Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
I don't see that number being adopted. I see people agreeing, I see someone suggesting 41 games in a single season. I searched for this and see no set criteria established. Has this always been the criteria going back years? Did it change for this year?
It would be neat if the moderation team didn't try to explain away conflicting opinions as being pissy and instead focused on the actual opinions and arguments.
So then make that argument, apply it to other teams and see what happens.
There were 30 rookies in the NHL who played between 20 and 30 games in the regular season last year. There are 17 rookies who played between 25 and 30 games last year. The Ducks had 3 guys play between 25 and 30 games as rookies.
Sure, for this exercise it maybe makes the flames look a bit worse than they are relative to other orgs because their two best prospects each played the exact cutoff of games, but this is also happening in other organizations.
Relative to everyone else, a year after finishing 28th in the league from the same guy and trading away Adam Fox, a 31st ranking is entirely plausible/believable/attributable and is a reflection upon not making enough draft picks in the preceding 3 year time frame as explained in his ranking.
Carve this post into stone tablets because it's the definitive post about why Calgary's prospect ranking is where it is:
There were 40 guys who played between 25 and 41 games last year as rookies. Every team in the league is impacted by the 'arbitrary' cutoff.
Apply a 41 game standard and see for yourself how greatly it impacts the Flames vs other organizations. There are really good players there for every team in the league.
Again, yes, it sucks that two of the flames top prospects hit the 25 game mark exactly, but would the Sharks ranking not have benefited from Suomela and his 27 games? Ryan Graves in Colorado with his 26 games? Washington and Siegenthaler's 26 regular season games? Troy Terry and his 34 games with Anaheim?
It seems to me the problem for many posters in this thread is not that the Flames rank 31st, but that the Oilers rank 9th. Who freakin' cares?
|
Number one ... I'm not a moderator. And if I was, posting as myself, I certainly wouldn't be speaking for the Moderation team. The pissy comment was directed at an Oilers fan that spends his time looking to trip up any Calgary news item that slants to the positive ... so I can see why that would irk you as he likely often steals your thunder.
And I've said three times now ... it's August. It's newsworthy to me that the Oilers are 9th and the Flames 31st when the cut off that wasn't applied unfairly graduates the two best Calgary prospects at the exact number of games needed; one with regular season games, and the other with a nuance that you add playoff games to it too.
If you don't see that as worth discussing then don't.
But at least you've actually said something this time. Nice change from the snide one liners that have made you intolerable.