Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
Treliving is also a smart guy, and after going the Grossman/Wideman/Jokippakka plus two capable backups (in other organizations) route last year, I believe that he won't repeat what didn't work for this team.
Manson/Montour in Anaheim, for example are now considered huge assets, but only because they were allowed to play. Gibson ans Jones were given 1B duties for a year to prove their worth. Sometimes you have to trust your development in order to take that next step.
I'm all for buying a vet dman for Stockton as a fallback...
|
How is this a fair comparison? First of all, Anaheim did not start two rookie defensemen on their NHL roster in the same season. Manson first made the team in 2015–16 full time when he was 23-years-old. Brett Kulak is 23-years-old. Josh Manson did not make his NHL debut until just this season. He did so as an injury recall, and it occurred a few weeks before he turned 23-years-old. This was also after two full seasons in the AHL in which he scored at nearly a point/game pace.
The Flames have a few defensemen who have around the same amount of AHL experience, but I think it is fair to question whether they are yet good enough—or even if they ever will be for the NHL. Others who are likely good enough are still very young nd do not have the requisite experience.
Again: I think the Flames should and will have a rookie defenseman on the opening night roster, but ONLY ONE. They will also need to sign a veteran for depth/balance on the third pairing, but some of you are kidding yourselves if you think it is advisable for them to start two rookies in the NHL.