|
Not sure this is really a changing trend.
Laich and Umberger played a full AHL season during the lockout, and so were pretty much playing against NHLers that year. If you count that year as an NHL year they are in their 4th year. To an extent you can make the same point about Streit, as the Swiss league did get NHLers as well during the lockout though not very many. Streit's numbers jumped to almost a point per game during the lockout year.
Kostitsyn also played his first pro year in the AHL during the lockout but in his case I am thinking of this year more as a rookie year in which teams just weren't ready for him. I give him pretty much equal probability to have a better year, similar year, or 'sophomore slump', next year. Green's numbers may also be a similar story, in that last year he wasn't employed in an offensive role so only this year teams had to contend with him offensively and weren't ready. Green's ES ice time grew from 12:46/g in 06/07 to 18:35/g in 07/08, and his PP time grew from 2:31/g to 4:41/g.
I do agree that the 4th year breakout phenomenon may be changing, though. It hearkens back to the new CBA.
There isn't much magic to when a breakout occurs. 4 factors usually would cause a player to significantly up their production from year to year:
1) experience bringing them to the point where they finally 'figure out the NHL game and they best cope with it'. The 4th year breakout would usually be linked with that.
2) Their body frame finally fills out to its full muscle mass. The age 28 breakout would often be linked to that.
3) They are in a contract year. In the old NHL, because of when players made their rookie season, 4th season and/or age 28 in any cases were also contract years, the first just before the mid-salary, mid-length contracts good players would get after their entry-level contract, the second just after this middle contract and before the elite one.
4) playing time - which teams could coincide with player development by moving other roster pieces around.
All of this is thrown out of whack in the new NHL.
1) Entry-level contracts are signed earlier, and teams have much more incentive to give players on entry-level contracts a shot because they are much cheaper under the cap. So a lot more players start gaining NHL experience earlier, but that also means they reach their 4th years earlier, that is, at an earlier stage of their physical development. How physically and mentally mature they are thus variates whether they'll have a breakout at the 3rd, 4th or 5th year.
2) The middle contract has been all but eliminated for players with distinct offensive upside or leadership potential, so such players would usually get their big long term contract around the experience breakout mark (e.g., Mike Richards). Many such players would be in the middle of these contracts when their physical breakout mark is reached.
3) It is now much harder for teams to move assets around, so more and more players will find themselves stuck in log jams. They could be primed for an experience or physical breakout, but not get the minutes for it, barring injury, thereby postponing their breakout by a season or two. Others may get the minutes earlier which could accelerate their breakout. Because teams cannot easily move assets and have to wait for contracts to run out, it is much harder for teams to fit their roster to the development of their players especially if they are mostly focused on the short term.
Bottom line, starting from next year (4th season for the post-lockout season rookies) there'll be a lot more variation in breakouts than before, and trying to estimate whether a player is pried for breakout year will require looking at a combination of factors rather than just one. There'll be more players, for example, who breakout in their 3rd or 5th seasons instead of the 4th, but there will also be many players still breaking out in the 4th. It's not as if 3rd year breakouts will become as predominant as 4th year ones used to be.
|
Favoured: 0
