Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - The Flames' handling/plan for Zayne Parekh..

Calgary4LIfe · 01-21-2026, 01:13 PM

Huska has been great at developing kids so far. I doubt Parekh will be the exception here.

He is already giving Brzustewicz his 'next step' by inserting him into one of the PP units.

As for wanting to make Parekh play defence - of course he wants that, and he should! Parekh was fine so far - a couple of misreads, and he is getting out-muscled for now on puck-battles, but he has been fine. He doesn't fit into the team not because of the system, but the overall lack of skill on the roster, and the Flames were particularly awful overall offensively while Parekh was playing (not saying it was his fault - was just one of the tougher periods of the season). Huska had him playing PP1. He wouldn't have given Parekh that reward if Parekh didn't deserve it. Huska and Conroy have stated numerous times that Parekh is a special player, and that they don't want to change his game.

I think people are overly concerned about Huska being some kind of a stifling coach because the Flames don't score much. They don't score much because they aren't skilled, contrary to what some people believe. This team is one of the lowest-skilled teams in the league, period.

Sure, Huska can 'open things up' a bit more and allow them to play run-and-gun for now. Is that really a benefit, however? Maybe if Huberdeau was brought up in a better system, he would be a better player within this system today? Huberdeau was bound for a large regression since Zito revamped Florida. Out went players that couldn't play a playoff-style of game, and in came players that did. They had a rather smooth transition because of some of the existing pieces like Barkov (elite at that type of a game), and getting a winger like Tkachuk who is good defensively (since he was brought-up and developed in that environment).

Run-and-gun doesn't work in the playoffs. One team that really strikes me as a team that flopped hard by trying to play a more offensive style was the Oilers in the Hall-Eberle-RNH-Yakupov era. That team was easy to play against. Coach after coach came in and tried to get them to flip that switch, but weren't able to.

I don't mind as much if Conroy decides to 'burn it to the ground' (though one could make an argument that they are there already), as I think it is possible to build it back up, as long as you retain a certain style of play. If we bring up all these kids in an environment that is conducive to Huberdeau getting a bunch of points, what are we doing then? Developing more Huberdeaus, right?

Take a look at how Calgary actually plays offensively. Can anyone make the argument that Huska is stifling this team when we just watched Whitecloud in on a 2-on-1? I would have thought that Huska would have told him what is and isn't acceptable. We all saw Rasums pinch and be involved in odd-man rushes - in fact, every defencemen. Is Calgary just dumping and chasing and trying to live and die off the cycle like they were under Brent Sutter? Absolutely not - they often carry the puck in (or attempt to!), and rely on the dump when the other team is standing up at the blue-line.

What about the old tired line of: "They are a shot volume team shooting from the perimeter - nothing dangerous." Baloney. They are trying to generate high danger chances with plenty of back-door plays and bumper plays. They just lack talent, period. They are whiffing on some passes, whiffing on receiving passes, whiffing on shots, and missing the net sometimes (or shooting it straight into the breadbasket).

That's what a bad team without really skilled players do. Plus, deencemen and defensive players in general have an easier time stopping Calgary because so many players are playing out of position. There are no 1st line players on the team (though Gridin will get there). Imagine being used to going up against a McDavid - Draisaitl combo, or Eichel - Stone, etc., and now you are going up against.. Huberdeau? Kadri? These 2nd line guys are having a harder time scoring since they have to face the best defence pairings and shutdown lines.

Kadri still managed to get a career high in goals here - ditto Coleman, ditto Weegar, and Huberdeau was close!. However, how much easier did he have it when he got to play behind MacKinnon? They take all the hard match-ups. People want to show that Kadri had 87 points in 71 games in Colorado, but somehow 'sucks' in Calgary and it is Huska's fault? BS BS BS.

Kadri's next best seasons in point production where where? Yep, you guessed it - Calgary! 75 points and 67 points were his next two best seasons. Plus, once again, his career high in goals was actually in Calgary.

Sucks to be Kadri having to play in such a 'stifling' system.

Parekh was on PP1. How in the world is that stifling him?

As for expecting him to be good defensively - thank goodness! Look at how effective and deadly Hughes is when he breaks up plays! Hughes is absolutely lethal on the PP and in transition - that's going to be Parekh's bread and butter. There is no single defenceman on this team that I want to be the one breaking up plays because that's when you can generate a lot of offence. Break up a play in the defensive zone, and with the vision and skill of Parekh, he can transition that puck lightning fast, and this leads to breakdowns - odd-man rushes the other way, as well as defensive zone break-downs as the opposing teams end up panicking and leaving guys open as they double-team or simply miss assignments.

Huska allows full creativity in the offensive zone. Parekh will thrive in it. Huska also has a pretty good track record with defencemen as well, even of the offensive kind.

I have always stated that if Hartley could eliminate some of his methods, that he would make for a fantastic coach for a rebuilding team as he was a real teacher out there, and a lot of players really developed well under him (and not just on the Flames). Huska does that without the 'behind the scenes' stuff. Kuznetsov, Honzek, Coronato, Zary, Pospisil, Bahl (considering only 1 season under his belt), Andersson (from the A), Brzuestewicz right now - lots of youth are developing well under Huska. Why wouldn't Parekh?

He is an offensive unicorn that needs to learn how to apply his skillset to a playoff type of play-style and be reasonably effective defensively. That's it. You aren't going to develop him well in a system that is all run-and-gun. Flames will be a team that gets stuffed in the playoffs year over year with people pointing fingers at Parekh for not producing in the playoffs. He is being brought along well right now I would say, injuries aside. That's the single worry I have when it comes to Parekh - not being aware enough and getting tagged a few too many times.

01-21-2026, 01:13 PM	#196
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	Huska has been great at developing kids so far. I doubt Parekh will be the exception here. He is already giving Brzustewicz his 'next step' by inserting him into one of the PP units. As for wanting to make Parekh play defence - of course he wants that, and he should! Parekh was fine so far - a couple of misreads, and he is getting out-muscled for now on puck-battles, but he has been fine. He doesn't fit into the team not because of the system, but the overall lack of skill on the roster, and the Flames were particularly awful overall offensively while Parekh was playing (not saying it was his fault - was just one of the tougher periods of the season). Huska had him playing PP1. He wouldn't have given Parekh that reward if Parekh didn't deserve it. Huska and Conroy have stated numerous times that Parekh is a special player, and that they don't want to change his game. I think people are overly concerned about Huska being some kind of a stifling coach because the Flames don't score much. They don't score much because they aren't skilled, contrary to what some people believe. This team is one of the lowest-skilled teams in the league, period. Sure, Huska can 'open things up' a bit more and allow them to play run-and-gun for now. Is that really a benefit, however? Maybe if Huberdeau was brought up in a better system, he would be a better player within this system today? Huberdeau was bound for a large regression since Zito revamped Florida. Out went players that couldn't play a playoff-style of game, and in came players that did. They had a rather smooth transition because of some of the existing pieces like Barkov (elite at that type of a game), and getting a winger like Tkachuk who is good defensively (since he was brought-up and developed in that environment). Run-and-gun doesn't work in the playoffs. One team that really strikes me as a team that flopped hard by trying to play a more offensive style was the Oilers in the Hall-Eberle-RNH-Yakupov era. That team was easy to play against. Coach after coach came in and tried to get them to flip that switch, but weren't able to. I don't mind as much if Conroy decides to 'burn it to the ground' (though one could make an argument that they are there already), as I think it is possible to build it back up, as long as you retain a certain style of play. If we bring up all these kids in an environment that is conducive to Huberdeau getting a bunch of points, what are we doing then? Developing more Huberdeaus, right? Take a look at how Calgary actually plays offensively. Can anyone make the argument that Huska is stifling this team when we just watched Whitecloud in on a 2-on-1? I would have thought that Huska would have told him what is and isn't acceptable. We all saw Rasums pinch and be involved in odd-man rushes - in fact, every defencemen. Is Calgary just dumping and chasing and trying to live and die off the cycle like they were under Brent Sutter? Absolutely not - they often carry the puck in (or attempt to!), and rely on the dump when the other team is standing up at the blue-line. What about the old tired line of: "They are a shot volume team shooting from the perimeter - nothing dangerous." Baloney. They are trying to generate high danger chances with plenty of back-door plays and bumper plays. They just lack talent, period. They are whiffing on some passes, whiffing on receiving passes, whiffing on shots, and missing the net sometimes (or shooting it straight into the breadbasket). That's what a bad team without really skilled players do. Plus, deencemen and defensive players in general have an easier time stopping Calgary because so many players are playing out of position. There are no 1st line players on the team (though Gridin will get there). Imagine being used to going up against a McDavid - Draisaitl combo, or Eichel - Stone, etc., and now you are going up against.. Huberdeau? Kadri? These 2nd line guys are having a harder time scoring since they have to face the best defence pairings and shutdown lines. Kadri still managed to get a career high in goals here - ditto Coleman, ditto Weegar, and Huberdeau was close!. However, how much easier did he have it when he got to play behind MacKinnon? They take all the hard match-ups. People want to show that Kadri had 87 points in 71 games in Colorado, but somehow 'sucks' in Calgary and it is Huska's fault? BS BS BS. Kadri's next best seasons in point production where where? Yep, you guessed it - Calgary! 75 points and 67 points were his next two best seasons. Plus, once again, his career high in goals was actually in Calgary. Sucks to be Kadri having to play in such a 'stifling' system. Parekh was on PP1. How in the world is that stifling him? As for expecting him to be good defensively - thank goodness! Look at how effective and deadly Hughes is when he breaks up plays! Hughes is absolutely lethal on the PP and in transition - that's going to be Parekh's bread and butter. There is no single defenceman on this team that I want to be the one breaking up plays because that's when you can generate a lot of offence. Break up a play in the defensive zone, and with the vision and skill of Parekh, he can transition that puck lightning fast, and this leads to breakdowns - odd-man rushes the other way, as well as defensive zone break-downs as the opposing teams end up panicking and leaving guys open as they double-team or simply miss assignments. Huska allows full creativity in the offensive zone. Parekh will thrive in it. Huska also has a pretty good track record with defencemen as well, even of the offensive kind. I have always stated that if Hartley could eliminate some of his methods, that he would make for a fantastic coach for a rebuilding team as he was a real teacher out there, and a lot of players really developed well under him (and not just on the Flames). Huska does that without the 'behind the scenes' stuff. Kuznetsov, Honzek, Coronato, Zary, Pospisil, Bahl (considering only 1 season under his belt), Andersson (from the A), Brzuestewicz right now - lots of youth are developing well under Huska. Why wouldn't Parekh? He is an offensive unicorn that needs to learn how to apply his skillset to a playoff type of play-style and be reasonably effective defensively. That's it. You aren't going to develop him well in a system that is all run-and-gun. Flames will be a team that gets stuffed in the playoffs year over year with people pointing fingers at Parekh for not producing in the playoffs. He is being brought along well right now I would say, injuries aside. That's the single worry I have when it comes to Parekh - not being aware enough and getting tagged a few too many times.