Either way, 50% of Colborne's goals game against Edmonton.
That means against NHL competition, Joe Colborne had 4 goals last season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames
Colborne is more then a big body. He's a big body who can play hockey.
|
Kevin Hayes is a big body who can play hockey. Joe Colborne is a big body who resembles a big body who can play hockey. There's always something missing on the ice when you watch Colborne play, especially when the pace slows down. A lot of people talk about how great he is at puck protection, but all that's ever gotten him was buying more time before inevitibly he turns the puck over.
I like parts of Colborne's game... his vision, his size, his stickhandling. But the problem is I've never seen him put it together for a whole game and it's been what two seasons now?
Quote:
|
Today's Joe Colborne can play physical, is great along the boards, has improved his footspeed while gaining mass and seems to be able to score his amazing shootout goals on break-aways now.
|
Yes, he's improved his foot speed while adding mass. That was impressive.
But I disagree on the rest. To me "playing physical and being great along the boards" is playing like Anze Kopitar, not just faking it with cross-checks and poorly judged hits. To me Joe Colborne plays fake physical - the kind where he's trying harder to impress people than just play the game.
Quote:
|
You don't throw away a 25 year old asset that you spent 2 NHL seasons developing.
|
Well you gotta throw somebody away or pray that they pass waivers which is no guarantee (though Wolf will probably pass waivers).
Bollig and Raymond are the players I advocate throwing away, but even then you have to find a taker as it's a waste of 4M in salary to have them rot in AHL.
Do you throw away David Jones? He's an expiring contract and should net a decent return. But he's also a more effective player than Joe Colborne right now.
Do you throw away Shore, who's 24, 6'3", and has shown better actual instincts than Colborne already?
Do you throw away Jooris, who came off a strong rookie season where played the position (3rd line center) that Colborne "should" be playing?
Let me guess though, you throw away Byron because he's short and had bad luck on breakaways last season (even though he virtually matched colborne in goals per game having the worst puckluck ever for a whole season). Byron's everyone's favorite punching bag, even though everything just clicks every time he's on the ice. "Because we need to get bigger".
Quote:
|
Colborne has a higher upside than Granlund and Jooris.
|
Higher upside than Jooris? Maybe. But that doesn't mean he has a higher likelyhood to be a better player. If I'm putting my money on one of these two players, it's Jooris because he's more natural at everything. Just having better tools doesn't make Colborne better.
And no, Colborne doesn't have higher upside than Granlund. Granlund has potential to be a star skilled winger with goal-scoring in the high 20s. Most of us will be happy if Joe Colborne ever scores 14 in a season. Not saying Granlund doesn't have parts of his game he needs to work on - obviously, since he's 3-4 years away from being Colborne's age.
Quote:
|
These players don't have the attributes of a potential 2nd liner, but Colborne certainly still does.
|
You're looking at it from a superficial level where Colborne is the sum of his parts. The problem is, Colborne
hasn't put those parts together. Sure, game 1 vs Vancouver, his one shift to win the game was "what can Joe Colborne be". But then for the next 10 games in the playoffs it was back to "what Joe Colborne really is".
Quote:
|
He was playing 2nd line minutes near the end of last season so I don't know why the addition of Frolik means he's now competing for 4th line minutes.
|
RW was our weakest position. By far last season. The reason was because we didn't have a 2nd line RW. And we added him in Frolik.
We saw Colborne on the 3rd line most of the end of last season anyways. Glencross-Jooris-Colborne, or Raymond-Jooris-Colborne, or Raymond-Backlund-Colborne. Notice how these 3rd lines accomplished absolutely nothing when they were together? Nor did Glencross-Monahan-Colborne as our 2nd line, which is right when we co-incidentally hit an 8 game losing streak. Nor did Wolf-Colborne-Bollig as our fourth line, though I like what Wolf did individually. There were many lines Hartley tried for Joe Colborne last year, and the only one that remotely worked all year was Bennett-Backlund-Colborne. But that was more Bennett-Backlund being a match made in heaven than Colborne being a great fit on the line.
Yeah, there's a chance Colborne is our second line RW next season. And there's a chance that while that's the case, our second line won't be as effective as we want it to be.
If you think I'm ripping Joe Colborne and think he's a terrible player, no I don't. But I just haven't seen the results where I consider him a piece that needs to be kept. And actually, I don't want it to be that way, because I've watched all the interviews where Colborne talks about how big of a Flames fan he was growing up and I know he probably more than anyone wants to bring a cup to Calgary. I would like it if he's on the roster if/when Calgary wins a cup.
