What Should We Really Expect From NHL Player Development?

Every now and then, a reader comment comes along that makes me stop and think about something a little differently. That happened with a comment about Hayley Wickenheiser and her eight years with the Maple Leafs. The reader's basic argument was pretty simple: lasting eight years with the same NHL organization is unusual, particularly when you've survived multiple changes in management. And maybe we should be careful about judging her record simply by looking at how many players eventually became NHL regulars.

I think there’s something to that. The reader also raised a bigger question: how much of player development can actually be credited to the people doing the developing? That’s where things get interesting.

Can someone working in player development take credit for what a player becomes?

Take a player drafted in the fourth, fifth, sixth or seventh round. The Maple Leafs can put him in the American Hockey League, give him coaches, strength training, video work, development plans and all the support in the world. But if the player simply doesn't have enough NHL ability, there isn't much anybody can do.

On the other hand, some players clearly do need time. They aren't ready at 19 or 20, but they become better players at 22 or 23. That's where development work presumably matters. The trick is figuring out how much of that improvement came from the organization and how much came naturally as the player matured.

I have to believe that NHL-level skills and habits are teachable.

And that's probably why the reader's comment about “player development being a myth” is a little too strong for me. I don't think development is a myth. But I do think we sometimes give development departments too much credit — or too much blame.

The best young players are usually going to make it regardless. Or, are they? I’m thinking of Josh Ho Sang, for example. He had all the talent in the world, but not the right attitude. A first-round pick with exceptional talent doesn't suddenly become an NHL player because somebody in the development department discovered a magic button. At the same time, a good development system can help a player understand how to use those skills at the professional level.

That's an important distinction. So when we look back at Wickenheiser's eight years with the Maple Leafs, maybe the question shouldn't simply be, “How many NHL players did she develop?”

What is the right question to ask for anyone working in NHL player development?

Maybe it should be, “Did the organization give its young players a better chance to become the best players they could be?” That's a much harder question to answer. And, for me, it's probably the more interesting one.

Because developing hockey players isn't like building furniture. You can't point to a finished product and say, “There it is. We made that.” Sometimes the player makes himself. Sometimes the organization helps. And sometimes, despite everybody's best efforts, the player simply isn't going to make it.

That's what makes judging an NHL development department so darn difficult.