This is the year for the Flames to prove they can graduate prospects from the AHL

[Bingo]

The other thing for me is the past.

I've been here for 17 years and have seen a lot of prospects come and go over the past two decades many of which were at one point thought to be obstructed by Flames management that had it in for young players.

The absolute postcard for this was Dustin Boyd.

I do think it's appropriate to be forced to make room for a player and not leave spots open for them going into camp (~cough Edmonton ~cough). The key then however is when a player proves he's ready you don't come up with excuses to take said action.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The other thing for me is the past.

I've been here for 17 years and have seen a lot of prospects come and go over the past two decades many of which were at one point thought to be obstructed by Flames management that had it in for young players.

The absolute postcard for this was Dustin Boyd.

I do think it's appropriate to be forced to make room for a player and not leave spots open for them going into camp (~cough Edmonton ~cough). The key then however is when a player proves he's ready you don't come up with excuses to take said action.

I do get the always earned, never given philosophy. But in other sports it seems to me its not unusual to play "the kids" and go through some growing pains while they learn OTJ. I don't believe it's necessarily a disaster to leave a spot or two open for which the young players can compete. There are always waiver wire pickups available should the kids not be as good as you think. It's another way to hedge your bet.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I do get the always earned, never given philosophy. But in other sports it seems to me its not unusual to play "the kids" and go through some growing pains while they learn OTJ. I don't believe it's necessarily a disaster to leave a spot or two open for which the young players can compete. There are always waiver wire pickups available should the kids not be as good as you think. It's another way to hedge your bet.

Totally agree here.

My philosophy is that you should not be trading or signing depth veterans for 3rd/4th line, 3rd D pairing or backup goalies.

No reason to trade for Lack when our goalies have shown so much in the AHL. No reason to get both Stone AND Hamonic (the latter at an exorbitant price). You can always find replacement level players at any point in the year.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Totally agree here.

My philosophy is that you should not be trading or signing depth veterans for 3rd/4th line, 3rd D pairing or backup goalies.

No reason to trade for Lack when our goalies have shown so much in the AHL. No reason to get both Stone AND Hamonic (the latter at an exorbitant price). You can always find replacement level players at any point in the year.

I think the reasons would be:
Our goalies have shown practically nothing in the AHL
and
Hamonic and Stone are far and away better than any replacement-level player or prospect

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I do think it's appropriate to be forced to make room for a player and not leave spots open for them going into camp (~cough Edmonton ~cough). The key then however is when a player proves he's ready you don't come up with excuses to take said action.

Exactly.

I find it very rich when some Oiler fans in this forum disregard the septic field that was created over the last decade with the biggest component being exactly what you stated.

Proper development and making the right choice as to when a young player is ready to succeed in the NHL is huge.

Knowledge , coaching expertise and the ability to build strong professional relationships within the development realm is not equivalent amongst 90 percent of NHL teams.

Not even frigging close. That is a huge insult to the many teams who have designed and built a strong development system and a gigantic excuse for those who have not. The Oilers being the poster child for the latter.

Hall, Nugent Hopkins , Yakupov , Petry, Schultz , Eberle, Dubnyk etc were badly shortchanged by the unwillingness and inadequacy of the Oilers to develop them properly.

They were handed positions where they had little chance of being successful or reaching their optimum potential and they as well as the Organization bore the negative results.

[MarkGio]

I think the Flames have carried a poor prospect cupboard for over a decade due to inadequate drafting. You look at the probabilities of a draftee and the path of least resistance will always be a proven NHL vet over a prospect any day.

But the Flames have carried this mentality over to a current organization that now carries a stocked cupboard and I think they will have to do some juggling. Being inactive during free agency I think was the first step in the right direction, as was buying out Bouma. But ultimately, when they signed Stone and Versteeg, it meant that the whole line up is full down the RW and RD position at the start of camp. The centre position is already full. And maybe there's one spot in the bottom six for a left winger, as well as one spot on the bottom pairing LD position.

But here's the logjam looking at the bottom six LW position: Janko, Mangia, Klim, Poir, Lomb, Hath, Shink, Foo and F. Hamilton

Here's the logjam for one LD position: Kulak, Wother, Kyling, Anders, Bartow, Healy

So for guys who play centre (ie Janko) and guys who play RD (ie, Andersson), it's even tougher to crack a spot being handicapped trying to play in a different role than what they're used to. But for everyone else, there is a massive amount of competition for one spot, likely providing limited minutes to begin with.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

So for guys who play centre (ie Janko) and guys who play RD (ie, Andersson), it's even tougher to crack a spot being handicapped trying to play in a different role than what they're used to. But for everyone else, there is a massive amount of competition for one spot, likely providing limited minutes to begin with.

It's supposed to be tough.
If it was easy...anyone could do it.

They are trying to build a championship team.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by timbit

It's supposed to be tough.
If it was easy...anyone could do it.

They are trying to build a championship team.

Honestly, if Andersson came out and was better than Stone, do you honestly expect Stone to be traded? The path of least resistance is to send Andersson down and "over cook" him and wait for an injury. But if he proves he's NHL ready, what is it telling him that he's not "NHL status" yet? It tells him he's just unlucky that the Flames have a glut of RD already. So what does Andersson and his agent consider at that point?

Sure, it's possible that Andersson plays on the left. But I doubt that any coach would do that. It would be easier to give Andersson big minutes in the AHL at his natural position and just wait for things to open up for him in the NHL.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Honestly, if Andersson came out and was better than Stone, do you honestly expect Stone to be traded? The path of least resistance is to send Andersson down and "over cook" him and wait for an injury. But if he proves he's NHL ready, what is it telling him that he's not "NHL status" yet? It tells him he's just unlucky that the Flames have a glut of RD already. So what does Andersson and his agent consider at that point?
.

I think this is largely irrelevant because the chances of this being true are very small. And that's the assessment the brass would be making. What is the probability our kids are ready and how far up the line up do we think they can play? If they felt Rasmus was likely to be better now than Stone is - then they would not have signed Stone.
Andersson is a kid that showed up out of shape a mere year ago. What are the chances that he is ready to displace a proven and effective NHL dman like Stone?
If you base your season success on that type of "hope" then you are setting yourself up for disaster.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Honestly, if Andersson came out and was better than Stone, do you honestly expect Stone to be traded? The path of least resistance is to send Andersson down and "over cook" him and wait for an injury. But if he proves he's NHL ready, what is it telling him that he's not "NHL status" yet? It tells him he's just unlucky that the Flames have a glut of RD already. So what does Andersson and his agent consider at that point?

Sure, it's possible that Andersson plays on the left. But I doubt that any coach would do that. It would be easier to give Andersson big minutes in the AHL at his natural position and just wait for things to open up for him in the NHL.

If Andersson showed himself to be clearly better than Stone, he would get the spot, Stone would be the #7, and Bartkowski would be off to Stockton.

If Andersson were marginally better, but not significantly enough to force their hand, they send him down to get ice time and tell him he'll be in the lineup as soon as there is an injury.

If, by the end of the year, Andersson has earned himself a full time job, they probably look to move Stone, unless they have ample room with the cap.

It really isn't that hard. And you are looking for a fight that isn't there. The organization has only one motive:: to put the best team on the ice that they can.

[MarkGio]

I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just pointing out the facts. There is a logjam in certain positions and with that comes challenges. Don't be so defensive.

It's also possible that Andersson gets packaged to move out Brouwer or acquire a top RW or upgrade the goalie. Or whatever else. But there's no question that Andersson is looking good at a 3 year logjam.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by timbit

It's supposed to be tough.
If it was easy...anyone could do it.

They are trying to build a championship team.

They are also trying to maintain a competitive team. You have to keep the talent rolling in and allow the players to go through the transition period, get that initial experience under their belt, go through the learning curve, and then become a player a year or two down the road. The learning curve doesn't change for a player because they rode the bus for another year. The same adjustment period just gets pushed off another year, and the player has potential to plateau. You know how exactly how it works and how that transition period takes time.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

I think this is largely irrelevant because the chances of this being true are very small. And that's the assessment the brass would be making. What is the probability our kids are ready and how far up the line up do we think they can play? If they felt Rasmus was likely to be better now than Stone is - then they would not have signed Stone.
Andersson is a kid that showed up out of shape a mere year ago. What are the chances that he is ready to displace a proven and effective NHL dman like Stone?
If you base your season success on that type of "hope" then you are setting yourself up for disaster.

Yeah sure Andersson today probably isn't as good as Stone today. But they signed Stone for 3 years. I called the Hickey situation and people got defensive. Because they don't look at the perspective of the player, they only think of their own fanaticism and assume the best for themselves, aggressively attacking any deviation from that homerism.

Now I'm not saying Andersson will request a trade or something. But if he has a good camp, good year in the AHL, then he would have to be dumb to not explore his options. There's no question he's got a high ceiling and talent, and there's also no question that he believes that himself.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Fans worried that prospects will leave because they're not being handed spots is ridiculous IMO.

Good teams have depth. Most players want to play on good teams. They know full well that they will have to improve in order to beat out NHLers and make the NHL. That organizations don't gift them a spot when they haven't earned it yet is not a bad thing to them unless they're completely entitled.

That whole angle is completely overblown IMO. We have management, scouts and coaches watching our kids in the AHL to see when they're ready. When they're ready they'll make room for them and not before. Fans getting paranoid we're not leaving enough room for them long term is neither here nor there.

If at some point we have too many good NHL defensemen that's the best kind of problem to have. Don't see how anybody can put a negative spin on our defensive depth.

[CliffFletcher]

Andersson had 22 points in 56 games in the AHL last season, or 0.41 p/g (good for 94th among defencemen). For context, Brandon Montour had 32 points in 36 games (0.89 p/g) before earning his call up. The season before, Montour had 57 points in 68 games in the AHL. Andersson is 20. Montour is 23.

Relax, people. Goalies typically break into the NHL at 24-26. Defencemen at 22-24. Forwards at 21-23. Most of the Flames prospects currently in the AHL need another season or two. Nobody is being kept back.

[Roof-Daddy]

Right D

NHL 1 - Hamilton
NHL 2 - Hamonic
NHL 3 - Stone

AHL 1 - Andersson
AHL 2 - TBD
AHL 3 - TBD

Hamilton, Hamonic and Stone will not be healthy for 82 games each.

Hamonic has missed on average 17 games per season the last 4 seasons.
Stone has missed on average 10 games per season the last 4 seasons.

Andersson will likely get 10-20 NHL games next season as long as he shows he's ready for it, the rest of the time he will be on the top pairing in Stockton.

Left D

NHL 1 - Giordano
NHL 2 - Brodie
NHL 3 - Competition between Kulak, Wotherspoon and Bartkowski

Best guy gets most minutes as #6, next best guy gets to be the #7, 3rd best gets waived and sent to Stockton.

AHL 1 - Kylington
AHL 2 - Worst of Kulak, Wotherspoon and Bartkowski
AHL 3 - TBD

IMO the way Treliving has the D set up now is perfect to gradually bring in Kulak, Andersson, Kylington, Valimaki and Fox over the next few seasons so they are ready to be plugged in when Brodie, Hamonic and Stone are set to be UFA's so that we can have a smooth transition and remain very competitive while the retool the D core.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Honestly, if Andersson came out and was better than Stone, do you honestly expect Stone to be traded? The path of least resistance is to send Andersson down and "over cook" him and wait for an injury. But if he proves he's NHL ready, what is it telling him that he's not "NHL status" yet? It tells him he's just unlucky that the Flames have a glut of RD already. So what does Andersson and his agent consider at that point?

Sure, it's possible that Andersson plays on the left. But I doubt that any coach would do that. It would be easier to give Andersson big minutes in the AHL at his natural position and just wait for things to open up for him in the NHL.

I think the answer is in your question.

How can Andersson prove he's better without an injury or an opportunity? In that you have a potential problem but a necessary one as the opposite is even worse.

If the Flames moved Stone before training camp because Andersson looked great in Penticton they'd be idiots (and I'm not suggesting you said that).

So instead you watch and you learn. If he looks ahead of everyone in Penticton you note it, and make sure you leg him out in main camp. When rosters get cut down you play him in those last exhibition games against mostly NHL teams and you take notes.

If there are no injuries then you send him down with the word that he's close. Go dominate the AHL and we'll go from there.

Injury comes up and you bring him up. If he does well you have a decision.

I think it has to go that way.

The alternative is MacTavish telling the media that Draisaitl has made the team in the middle of summer. NO thanks

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Totally agree here.

My philosophy is that you should not be trading or signing depth veterans for 3rd/4th line, 3rd D pairing or backup goalies.

No reason to trade for Lack when our goalies have shown so much in the AHL. No reason to get both Stone AND Hamonic (the latter at an exorbitant price). You can always find replacement level players at any point in the year.

Way off in my opinion and a massive overrating of our current prospect base. One injury to a goalie or Dman and we have Kulak in the top 4 or Rittich starting several games in a row. I just don't think they are ready for that and the Flames are an injury away from the lottery. Considering they traded next years first they can't risk that pick being top 10.

No injuries the team could theoretically have a rookie 3rd pair and a young goalie. 1-2 injuries the lack of depth is clear and the team will fail

[Five-hole]

I think there is a big difference in saying "we are leaving a spot open on the 3rd line for Jankowski" and saying "we have an open spot on the roster, and we think one of 4 or 5 rookies are in competition for that spot".

I think, historically, we haven't really had those spots. Once Monahan was drafted, four years in a row guys have forced their way onto the roster, but these were guys picked in the top 6 (or were Gaudreau), and were clearly better NOW than probably all but 5 or 6 forwards.

If we sign no more D before camp and say, there are two spots (even three) on the NHL team for defencemen, great. If we sign another stop-gap vet D and say to waiver-eligible 20 year olds that you have to be clearly better NOW than a guy who has been in the league for 5 years but who will never be anything more than a 6-7D, there's a problem. Particularly if your definition of "better NOW" means "makes the fewest mistakes".

I am not advocating that a spot be left open for a particular player. I am advocating that rookies be given a legitimate chance to win a spot without waiver eligibility factoring in, without respect to vets factoring in where it took 1.5 years too long to send Bollig down because you didn't want to slight a guy with a cup ring (or whatever), without burying one-way deals in the AHL factoring in, and factoring in that Rasmus Andersson may be better than Bartkowski in 3 of every 4 games but will make a costly mistake in the 4th game, that maybe he should get the spot anyway.

The part that I think this organization has forgotten or has overlooked in the past is that for a player to truly become NHL ready, in most cases, they need actual NHL time. It is rare that a player can become 100% NHL ready playing in the AHL.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The other thing for me is the past.

I've been here for 17 years and have seen a lot of prospects come and go over the past two decades many of which were at one point thought to be obstructed by Flames management that had it in for young players.

The absolute postcard for this was Dustin Boyd.

I do think it's appropriate to be forced to make room for a player and not leave spots open for them going into camp (~cough Edmonton ~cough). The key then however is when a player proves he's ready you don't come up with excuses to take said action.

I agree in general, but you have to keep in mind that progression is not linear and that a player may be ready to make the jump at time A, but isn't given the opportunity, and then sustains an injury, or goes into a slump, or gets frustrated, and then never gets back to the point when they're ready to make the jump.

The inevitable comeback is that if a player can't prove they're ready for the NHL over a long time period, they never will be truly ready for the NHL, I think may be true some of the time, maybe even most of the time, but it's not true all the time.

If your organizational philosophy is that a player has to consistently prove they belong on the NHL roster NOW by the way they play in the AHL, I submit to you that you WILL miss out on some NHL players.

The question, and I don't think anybody has the answer, is whether you get more NHL players as a result of this philosophy than you lose as a result of this philosophy.

Maybe Dustin Boyd could have been an NHLer if he were given the opportunity when he was peaking. We will never know, because he wasn't. And I don't mean to get into an argument as to whether Dustin Boyd, even at his peak, was ready for the NHL, because I honestly don't remember.

I think a too-rigid philosophy that treats all players the same, including that they have to continue to prove their worth in the AHL for long periods of time before being given a chance at the NHL level, ignores that hockey players are human and therefore not all the same. I think you have said as much in this thread.