfolk. Hutchings will need a year or two to learn the pro game.

Don in St Pete

by Don in St Pete on Sep 9, 2010 1:46 PM EDT reply actions

My point was

that is it so hard to imagine that a few of the players maybe one at a time would have a spot here and there in the beginning of the year to play a few minutes and get a taste of the NHL and still be eligible to be sent back to juniors…

by TBL Fat Tony on Sep 9, 2010 7:51 PM EDT reply actions

expecially if

especially if Lecavalier needs a tad bit extra time to recover from his knee surgery..

by TBL Fat Tony on Sep 9, 2010 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions

I totally got that

Don’t get me wrong with my response being critical — giving a taste is not a bad idea. The logistics of the CBA and waivers are what makes it an impossibility at this time.

"Seen Cincuenta" -- 04.10.10 -- Raw Charge.

by John Fontana on Sep 10, 2010 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions

sorry if i have to claim ignorance on this one

but i know there is atleast one player in Harju who would be waiver exempt seeing as tho hes 24 and he’s playing his first year in NHL and his first NHL contract so moving him to AHL and NHL is free and clean is it not? same thing how james wright went down to AHL last year he was waiver exempt

by TBL Fat Tony on Sep 10, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Wright went back to Junior, not to the AHL. Yes, he was waiver exempt because of age and games played. Harjus and Niklas Perrson are potentially waiver exempt… Harju is on a one-year, one-way contract though (meaning he gets paid at NHL rate anywhere he plays)

But there are more than Harju and Persson on the roster who could be sent down. If Harju or Persson win a roster spot, it’d be cruel to send them down just to humor ourselves by giving a junior aged player a taste of the league. If a junior-age player makes the club outright by beating Harju, or Perrson (or Bergenheim, or Moore, or Thompson, or Durno or Purcell, or whoever) in their pre-season performance — that’s when the Bolts should seriously consider keepign a guy up with the club to start 2010-11.

But if this is just a tickling-of-the-fancy move, where we want to encourage the young guys y having them play at the very beginning of the season… Well, if this club was rebuilding, I would be fine with that. But seeing the team’s top-six are locked… Most of these junior age players we’ve discussed have been offensive talents… The roster spots in question are for grinder roles…

Does it really make sense?

Personally I wish the NHL was more like MLB with expanding-rosters late in the season. Being able to call up junior age players if the season is over for a team by March or April (and giving players a taste of the NHL) would be more helpful than havign them up at the start of the season — where games are more vital.

"Seen Cincuenta" -- 04.10.10 -- Raw Charge.

by John Fontana on Sep 10, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Maybe Ashton

I just don’t see Connolly as being remotely close to ready. He didn’t excel at the prospects scrimmage, where a few others did, including some undrafted invitees. If somebody is banged up then Ashton could stay as a fillin for Malone or Downie and Tyrell as a fillin for Gagne, St. Louis, Stamkos or Lecavalier. Nopne of the other guys is ready to fill a top 6 role and it would be foolish to insert potential top six type players into the grinder role.

Don in St Pete

by Don in St Pete on Sep 9, 2010 8:59 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs