[News] With the #28 pick the Flames select LW Morgan Klimchuk

[Calgary Highlander]

I can't think of any prospects in the last ten years (Flames ones anyway) that had their numbers regress in college/junior and still ended up being good NHL players. I can understand difficulties transitioning to pro hockey like Ferland, but Klimchuk should be dominating the WHL at this point. He should at least be the clear cut offensive leader on a team where he is one of only two drafted players (other guy is a seventh rounder).

Flames were desperately trying to add a 2nd rounder in 2013 to draft Madison Bowey. I remember thinking at the time how great it would be to add a big, two-way RH defensemen. Bowey is now arguably the best defensemen in the WHL. Hindsight is 20/20, but the Flames were sniffing around Bowey so it's fair to question why they selected Klimchuk ahead of him.

[Ashasx]

I'll be honest. I haven't watched Klimchuk more than 5 times over the last 2 years (outside of prospect camp), but his game reminded me a lot of Stempniak.

[lanny9]

Of course there are sexier picks but when building a team you need to look at organizational needs. Klimchuk is going to be a great 3rd liner who can show some decent offence but will be a great shutdown player, pk man. People seem to think that teams just need offensive guys and that will carry the day, you need players like Klimchuk to do the unselfish work imo and this is what he has shown in spades.

Between battling injuries and being the go to shutdown player on the Pats who is called on to go up against the opposition's top players plus kill penalties all the time does not leave a lot of room for his offense to shine through. You talk to all coaches in the WHL and they all gush talking about Klimchuk and his near perfect all around game, all think he will be a very dependable pro, I tend to agree. Do I think he's 2nd line material? No not at the moment, but I think he could further develop and may top out there but I have always said he got the making of "The Perfect" third line player which when it comes to playoff hockey you really need and is where they tend to come up big.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by lanny9

Of course there are sexier picks but when building a team you need to look at organizational needs. Klimchuk is going to be a great 3rd liner who can show some decent offence but will be a great shutdown player, pk man. People seem to think that teams just need offensive guys and that will carry the day, you need players like Klimchuk to do the unselfish work imo and this is what he has shown in spades.

Between battling injuries and being the go to shutdown player on the Pats who is called on to go up against the opposition's top players plus kill penalties all the time does not leave a lot of room for his offense to shine through. You talk to all coaches in the WHL and they all gush talking about Klimchuk and his near perfect all around game, all think he will be a very dependable pro, I tend to agree. Do I think he's 2nd line material? No not at the moment, but I think he could further develop and may top out there but I have always said he got the making of "The Perfect" third line player which when it comes to playoff hockey you really need and is where they tend to come up big.

You don't really draft on organizational needs, especially when the player is years out.

[lanny9]

Plus, you put him with someone like Jankowski who is developing that same game and has the exact level of hockey IQ and you have the makings of a very, very good third line imo. Kind of third line that championship teams have.

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by nik-

You don't really draft on organizational needs, especially when the player is years out.

I will tend to disagree with you there, you don't draft for organizational needs and you end up like the oilers!

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by lanny9

I will tend to disagree with you there, you don't draft for organizational needs and you end up like the oilers!

The Oilers are where they are because they just suck at drafting and developing. Nothing to do with taking BPA vs organization need.

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The Oilers are where they are because they just suck at drafting and developing. Nothing to do with taking BPA vs organization need.

But you need to have a long term game plan when going to the draft table,(oilers haven't had that imo) I agree that high up in the draft you grab the bpa but after the mid first round you need to look at organizational needs, unless it is a very strong draft then take bpa.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by lanny9

I will tend to disagree with you there, you don't draft for organizational needs and you end up like the oilers!

The Oilers aren't where they are because they didn't draft for organizational need. They're where they are because they took who they felt was the best player, and even though they are all very similar, they didn't move assets to address needs. That and their drafting is just atrocious.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by lanny9

But you need to have a long term game plan when going to the draft table,(oilers haven't had that imo) I agree that high up in the draft you grab the bpa but after the mid first round you need to look at organizational needs, unless it is a very strong draft then take bpa.

The later the player is picked the farther they typically are from playing. Drafting a player 3-4 years out for a current organizational need is a horrible decision.

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by nik-

The later the player is picked the farther they typically are from playing. Drafting a player 3-4 years out for a current organizational need is a horrible decision.

Well let's just say we disagree then, I believe in having a road map of needs and as such you tick off the needs as you draft. Just because the guy is 3-4 years out means nothing, at the back end of the first round typically those guys are that far out from making the show so organizational needs need to be taken into account more so than the front end of the draft.

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by nik-

The Oilers aren't where they are because they didn't draft for organizational need. They're where they are because they took who they felt was the best player, and even though they are all very similar, they didn't move assets to address needs. That and their drafting is just atrocious.

But if you aren't going to move assets you sure as hell need to draft for organizational needs, you are witnessing a team with no road map and as such are going to continue to stuck until they develop said road map and follow it.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by lanny9

But if you aren't going to move assets you sure as hell need to draft for organizational needs, you are witnessing a team with no road map and as such are going to continue to stuck until they develop said road map and follow it.

Well yes, but an example from an awfully run hockey team doesn't change a draft strategy that most teams in the league follow.

[bob-loblaw]

Politically, he was destined to get cut from the the WJC team. He scored in each of the games he played in and got cut. I think Poirier was cut from the WJC team and we're all chomping at the bit for him to come up to the big club, so I wouldn't put a lot of faith in WJC selection.

I think he'll turn out fine, but we'll start to find out when he starts playing the system in Glen Falls.

[CliffFletcher]

If it's premature to express doubts about Klimchuk's development, then is it premature to express optimism about Poirier's? Or can only critical assessments be premature?

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by nik-

Well yes, but an example from an awfully run hockey team doesn't change a draft strategy that most teams in the league follow.

I guarantee you that all teams are looking at that 3-5 year timeframe when drafting later first onward, not many step into the league right away.

Of course you can't draft for current organizational needs, but if you look at Calgary for example, we will not need Klimchuk for another 3 years so why not draft for needs 3 years out? That is how you build quality organizational depth imo and is the plan drawn out by our scouting staff. You need to have a long term plan and unfortunately for some that does include non-sexy picks like Klimchuk. There week of course be some that your shouting staff didn't get right as seen with Matta but that happens.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If it's premature to express doubts about Klimchuk's development, then is it premature to express optimism about Poirier's? Or can only critical assessments be premature?

Good point, but doen't apply in this case; one is having results aginst men, the other is struggling against boys.

[Hackey]

You definitely draft BPA, especially in the first round. And yes drafting an organizational need 3-4 years in advance makes zero sense. Hopefully Klimchuk becomes a solid player for us but over the last year I've kind of lost more confidence in him than I've gained.

[SeanCharles]

Two points, I'm not sure if they've been mentioned but:

- I saw him play with Reinhart and McDavid on his line at the under 18s I believe is was and I didn't have my Flames lens on yet cause we hadn't drafted him yet.. I'd have to say he was the most impressive player on the line. Not necessarily for his offensive skill set because the other two were quite impressive in that regard, but his determination, will, aggressiveness on the puck carrier, and quicknesses in tight quarters were all extremely eye opening. He stood out on the line because he was doing all the little things to help his line mates succeed. He wasn't the offensive catalyst on the line but he kept his motor running and in turn the line was much more effective.

- I heard about a vote done by all draft eligible players in 2013 and they were asked who would you want on your team out of anyone in the draft? The concensouis answer was Klimchuk. Players love him as a teammate because he does all the little things that not everyone does, the little things that help your team win.

Give Klimchuk some time he will not be as offensively dynamic as Monahan or Poirier but he is a good draft pick for where he was taken. If injuries don't hinder his development he will turnout to be an effective shutdown winger with the skill to score as well. It's still way too early to judge the pick. Time will tell...

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Good point, but doen't apply in this case; one is having results aginst men, the other is struggling against boys.

But if you ask the scouts and coaching staffs of opposing teams they all speak very, very highly of Klimchuk, he is nor struggling by any means, he is playing the game the coaching staff wants him to play. His hockey IQ is up there with the best in that draft year imo, people need to stop solely relying on stats and look at how they are being used within the coaching system being put forward. He is progressing just fine, he does all the little things that go into making a solid professional.

Don't get me wrong, in the prospects forum I have always started he is likely going to top out at s great third liner where many think he's 1st line material, I just don't see it in him, he can move up to play that role if needed but his type of game isn't really did for that role imo.