Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
If you look at Treliving's tenure, the Bollig, Setoguchi, Chiasson, Brouwer, Raymonds he has brought in simply haven't definitively done enough to keep prospects playing well, out of the lineup, other than "being veterans" and put on a pedestal solely for that reason.
Playing in the minors is a grind as it is, but knowing that you won't get a chance has to be absolutely draining, which I'm sure explains why Baertschi and Reinhart wanted out and why Poirier/Arnold and co have managed to produce less and less every year. It's not even a character or toughness thing, it's human nature to need a carrot in front of you. Optics matter to these kids.
snip
Reality is, this team isn't as young as we claim it is. The Leafs are a young team. The Flames? Our top line is carried by a polished veteran (Backlund). Our entire blue line right now has only one player younger than 27 (Hamilton, who is an early bloomer that made the NHL at age 19). Many teams ahead of us in the standings are younger on a whole - Columbus, Ottawa, Toronto, Edmonton and their success is not by chance.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
I have no problem with Wideman at present, actually. he's a serviceable four/five who has his bad games and his okay games. He's old AF though, with no replacement in sight as there is no way Andersson will get an opportunity to be our 6 or 5 next year no matter how well he plays.
Brodie nor Backlund are "young" players. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their prime at this point. That leaves Hamilton, Bennett, and Tkachuk. Two high draft picks and a player where another team took all the development risk.
The Flames might have a pretty young core, but they are not a young team. The average Forward line age or D-pair age is NHL average or older.
|
Dealing with the bolded first, that is blatantly false. The Flames are ranked 20th in the league in terms of age (meaning they are the 11th youngest team in the NHL). That's including 3 guys that are likely to be off the team next year: 34 year old Deryk Engelland, 33 year old Dennis Wideman, and 31 year old Ladislav Smid. Not to mention both goalies are 30 and I'd be surprised if both or either are brought back next year.
The only player from the core that would be considered in his "prime" years is Brodie, and he's still definitely young since the average age in the NHL is 27.3 years old. Backlund is still relatively young, but pretty much league average now in age.
I object to the idea that the veterans are placed on pedestals. They're given a chance to succeed and fill a hole that a rookie wouldn't be capable of filling adequately. Most of these guys were reclamation projects and were designed to be place holders so that they could be jettisoned the moment a younger player looked like they were capable of doing a better job in that place. The young players didn't for the most part, and that's why they stayed on the team. When they were replaceable, they were ejected. Setoguchi sent to the farm. Raymond was bought out. Bollig sent to the farm. Chiasson will work his way out of the lineup. I know you hate Brouwer, so I won't even bother with that one. Point is, this team has needed a LOT of place holders over the years since the farm was in such bad shape.
You have no idea how the club views Andersson, so your statement is a bit of a reach, but chances are he'll need at least one more season in the minors...like most defensemen not drafted in the 1st round do. However, if he impresses in camp, he'll probably be given a chance, the same way Kulak was given a chance 2 years ago and this year as well. What he does with that chance is up to him, but I'd rather he make the bulk of his mistakes in the minors than on a club trying to compete for the Stanley Cup.
And lastly....holy hell, are you actually talking about Max Reinhart like he was destined to be an NHLer? He was a 3rd round pick, and the vast majority of those picks never even play games in the NHL. He had a decent minor league career, but he was never good enough to warrant staying in the NHL, despite callups of 24 games over 3 seasons. He went to another franchise and they didn't see any more in him either. He's now playing in the German league putting up a little more than 0.5 points per game. Baertschi? That's been discussed to death, and he had a LOT of opportunity in the NHL. Poirier's regression is on him and nobody else. He has been given games in the NHL to give him some sort of "carrot", but he's not put the work into his game that he needs to. Arnold never looked good as a pro, and some guys just aren't cut out for the next level. Not a big deal when you're talking about a 4th round pick.
You seem to be obsessed with youth as the only way to be successful, but while there are examples of the Oilers (which is dubious because they are overly reliant on one young player), there are plenty of other examples of age and experience making teams successful. The Stanley Cup finalists from one year ago are the two oldest clubs in the league: San Jose-1, Pittsburgh-2. BTW, Ottawa is the 8th oldest team in the league. They aren't exactly young.
There are plenty of examples of young teams that are good, and a lot more that are bad. There are examples of old teams that are great, and others that are flat out horrible (Colorado, Dallas).
There's no correlation with youth and success. You need to have some GOOD youth to be successful into the future, and the Flames have that. How successful they are is a crapshoot, and it will likely depend on how they construct a team going forward after some of the rebuild veterans are off the team.