• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Did the Leafs Ruin Schenn's Development?

Peter D.

Peter D.

Moderator
I want to keep this as a separate discussion from the trade itself wherein we can concentrate solely on Schenn and his tenure here.

Schenn, the guy deemed to be the start of a new era in Toronto, a #5 pick who was labelled as a future Leaf captain from the get-go, a player that was supposed to anchor the Leafs' D for 10-15 years -- gone just like that after four years.

So what happened?  Was Schenn rushed into the NHL as an 18-year when he should have gone back to junior for another year to continue to hone his skills?  Was he, despite being a high pick, just not that good and more expectations were placed on him than there should have been based mainly on where he was drafted?  Was it his coach...the system?  All of these?  Or none and he needed more time, and the tutelage of Carlyle, to bring out the player in him? 

For me, Schenn blew me away as an 18-year old -- he held his own much better than one would expect at such an age.  But he regressed pretty significantly in my eyes, but I don't know if Wilson could be entirely blamed for that.  Wilson couldn't entirely control his foot speed or lack of shot. 

While I do wish Schenn was given a bit more time to see what Carlyle could do with him, a part of me also thinks he is what he is and maybe the expectations of him being a high pick were just too much for him to live up to.
 
I don't think we can conclude he was ruined by being rushed, but he should not have been rushed no matter how good he was in camp that year.  It was not the right choice.  The team was awful and every Leafs exec, coach, scout and every fan knew it.  Is Luke Schenn going to be less of a player than he would have been had he stayed in Junior at least 1 more year?  I think at the very least, his path to whatever he becomes has been far rockier than it would have been. 

I'm not a fan of the approach that a kid like that can earn his way on to the team with a good 2 weeks of pre-season hockey.  Especially in this market.  I do appreciate Burke's approach that with the exception of Gardiner, he has put his prospects through the standard development steps even if they seem to be bursting at the seams ready to move up.  Kadri is a good example.  I don't think you harm kids by keeping them down a bit too long.  Too soon can do damage for sure.

The 18 year old brain is simply too fragile for this market.  Heck even the 21 year old brain has a tough time handling the attention, the media scrutiny and the fan expectations and projections.
 
Peter D. said:
I want to keep this as a separate discussion from the trade itself wherein we can concentrate solely on Schenn and his tenure here.

Schenn, the guy deemed to be the start of a new era in Toronto, a #5 pick who was labelled as a future Leaf captain from the get-go, a player that was supposed to anchor the Leafs' D for 10-15 years -- gone just like that after four years.

So what happened?  Was Schenn rushed into the NHL as an 18-year when he should have gone back to junior for another year to continue to hone his skills?  Was he, despite being a high pick, just not that good and more expectations were placed on him than there should have been based mainly on where he was drafted?  Was it his coach...the system?  All of these?  Or none and he needed more time, and the tutelage of Carlyle, to bring out the player in him? 

For me, Schenn blew me away as an 18-year old -- he held his own much better than one would expect at such an age.  But he regressed pretty significantly in my eyes, but I don't know if Wilson could be entirely blamed for that.  Wilson couldn't entirely control his foot speed or lack of shot. 

While I do wish Schenn was given a bit more time to see what Carlyle could do with him, a part of me also thinks he is what he is and maybe the expectations of him being a high pick were just too much for him to live up to.
Click to expand...

I don't think he was rushed in, and I thought he deserved his roster spot come opening night in 2008 but that's not to say he should have played the entire season based upon his performances at camp or in the early games. His first season I thought was pretty good, obvious rookie mistakes but that's pretty much a given.

Not sure what to say really reference the highs & then lows during his four seasons as a Leaf; maybe we just expected too much from him due to being a 5th overall pick?
 
I'm with Corn Flake. He wasn't ruined but they handled him poorly.

Write yourself a list of dmen who did well by playing at the age of 18 in the NHL. After Bobby Orr, the list is rather short. Now, write a list of defensive dmen who are not gifted offensively who did well playing in the NHL at age 18. The list is substantially shorter as the offense helps some 18 year olds stay in the league but Luke was never, ever going to be that type of player - EVER.

Look at the cap implications. Luke's entry level deal ran out and they're stuck giving him $3.6 mil/yr for five years before he's played a decent top 4 season. He's a UFA at 25 because he started so early. If he starts in the NHL at age 20, he's a UFA at 27 so his salary hit gets delayed a couple of years and you get better price performance because he's very likely better with 2 years development. Nearly any dman is better between the ages of 20-27 than they are between the ages of 18-25 as many don't come into their own in the NHL until they're 24-25. It's the defensive side of the faster game that takes the most time to learn.

As for Luke himself, he might be better off. Yes, he has struggled but he'll probably peak sooner with the additional NHL experience before age 25 as long as he survives - which I expect he will handily.

Kadri could probably have been a .5ppg player in the NHL long before now. But he'd probably still be a poor player defensively.

I can understand why a super talented Sidney Crosby type franchise player would start in the NHL at age 18 but Luke was never in that talent category. Forwards sometimes are because they tend to develop by age 22 - about 2-3 years sooner than a dman. It's much more rare for a defensive dman in my opinion.

If they'd handled him right, he'd be coming along nicely or they might have got more than a chonic injury suspect underachiever for him.

I said it at the time and I'll say it again: it was a very stupid move by Leafs management in my opinion.
 
It's hard to say.  I remember being at the ACC the night they retired Gilmours Jersey.  Schenn was amazing.  I turned to my wife and said that he could be the Leafs next captain.  He had a goal, an assist and he fought a guy.  He was all over the ice, and he kept Crosby off the board.  I believe the Leafs won the game 5-2.  He always seemed like he had one more level to give, but just couldn't get there.
 
I don't think his development is ruined but yes it wasn't handled well. I think he will thrive in Philadelphia sooner or later, but he might have growing pains.
 
McLeaf said:
I don't think his development is ruined but yes it wasn't handled well. I think he will thrive in Philadelphia sooner or later, but he might have growing pains.
Click to expand...

They'll be big time pressure on him in Philly as well, it's not like he's suddenly going to a non hockey market and can just hide away.  People like to evaluate trades after both players start going, and if JVR suddenly takes off with the Leafs and is a great fit, they'll be people expecting Schenn to play a big role and prove he was worth the trade. 

But to answer the initial question, I think Schenn would have been served better in junior/minors before hitting with the Leafs.  Too much pressure on an 18 year old playing the blue line.
 
For me, it is impossible to say whether Luke's skill development is better or worse off having been thrust in to the NHL early.

On the other hand, it is 100% clear that he was "economically" mis-managed.  The leafs were forced in to a situation in which they had to give him a substantial deal prior to him being able to show them his worth on a consistent basis.  From the team's economic standpoint, as cw says, it was horribly mismanaged.  Here's the key part:

Look at the cap implications. Luke's entry level deal ran out and they're stuck giving him $3.6 mil/yr for five years before he's played a decent top 4 season. He's a UFA at 25 because he started so early. If he starts in the NHL at age 20, he's a UFA at 27 so his salary hit gets delayed a couple of years and you get better price performance because he's very likely better with 2 years development. Nearly any dman is better between the ages of 20-27 than they are between the ages of 18-25 as many don't come into their own in the NHL until they're 24-25. It's the defensive side of the faster game that takes the most time to learn.
Click to expand...

In addition to suppressing what you have to pay for him, if the leafs had waited, they would get to more thoroughly and accurately evaluate what they had and give him the salary he deserved.  After last year, it seems he actually deserved a salary in the 1-2million range, not the 3-4 million range.  With a salary more closely approximating his current level of play, the team would be better off whether they wanted to trade him or keep him.

I am going to miss Luke.  He seemed like a really nice kid.
 
Not sure if Stellick should be deemed an authority on the matter but I think he may be right here;

Gord Stellick ‏@GordStellick Benning, McGill, Boimistruck, Nylund, Iafrate, Richardson, Ware & Schenn - EVERY Leaf underage D should have stayed one yr. in junior.
 
Sgt said:
Not sure if Stellick should be deemed an authority on the matter but I think he may be right here;

Gord Stellick ‏@GordStellick Benning, McGill, Boimistruck, Nylund, Iafrate, Richardson, Ware & Schenn - EVERY Leaf underage D should have stayed one yr. in junior.
Click to expand...

Yeah? What talk radio show did he say that on?
 
Significantly Insignificant said:
It's hard to say.  I remember being at the ACC the night they retired Gilmours Jersey.  Schenn was amazing.  I turned to my wife and said that he could be the Leafs next captain.  He had a goal, an assist and he fought a guy.  He was all over the ice, and he kept Crosby off the board.  I believe the Leafs won the game 5-2.  He always seemed like he had one more level to give, but just couldn't get there.
Click to expand...

He absolutely had his moments and also had long runs of solid, impactful play.  There were nights two years ago where he was shutting down Ovechkin handily and then there were nights where the other team's 4th line were skating circles around him.

One thing I still wonder is if that vision problem he had at one point in year 2 is still bothering him. Almost seemed like that could be an ongoing issue. 
 
No but there was probably a better path.

Would another year in juniors have made him a better skater? Or given him better skills? Or given him better hockey sense? I'm not sure. Instinctively I sort of believe otherwise. I think that I got more out of playing better opposition when I played at least to the point that I wasn't over my head. I always argue it's a myth that young players can be "ruined" by being challenged to play at the NHL level at a younger age. Failure is how you learn. I think it just a hockey/sports cliche that is a convenient excuse. If Schenn's skating and skills needed work, he had an entire summer of 4 months for 3 consecutive years to work of those things if there was room to improve.

And I don't think it's semantics to point out that Schenn played less than a month in the NHL as an 18 year old. He turned 19 on November 2nd, 2008 after 11 NHL games.

 
LeafsInSeven said:
No but there was probably a better path.

Would another year in juniors have made him a better skater? Or given him better skills? Or given him better hockey sense? I'm not sure. Instinctively I sort of believe otherwise. I think that I got more out of playing better opposition when I played at least to the point that I wasn't over my head. I always argue it's a myth that young players can be "ruined" by being challenged to play at the NHL level at a younger age. Failure is how you learn. I think it just a hockey/sports cliche that is a convenient excuse. If Schenn's skating and skills needed work, he had an entire summer of 4 months for 3 consecutive years to work of those things if there was room to improve.

And I don't think it's semantics to point out that Schenn played less than a month in the NHL as an 18 year old. He turned 19 on November 2nd, 2008 after 11 NHL games.
Click to expand...

It's not about failure not being how you learn, but the difference in pressure on you to NOT fail when you are in the NHL is that much greater.  You top that off with the number of eyeballs watching and talking about you on a daily basis and the feeling of every move or on-ice error being under the microscope has to be tough on the psyche. 

That said, He did better in his rookie year than basically the next three, so why is that? It's not that being 18 means you will make lots of mistakes that you won't later on, it's that the pressure in his rookie year was far less as the expectation level on this team was minimal.  As the years have gone by it has increased exponentially and his game seems to have gotten worse the crazier the media and fans got.

Maturity and confidence would be the two biggest factors for a young player to develop as the gets older... the former comes with time, and the latter comes with playing at a level you can compete at the top.  If he had spent 2 years in junior and 1 year in the AHL he would have matured significantly on both of these items, come into the NHL at 21/22 more than ready and would have spent 3 years (probably) dominating his competition.
 
I'm a big fan of his defensive game and hard hitting style, but a stay at home defender with little offensive ability and average skating ability will never be the guy you build a D around.  I don't think anyone ruined him and I think his development is on track - just takes time with Dmen. I think people set some pretty high and, at times, unrealistic expecations for an 18 year old.  If you just accept that what you have is a 4/5 d-man, you'll be happy with him and over the next few seasons I expect he'll be a decent defender for the Flyers. If you expect him to be the next Chris Pronger, you're going to be extremely disappointed.  For his sake I hope I'm wrong, but I have a feeling that Flyer nation thinks they're getting more than they actually are with him.
 
I think that Schenn's biggest flaws were mental.  There are so many defensemen, particularly as they get older, who are not particularly mobile, but who are still effective because of their positioning.  Luke  seemed to be caught out of position so often.  And when he had the puck, his decision making was not always the best.

I found it interesting that every Leafs spokesman mentioned hockey sense when talking about the recent Leafs draft picks.  I am guessing that they have made hockey intelligence a higher priority than it was before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top