Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
Why does that exact narrative have to be fulfilled?
The NHL is a chicken-and-egg league.
If the Flames failed to give a potentially NHL calibre player an opportunity - that becomes a self-fulfilling outcome independant of opportunity with another team - because the majority of NHL teams prioritize the prospects in their own system. The converse us also true - if a team gives a non NHL-calibre player an opportunity - it becomes an equally self-fulfilling outcome that a guy like Kevin Rooney can get hot for a handful of games and score himself a two year one way contract in free agency.
Not all NHL calibre players get NHL opportunity. With the Flames this seems to be a theme, and I don't think a guy like Morgan Klimchik had needed to be an impact player to have potentially had a Blake Coleman type career if given a Blake Coleman type opportunity. Instead we paid 5M year for a past-his-prime Blake Coleman. And therein lies the problem. Of course it might have been more humiliating if, for instance, an Oliver Kylington had been claimed on waivers and proceeded to have a season like he did last year, or even better (he was hardly given a ton of opportunity last year himself). But that is missing the key point - that the Flames refuse to see what they have.
Not all players that get copious NHL opportunity elsewhere are NHL calibre. But the only way to know is to see what you have by giving kids a shot. Bill Peters sort of started them on the right path as he really enabled Mangiapane and Andersson (and to a lesser extent Kylington - also driven out by Treliving acquiring Fantenberg) but since his tenure the Flames have regressed to the same issues that have plagued them under every coach not named Peters or Hartley for thr last 30+ years. The Flames think they are able to assess players in practice and preseason, but fail to recognize that their own biases will always influence such an evaluation.
Asking for such a list is ignoring the larger point. That successful organizations give their own drafted players more opportunity to sink or swim. The only excuses not to are
A) Genuinely Contending for a Stanley Cup - which the Flames have not come close to in decades. The bar for this organization is winning a playoff round.
B) Atrocious amateur scouting - which is evidently not the case with the Flames outsixe of perhaps the goalie position. The Flames have shown to be one of the better amateur scouting organizations in the league despite the deficit in picks. Which makes the lack of opportunity more baffling.
|
Not sure what you're saying.
That there won't be a list because ... why?
Calgary doesn't promote a player and the rest of the league just leaves him be? That doesn't make any sense to me.
You're essentially saying the other 31 teams have the exact same opinion which brings me back to my original point doesn't it? There really isn't any proof that Calgary is unique or harder on young players than other organizations.
And Coleman vs Klimchuck?
Coleman is an elite play driving two way forward on a contract that makes sense. Klimchuk played in two other organizations after leaving Calgary, if he had Blake Coleman pedigree he's still be playing.