Quote:
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.
Quote:
|
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.