[News] 31 in 31: Flames Edition

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Saying Parsons is our top prospect is not laughable it's perfectly defensible.

What's laughable is saying Bennett is a dud. Look at the Stanley Cup Contender thread for some truly laughable statements.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

My god you say some ridiculous things. Who is a better goalie than Parsons? I guarantee you that you are talking out of your ass again, Parsons is easily our most coveted prospect by other teams.

And if Parsons were not a London Knight you wouldn't even know how to spell his name. I want Parsons to turn out, but right now he is no better than Thatcher Demko, Mason MacDonald, Vitek Vanecek, or Brandon Halverson. The pros will tell you how good a prospect he is, because he just showed he could carry a bunch of 17-19 year olds. How is that going to translate against the professionals who shoot harder and faster than anything he's seen to date? That is why you never get high on goaltenders. They miss 90% of the time.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Saying Parsons is our top prospect is not laughable it's perfectly defensible.

What's laughable is saying Bennett is a dud. Look at the Stanley Cup Contender thread for some truly laughable statements.

See, that I agree with. You can't make that call until someone has had some development time in the pros. Bennett is going tribe a player because of what he has done in the pros. Many players his age are in the minors. He's playing and contributing to a NHL team. He's proven himself as a NHL player, now it is up to him to take the next step. Does he have the tools? Yes. Does he have the tool kit? We'll find out this year.

Parsons is still years away from the NHL. He won't have his chance to prove anyone wrong until he works through the ECHL, the AHL, and shows some stuff in a call up. That is a long way away, regardless of the upside people see. He's a long shot because he hasn't played a shift of pro hockey, and that is a huge step up from junior.

[Calgary4LIfe]

There is absolutely no way that MacDonald is ahead of Parsons. 1 year of development in the ECHL where he posted poor numbers makes him ahead?

You have not been watching Parsons if you even consider MacDonald ahead of Parsons.

The BIGGEST issue with goalies is consistency. Consistency, consistency, CONSISTENCY. Every single pro and amateur goalie in the world is likely to make an elite-level save. Unless you are elite, you can't make those saves consistently while saving almost all the shots that you should be saving otherwise.

Parsons is ELITE for his age group. He also rises to the challenge. Tell me about a big game - like an elimination game where either his team or the opposing team could be eliminated - where Parsons performed poorly. I will tell you about the ones where he stands on his head and makes 50+ and even 60+ saves.

When was the last time that you have heard Parsons having a bad game? Not since I have been tracking him. I haven't heard of a single bad game, and that's crazy to me. Maybe I missed a few, and I am sure there were probably a couple (Price has a bad game now and then too, after all). Bad games in a row? Not Parsons.

I get that goalies are so incredibly difficult to translate and make predictions on. That's fair if you want to criticize selecting Parsons as Calgary's top prospect, but Mason MacDonald ahead of Parsons? It isn't even close. Mason MacDonald has never had that consistency in his game. He was selected due to his athleticism and ability to steal games, but has unfortunately never improved upon his consistency yet.

Parsons is yet another level higher in the 'elite' side of things, and already has amazing consistency. That's what sets him apart. That's why I have him as Calgary's top goalie prospect (and it isn't even close in my mind, and I like Gillies and Rittich).

I don't have him as Calgary's top prospect, but probably because goalies are so difficult to predict. However, he most certainly is in the top 5, and if someone has him as Calgary's top prospect, I wouldn't argue with it either.

I remember one scout saying that he hasn't seen a goalie like Parsons go through the OHL for the last 10 years. Let that sink in.

[TheScorpion]

What is even happening in here?

[indes]

I'm confused...is our best goalie prospect Mike Smith?

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by New Era

And if Parsons were not a London Knight you wouldn't even know how to spell his name. I want Parsons to turn out, but right now he is no better than Thatcher Demko, Mason MacDonald, Vitek Vanecek, or Brandon Halverson. The pros will tell you how good a prospect he is, because he just showed he could carry a bunch of 17-19 year olds. How is that going to translate against the professionals who shoot harder and faster than anything he's seen to date? That is why you never get high on goaltenders. They miss 90% of the time.

World Juniors? Quite the hole you're digging here. Very entertaining.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Completely]

Originally Posted by indes

I'm confused...is our best goalie prospect Mike Smith?

Im pretty sure im the best goalie prospect at this point. dark times...

[robaur]

DobberHockey projects:

Gaudreau: 27 goals 50 assists 77 points in 77 games
Monahan: 29 goals 37 assists 66 points in 82 games
Backlund: 23 goals 31 assists 54 points in 75 games
Hamilton: 14 goals 38 assists 58 points in 79 games
Tkachuk: 15 goals 32 assists 47 points in 75 games
Brodie: 7 goals 37 assists 44 points in 78 games
Frolik: 43 points in 77 games
Versteeg: 36 points in 69 games
Giordano: 37 points in 75 games
Bennett: 36 points in 78 games
Brouwer: 32 points in 80 games
Ferland: 27 points in 73 games

Mike Smith: 31 wins in 53 starts with 2 shutouts
Eddie Lack: 17 wins in 33 starts with 1 shutout

Totals 48 wins which equal 96 points ....they haven't released their standings projection yet but with some loser points that puts the Flames on track between 100-105 points. Good to see.

One thing that stands out for me is the split between Mike Smith and Eddie Lack....unless they're accounting for a smith injury...I think he starts upwards of 62-65 games this season...and wins about ~38 games.

[Gaudfather]

Originally Posted by robaur

DobberHockey projects:

Gaudreau: 27 goals 50 assists 77 points in 77 games
Monahan: 29 goals 37 assists 66 points in 82 games
Backlund: 23 goals 31 assists 54 points in 75 games
Hamilton: 14 goals 38 assists 58 points in 79 games
Tkachuk: 15 goals 32 assists 47 points in 75 games
Brodie: 7 goals 37 assists 44 points in 78 games
Frolik: 43 points in 77 games
Versteeg: 36 points in 69 games
Giordano: 37 points in 75 games
Bennett: 36 points in 78 games
Brouwer: 32 points in 80 games
Ferland: 27 points in 73 games

Mike Smith: 31 wins in 53 starts with 2 shutouts
Eddie Lack: 17 wins in 33 starts with 1 shutout

Totals 48 wins which equal 96 points ....they haven't released their standings projection yet but with some loser points that puts the Flames on track between 100-105 points. Good to see.

One thing that stands out for me is the split between Mike Smith and Eddie Lack....unless they're accounting for a smith injury...I think he starts upwards of 62-65 games this season...and wins about ~38 games.

Projections for Ferland, Bennett, Steeger and Gio may be on the low side.

[GoFlamesGo89]

Originally Posted by robaur

DobberHockey projects:

Gaudreau: 27 goals 50 assists 77 points in 77 games
Monahan: 29 goals 37 assists 66 points in 82 games
Backlund: 23 goals 31 assists 54 points in 75 games
Hamilton: 14 goals 38 assists 58 points in 79 games
Tkachuk: 15 goals 32 assists 47 points in 75 games
Brodie: 7 goals 37 assists 44 points in 78 games
Frolik: 43 points in 77 games
Versteeg: 36 points in 69 games
Giordano: 37 points in 75 games
Bennett: 36 points in 78 games
Brouwer: 32 points in 80 games
Ferland: 27 points in 73 games

Mike Smith: 31 wins in 53 starts with 2 shutouts
Eddie Lack: 17 wins in 33 starts with 1 shutout

Totals 48 wins which equal 96 points ....they haven't released their standings projection yet but with some loser points that puts the Flames on track between 100-105 points. Good to see.

One thing that stands out for me is the split between Mike Smith and Eddie Lack....unless they're accounting for a smith injury...I think he starts upwards of 62-65 games this season...and wins about ~38 games.

Number of goalie starts adds up to 86-- so point totals may not be that high if win % for each goalie remains the same.

[Dajazz]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

What is even happening in here?

Digging some holes. And they're getting deeper.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by GoFlamesGo89

Number of goalie starts adds up to 86-- so point totals may not be that high if win % for each goalie remains the same.

Lack gets traded after Parsons records 5 shutouts in first 5 games in Stockton and gets moved up to the big club. Lack gains extra starts with his new club that traded for him because their starter went down with a career ending injury.

Is it September yet.....

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by GoFlamesGo89

Number of goalie starts adds up to 86-- so point totals may not be that high if win % for each goalie remains the same.

I noticed that too. Maybe this means Lack is traded/lost on waivers after Parsons, Gillies or Rittich steals his job? I also don't think Smith was brought in to only play close to 50 games, and if he stays healthy will play closer to 65.

The point predictions seem reasonable but I wouldn't put much stock in it. It looks like they randomly picked games played, used the players career points per game, then increased younger players and decreased older players.

Also, the intense argument that Parsons should not be the top prospect was too funny. He finished 2nd in the CP prospect ranking. It's not a stretch at all to call him the top prospect, especially considering he has a far higher ceiling than Jankowski and I suspect many votes for Janko were due to name recognition.

[robaur]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

I think Parsons has Carey Price level upside if he figures everything out. So yeah, I can see him being ranked #1 on the list. In terms of upside, there is nobody in the organization with higher potential. Jankowski is the most NHL ready of all the prospects and will likely start in the NHL to start the year.

This. I just wrote it in the Tyler Parsons thread before coming here to read this one.

Parsons has weak fundamentals?

Like c'mon...really? How long have you spent watching hockey and studied prospects and their games? That comment is so disappointing.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Tyler Parsons is an excellent prospect, and we are lucky to have him, but like any goaltending prospect, you never know what you have until they face the pros. Everyone likes to talk about Matt Murray, but he was a middling goaltender prospect until he got to the AHL and showed he had greater game than anticipated. People tend to forget that Murray posted save percentages in the OHL of .887, .876, .894, and then a .921. It was his second year in the AHL when the Penguins found their future goaltender, when Murray posted a .941 save percentage, then followed that up with a .931, which he maintained when he made it to the NHL as a backup.

Tyler Parsons gets everyone excited, and rightly so. In junior he posted save percentages of .905, .921, .925, while winning games in spectacular fashion. But that is junior hockey. The road to the NHL is littered with goaltenders who lit up junior, then couldn't handle the shots from the pros or the speed of the game. I will be interested to see how Parsons handles his first year as a pro and what performance he puts up. After seeing that I think we will be able to make a call as to what type of prospect he is and what improvements he needs to make. Right now he gets high marks for his style of play, but he'll have to prove that style works in the pros. Parsons athletic style may not translate. There is a lot of Jonathan Quick in him, but there are very few Jonathan Quicks around because of the style of game they play. The NHL goaltender has evolved into more of a shotblocker, relying on fundamentals, positioning, pure girth and equipment to keep pucks out of the net. Ben Bishop (girth) and Matt Murray (equipment) are your prototypical stoppers now. How is an average size athletic goaltender going to stack up? We don't know because so few of them make it. The pros will prove his mettle.

I understand the excitement over a player like Parsons, but Flames fans should be more than aware of falling in love with junior prospects before they have a chance to show what they do in the pros. Especially goaltenders. Do Flames fans not remember when Trevor Kidd was the future of the team? All the excitement of him playing for his national team? Or fast forward a bit and how incredible we felt with the troika of Irving, Lelande and Keetley? Just a reminder, but Leland Irving posted .930, .925, .929, .919 save percentages in junior, then ,912, .905, .913, .902 in the pros before falling off the map. Kevin Lalande posted .920, .916, .919. save percentage in junior, then as a pro posted years of .932 and .925 in the ECHL and .929, .927, and .912 in the AHL before heading off the KHL. Matt Keatley put up .933, .916, .913 save percentages in junior before posting some real middling numbers in the minors. What heady times, especially for Irving who looked like he was right there with Carey Price, who rode shotgun for at the Worlds in junior. Irving was the next great goaltender for the Flames. Well, until he got to the pros.

For a more recent example, look no further than John Gillies. This is a kid who has also done nothing but impress in junior/college days too. Playing at a harder level he posted .931, .931, .930 save percentages before hitting the pros. Since he turned pro he's posted .920 and .910, while making the adjustment. Making progress, but still not there.

Making the jump to the pros is not easy and is a process. All goaltenders go through it. Does Parsons have potential? Hell yes, plenty of it. But never trust a goaltenders potential until they get to the pros. For all we know, we may be looking at the Robbie Schremp of goaltenders. Lets see what he has next year as a pro before proclaiming him a franchise anything.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by New Era

Tyler Parsons is an excellent prospect, and we are lucky to have him, but like any goaltending prospect, you never know what you have until they face the pros. Everyone likes to talk about Matt Murray, but he was a middling goaltender prospect until he got to the AHL and showed he had greater game than anticipated. People tend to forget that Murray posted save percentages in the OHL of .887, .876, .894, and then a .921. It was his second year in the AHL when the Penguins found their future goaltender, when Murray posted a .941 save percentage, then followed that up with a .931, which he maintained when he made it to the NHL as a backup.

Tyler Parsons gets everyone excited, and rightly so. In junior he posted save percentages of .905, .921, .925, while winning games in spectacular fashion. But that is junior hockey. The road to the NHL is littered with goaltenders who lit up junior, then couldn't handle the shots from the pros or the speed of the game. I will be interested to see how Parsons handles his first year as a pro and what performance he puts up. After seeing that I think we will be able to make a call as to what type of prospect he is and what improvements he needs to make. Right now he gets high marks for his style of play, but he'll have to prove that style works in the pros. Parsons athletic style may not translate. There is a lot of Jonathan Quick in him, but there are very few Jonathan Quicks around because of the style of game they play. The NHL goaltender has evolved into more of a shotblocker, relying on fundamentals, positioning, pure girth and equipment to keep pucks out of the net. Ben Bishop (girth) and Matt Murray (equipment) are your prototypical stoppers now. How is an average size athletic goaltender going to stack up? We don't know because so few of them make it. The pros will prove his mettle.

I understand the excitement over a player like Parsons, but Flames fans should be more than aware of falling in love with junior prospects before they have a chance to show what they do in the pros. Especially goaltenders. Do Flames fans not remember when Trevor Kidd was the future of the team? All the excitement of him playing for his national team? Or fast forward a bit and how incredible we felt with the troika of Irving, Lelande and Keetley? Just a reminder, but Leland Irving posted .930, .925, .929, .919 save percentages in junior, then ,912, .905, .913, .902 in the pros before falling off the map. Kevin Lalande posted .920, .916, .919. save percentage in junior, then as a pro posted years of .932 and .925 in the ECHL and .929, .927, and .912 in the AHL before heading off the KHL. Matt Keatley put up .933, .916, .913 save percentages in junior before posting some real middling numbers in the minors. What heady times, especially for Irving who looked like he was right there with Carey Price, who rode shotgun for at the Worlds in junior. Irving was the next great goaltender for the Flames. Well, until he got to the pros.

For a more recent example, look no further than John Gillies. This is a kid who has also done nothing but impress in junior/college days too. Playing at a harder level he posted .931, .931, .930 save percentages before hitting the pros. Since he turned pro he's posted .920 and .910, while making the adjustment. Making progress, but still not there.

Making the jump to the pros is not easy and is a process. All goaltenders go through it. Does Parsons have potential? Hell yes, plenty of it. But never trust a goaltenders potential until they get to the pros. For all we know, we may be looking at the Robbie Schremp of goaltenders. Lets see what he has next year as a pro before proclaiming him a franchise anything.

Unless you're a fortune teller, this post means nothing. Right now, Parsons is a top NHL prospect for what he has DONE. If he craps the bed this year, his stock drops. I'm sure Parsons is well aware that to play in these pro leagues, he needs to play like he belongs in it.

To summarize, you're rating prospects the way you PROJECT them to be, everyone else is rating them for what they've done. And I known you'll be the first poster saying "I told you so" to everyone if Parsons does in fact suck later on, which is going to be rather annoying.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

To summarize, you're rating prospects the way you PROJECT them to be, everyone else is rating them for what they've done.

And there is the disconnect. Rating prospects is actually all about PROJECTING what they WILL be. Unless you're the Edmonton Oilers, you don't draft a kid because he just scored 60 goals in junior. You draft a kid because you see something in his skillset that makes you believe that will translate to the next level, and the level after that. Once a kid is selected, all that matters is his development from that point on. What they have done in the past is irrelevant and no team is worried about what a guy has done in the past. Teams only care about what a guy can do for them in the future and if they believe there is a NHL career in that player's potential.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by New Era

Tyler Parsons is an excellent prospect, and we are lucky to have him, but like any goaltending prospect, you never know what you have until they face the pros. Everyone likes to talk about Matt Murray, but he was a middling goaltender prospect until he got to the AHL and showed he had greater game than anticipated. People tend to forget that Murray posted save percentages in the OHL of .887, .876, .894, and then a .921. It was his second year in the AHL when the Penguins found their future goaltender, when Murray posted a .941 save percentage, then followed that up with a .931, which he maintained when he made it to the NHL as a backup.

Tyler Parsons gets everyone excited, and rightly so. In junior he posted save percentages of .905, .921, .925, while winning games in spectacular fashion. But that is junior hockey. The road to the NHL is littered with goaltenders who lit up junior, then couldn't handle the shots from the pros or the speed of the game. I will be interested to see how Parsons handles his first year as a pro and what performance he puts up. After seeing that I think we will be able to make a call as to what type of prospect he is and what improvements he needs to make. Right now he gets high marks for his style of play, but he'll have to prove that style works in the pros. Parsons athletic style may not translate. There is a lot of Jonathan Quick in him, but there are very few Jonathan Quicks around because of the style of game they play. The NHL goaltender has evolved into more of a shotblocker, relying on fundamentals, positioning, pure girth and equipment to keep pucks out of the net. Ben Bishop (girth) and Matt Murray (equipment) are your prototypical stoppers now. How is an average size athletic goaltender going to stack up? We don't know because so few of them make it. The pros will prove his mettle.

I understand the excitement over a player like Parsons, but Flames fans should be more than aware of falling in love with junior prospects before they have a chance to show what they do in the pros. Especially goaltenders. Do Flames fans not remember when Trevor Kidd was the future of the team? All the excitement of him playing for his national team? Or fast forward a bit and how incredible we felt with the troika of Irving, Lelande and Keetley? Just a reminder, but Leland Irving posted .930, .925, .929, .919 save percentages in junior, then ,912, .905, .913, .902 in the pros before falling off the map. Kevin Lalande posted .920, .916, .919. save percentage in junior, then as a pro posted years of .932 and .925 in the ECHL and .929, .927, and .912 in the AHL before heading off the KHL. Matt Keatley put up .933, .916, .913 save percentages in junior before posting some real middling numbers in the minors. What heady times, especially for Irving who looked like he was right there with Carey Price, who rode shotgun for at the Worlds in junior. Irving was the next great goaltender for the Flames. Well, until he got to the pros.

For a more recent example, look no further than John Gillies. This is a kid who has also done nothing but impress in junior/college days too. Playing at a harder level he posted .931, .931, .930 save percentages before hitting the pros. Since he turned pro he's posted .920 and .910, while making the adjustment. Making progress, but still not there.

Making the jump to the pros is not easy and is a process. All goaltenders go through it. Does Parsons have potential? Hell yes, plenty of it. But never trust a goaltenders potential until they get to the pros. For all we know, we may be looking at the Robbie Schremp of goaltenders. Lets see what he has next year as a pro before proclaiming him a franchise anything.

Are you backing away from your "poor fundamentals" comment? Without that, the above argument looks like nothing more that "goalies are a crap-shoot, remember all the others that didn't work out?"

I'm certainly not able to judge a goalie's fundamentals, but others have commented just the opposite from what you did. If they're right, then in addition to how Parsons has so far progressed, it's not too difficult to justify an opinion that he's the top Flames' prospect.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by the2bears

Are you backing away from your "poor fundamentals" comment?

You're right, "poor" was poor choice of words. Weak is the better word. When Parsons gets to the pros the goaltender coaches are going to be working him hard on positioning and angles. This is his weakness and is a fundamental that coaches will demand. He's a very aggressive goaltender and that needs to be harnessed in. Parsons has a great skill set in having great feet and hands, but he has a commitment problem, so to speak. Every prospect has weakness and for Parsons it is his reliance on his athleticism and abandonment of fundamentals. That kind of makes him unique, as there aren't many like that in the NHL.

Without that, the above argument looks like nothing more that "goalies are a crap-shoot, remember all the others that didn't work out?"

That is kind of the point. That is why Treliving himself said the team would take goaltenders with regularity, even though there are so few development slots for them in the organization. Selecting goaltenders is a crapshoot and you really never know what you have until they are in the AHL.

For example, here's the list of the top 50 goaltending prospects from 2015-16.

http://ingoalmag.com/features/top-50...5-2016-season/

This should give a little more insight into just how big a crapshoot finding goaltenders is, and just how many of them fail. It should also be noted that the same publication had the Flames as the third best team in the western conference for goaltending prospects, with Gillies being the top guy, but prior to the emergence of Parsons. Also, when they rated the 2016 draft for goaltenders and Parsons was rated as being 6th best. Things change with goaltenders so quickly it is best not to get too excited about one until they have some pro time under their belt.