[GDT] Flames Rookies vs Canucks Rookies, 8:30 MST

[sun]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

Are you calling Sven and Brodie a couple of round fruits?

[Trailer Fire]

Originally Posted by sun

Are you calling Sven and Brodie a couple of round fruits?

They're both so adorable I could just eat them up.

[stemit14]

I'm excited for the season to start... I know everyone is picking the flames to finish last in the NHL but all it takes is for the flames to find that diamond in the ruff goalie to carry the team... That's what they did in 2003-2004. That's what Ottawa did in 2011-2012. That's what Colorado did in 2009-2010. That's what columbus did in 2013. Goaltending can bring a team back faster than anything.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

I think in this instance the people who are upset about negative comments are the ones overreacting. What I've read doesn't really merit the amount of eye-rolling I'm seeing in the responses.

I haven't seen any over-reacting.

edit: Missed puckluck2's post

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Can't believe some people are writing off prospects because of one mini tournament which means crap.

Monahan and Baertschi will be in the ECHL if they're lucky if I am to believe what is being said in this thread.

Who said any of that? Saying that certain players have been disappointing based on their advanced billing is now saying they will be lucky if they play in the ECHL? Are we automatically going to be building in excuses in for guys that are supposed to be star players, and accept underperformance? I appreciate the defense of the guys that are supposed to be our best young players, but if they are our best young players shouldn't they perform like it, especially in a tournament for the best young players in each organization? Seems Ward and Ftorek weren't overly impressed last night either and sent a message to Baertschi with an extended view from the pine. Then again, what could that possibly mean? To the great critical thinkers that means nothing. They were thrilled with his performance and probably just saving him for main camp!

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

Obvious isn't it?
TJ Brodie plays defense, Sven Bärtschi is a forward.

Not a good comparable.

Oh, so you can't compare two players who have given lacklustre performances during the prospects tournament at the same time in their development because.... they play different positions?

Right....

I'm going to go ahead and assume with the rest that you meant they were round and delicious. That's closer to some sort of logic.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by T@T

I believe Connor had his jaw broken with that shot, up until that point he was very feared at about 6'4 225lbs...after that knockout Ferland was the feared one.

Ferland is one of those rare individuals that never seems to get hurt in a fight, an extremely solid noggin, Iggy was like that.

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Scott Cruickshank ‏@CruickshankCH 3m About #Flames LW Michael Ferland's much-improved play -- he was 234 pounds last winter. He's 210 now.

I really hope he keeps this trajectory. Good that he got his stuff together. He really looks good this year.

[mdubz]

Hoping Ferland becomes our "Lucic".

[SebC]

Is Monahan faster or slower than Luc Robitaille?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by strombad

Horvat is a 3rd line NHLer, I'd find it remarkable if he became more than that. A more accurate comparison would be Stephane Yelle with even less offensive upside. He'll likely help a team as a key role player, but he'll never lead a team or have anywhere near the impact Richards or Landeskog does.

Lol. What a joke of an analysis. And you've seen Horvat how many times? Yelle with less offense? You trying to troll Canucks fans or what cause you come off as completely without a clue.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Lol. What a joke of an analysis. And you've seen Horvat how many times? Yelle with less offense? You trying to troll Canucks fans or what cause you come off as completely without a clue.

Junior proficiency does NOT a star player make! I'm not breaking ground by calling him a 3rd liner, it's exactly what he looks like he's headed for.

I'm not sure exactly how you're defining Yelle as some sort of insult. Solid defensively, tough on opponents, low offensive output. Career 3rd/4th line guy but a mainstay in the NHL. That's Horvat. In fact, Horvat has lower offensive output than Yelle had in junior.

Horvat - 131GP 91P
Yelle - 187GP 204P

For comparisons sake:
Stajan - 182GP 204P
Belanger - 192GP 240P
Nichol - 137GP 157P
Stoll - 245GP 286P
Talbot - 249GP 299P

All 3rd line guys who play at least somewhat similar styles to Horvat. All produced more than a point per game in their junior career.

Stats don't mean everything, but thinking of him as anything more than a 3rd liner in the vein of the above is the only thing that could be considered a joke. He's going to be good, but you'd be a goof to say he's got top line potential.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by fotze

This tournament gives a glimpse into the players potential but gives an absolute certainty into certain posters quality. I wish there was a way I could attach my own sig o certain posters so I can remember in 3 months 'oh that's the guy that said this so his opinion is complete and utter garbage'.

I remember Sidney Crosby had more than two pisspoor playoff games in a row this past playoff. He DOESN'T SUCK because of that. All these kids are amazing hockey players playing in this tourney, the gap between top to bottom is extremely small. God dammit.

Thank you Fotze. Your post sums up my feelings on the influx of sub par posting, weak analysis, and over reactionary comments from internet experts that the site has been subject to over the past 18 months or so.

There are a lot of good posters that make solid contributions and provide insight that I take the time to read. Sadly, they have started to become the minority, and seem to be getting drowned out in a sea of mediocre posts. I've just sat back and not posted a lot lately, partly due to time constraints, partly due to not wanting to deal with the passive aggressive posting that seems to pop up in every thread.

How you can possibly form a concrete opinion via an internet web-stream or two 60 minute in person viewings during a prospects tournament is beyond me.

By the sounds of some of the analysis here, certain posters should be taking over as head scouts, coaches and GM's league wide with their unbridled powers of observation on hockey players with 25 games or less of NHL experience.

To all the guys posting fantastic updates/pictures/twitter feeds, thank you. That type of contribution makes CP such a great source of Flames information, and the main reason I come to the site. Please keep it up!

Sorry for the rant, its been getting to me for a little while. Thank god meaningful hockey is right around the corner. I'm looking forward to seeing the kids play San Jose tomorrow, should be a good tilt.

Maybe Baertschi will score, maybe he wont. But seeing as he finished last year on an impressive seven? game scoring streak in the NHL, writing him off as a bust because he's trying to not get hurt in the prospects tournament will be a judgement best left to the other professional scouts on this forum.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by stemit14

I'm excited for the season to start... I know everyone is picking the flames to finish last in the NHL but all it takes is for the flames to find that diamond in the ruff goalie to carry the team... That's what they did in 2003-2004. That's what Ottawa did in 2011-2012. That's what Colorado did in 2009-2010. That's what columbus did in 2013. Goaltending can bring a team back faster than anything.

This!

Just about once every 1-2 seasons this happens to a team. Most recently with Bobrovsky and the Jackets. Prior to Gaborik they were playing with ZERO proven 1st line forwards, yet they were tenacious as a team and supported each other well. And then Bob did the rest. You don't always need star power to come out and have a meaningful season. Sometimes a strong goaltender who can keep you in most games and a committed team in sync with eachother, playing a solid team style can bring a team more Ws than expected.

I just hope we have that goaltender in our ranks. Whether it be Ramo, Berra or Ortio, I hope one of them can rise up and be that guy for us. Would be amazing to see us actually do some damage when everyone is least expecting it. Am I expecting this? No, of course not. But as a fan, one can always hope.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

I think in this instance the people who are upset about negative comments are the ones overreacting. What I've read doesn't really merit the amount of eye-rolling I'm seeing in the responses.

It's not about being positive or negative here. My issue is with posters who seem to think they know the future based on a good or poor performance in a mini-tournament, or who think that it is a good idea to call out a kid who isn't playing like this or that fan believes he ought to be. That is all.

It sounds to me from all counts that Baertschi played poorly. Fair enough. As someone who doesn't have the opportunity to see this tournament this is useful and appreciated information, and I have no problem with discussions about what is wrong with his performance, or in what ways he has disappointed. But what I really don't have a lot of time for is the guesses about his attitude, or guarantees about his projected career potential based on "ifs" and "thens", or what the coaching staff should or should not be doing to ensure that he never, ever has a bad game. It seems like some people don't get (or for some reason can't accept) that these kids are not going to perform to the same level in every situation. This is not because of flaws in their development or their character. It is because they are human, and they are still kids.

Originally Posted by New Era

Who said any of that? Saying that certain players have been disappointing based on their advanced billing is now saying they will be lucky if they play in the ECHL? Are we automatically going to be building in excuses in for guys that are supposed to be star players, and accept underperformance?

Why not? With what Baertschi has already proved, does he not deserve some benefit of doubt concerning his future based on a couple of lack-lustre performances in a meaningless, short tournament? Some perspective here is all that I ask.

Originally Posted by New Era

I appreciate the defense of the guys that are supposed to be our best young players, but if they are our best young players shouldn't they perform like it, especially in a tournament for the best young players in each organization?

Historically, this would seem not to be the case, actually. It would be great if they did, but it is okay as fans to accept that young, developing star players are not always going to put forth their best effort, for whatever reasons, without histrionic predictions about what it means for their future. In the end, it probably doesn't mean anything.

Originally Posted by New Era

Seems Ward and Ftorek weren't overly impressed last night either and sent a message to Baertschi with an extended view from the pine. Then again, what could that possibly mean?

That he had a bad game and wasn't playing his best. But what it does not mean is that he is suddenly now endangering his own career potential and that his "attitude problems" will prevent him from being a great player.

Originally Posted by New Era

To the great critical thinkers that means nothing. They were thrilled with his performance and probably just saving him for main camp!

I have yet to see a single poster say they were "thrilled" with Baertschi's performance. But I submit that the more patient and thoughtful observers have not jumped to conclusions about what a poor performance means. Or for that matter, a great performance. It is awesome to hear that Ferland is playing so well, and I think this deserves lots of discussion and celebration. But by the same token, while we may be more encouraged about his future as a NHL player today than last week, it is still real, REAL early to know much of anything about what this "means".

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

This!

Just about once every 1-2 seasons this happens to a team. Most recently with Bobrovsky and the Jackets. Prior to Gaborik they were playing with ZERO proven 1st line forwards, yet they were tenacious as a team and supported each other well. And then Bob did the rest. You don't always need star power to come out and have a meaningful season. Sometimes a strong goaltender who can keep you in most games and a committed team in sync with eachother, playing a solid team style can bring a team more Ws than expected.

I just hope we have that goaltender in our ranks. Whether it be Ramo, Berra or Ortio, I hope one of them can rise up and be that guy for us. Would be amazing to see us actually do some damage when everyone is least expecting it. Am I expecting this? No, of course not. But as a fan, one can always hope.

Exactly...

The flames could surprise people this season... at the start of the season i could see alot of teams underestimating them and the flames could take on the "us against the world" mentality. The young players seemed to thrive at the end of the season when they were just playing to prove something... With every analyst and broadcaster picking the flames to be last, they may thrive once again trying to prove them wrong. Here's hoping.

[darthma]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's not about being positive or negative here. My issue is with posters who seem to think they know the future based on a good or poor performance in a mini-tournament, or who think that it is a good idea to call out a kid who isn't playing like this or that fan believes he ought to be. That is all.

It sounds to me from all counts that Baertschi played poorly. Fair enough. As someone who doesn't have the opportunity to see this tournament this is useful and appreciated information, and I have no problem with discussions about what is wrong with his performance, or in what ways he has disappointed. But what I really don't have a lot of time for is the guesses about his attitude, or guarantees about his projected career potential based on "ifs" and "thens", or what the coaching staff should or should not be doing to ensure that he never, ever has a bad game. It seems like some people don't get (or for some reason can't accept) that these kids are not going to perform to the same level in every situation. This is not because of flaws in their development or their character. It is because they are human, and they are still kids.


Why not? With what Baertschi has already proved, does he not deserve some benefit of doubt concerning his future based on a couple of lack-lustre performances in a meaningless, short tournament? Some perspective here is all that I ask.


Historically, this would seem not to be the case, actually. It would be great if they did, but it is okay as fans to accept that young, developing star players are not always going to put forth their best effort, for whatever reasons, without histrionic predictions about what it means for their future. In the end, it probably doesn't mean anything.


That he had a bad game and wasn't playing his best. But what it does not mean is that he is suddenly now endangering his own career potential and that his "attitude problems" will prevent him from being a great player.


I have yet to see a single poster say they were "thrilled" with Baertschi's performance. But I submit that the more patient and thoughtful observers have not jumped to conclusions about what a poor performance means. Or for that matter, a great performance. It is awesome to hear that Ferland is playing so well, and I think this deserves lots of discussion and celebration. But by the same token, while we may be more encouraged about his future as a NHL player today than last week, it is still real, REAL early to know much of anything about what this "means".

Not to be a cheerleader or anything, but man I always love your posts. I'll TL;DR most posts but always stop when I see yours. Good times.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's not about being positive or negative here. My issue is with posters who seem to think they know the future based on a good or poor performance in a mini-tournament, or who think that it is a good idea to call out a kid who isn't playing like this or that fan believes he ought to be. That is all. [...]

I still think you're putting too much effort into this. People saying that "if a player plays like this, then he's not going to have success..." are not really being unreasonably absolute or making long term predictions based on a couple of low level games, they're just criticising their perfomance right now using that kind of rhetoric.

Anyway, I don't like gossip about players' attititudes either, but at the same time if a player doesn't play with full effort, it's noteworthy and can be discussed. For me, positive performances in a tournament like this are nice but not something you can draw many conclusions from. Still worth discussing of course. I think disappointing performances are maybe a bit more worthy of discussion because this is our first opportunity to try and judge the progress the players have made and we have certain expectations for the more highly rated prospects. These views will be constantly revised as the preseason goes on - even the people who you feel are expressing themselves too strongly right now will change their opinions if the prospects start looking better.

[Husky]

Is rather the flames surprise the year after next year and hope the flames get a top 3 pick.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's not about being positive or negative here. My issue is with posters who seem to think they know the future based on a good or poor performance in a mini-tournament, or who think that it is a good idea to call out a kid who isn't playing like this or that fan believes he ought to be. That is all.

I'm not sure if you are directing this at me, but where was this peering into the looking glass to predict failure for anyone? Go back and read my comments again. My disappointment is that Baertschi looked disinterested and unengaged and that Monahan's skating wasn't up to the level expected based on the advanced billing. Both issues that need to, and can be, addressed, but not ones that will damn a player to a life of playing rec hockey. That over-reaction was made by others. My point was simply stating that I was expecting more from these two players and then identifying why they were not achieving those expectations. Interestingly enough similar comments that were made on the game broadcast and in the game thread.

It sounds to me from all counts that Baertschi played poorly. Fair enough. As someone who doesn't have the opportunity to see this tournament this is useful and appreciated information, and I have no problem with discussions about what is wrong with his performance, or in what ways he has disappointed. But what I really don't have a lot of time for is the guesses about his attitude, or guarantees about his projected career potential based on "ifs" and "thens", or what the coaching staff should or should not be doing to ensure that he never, ever has a bad game. It seems like some people don't get (or for some reason can't accept) that these kids are not going to perform to the same level in every situation. This is not because of flaws in their development or their character. It is because they are human, and they are still kids.

You do know that these kids train and work to develop a certain ethic, and that this work ethic is largely what separates the wheat from the chaff? A player can have all the talent in the world, but a poor attitude or a poor skating stride can prevent that kid from making it to, and sticking in, the NHL. See Robbie Schremp for examples of both. Also, most of these "kids" have been competing against each other since they were six or seven. They know these camps and tournaments are opportunities to show what they can do and potentially earn millions of dollars for their efforts. You may think that one player dogging it is just fine, but how do you think that works for the kid that is playing for his professional life out there, trying to earn a contract? Or should there not be equity in the system?

Why not? With what Baertschi has already proved, does he not deserve some benefit of doubt concerning his future based on a couple of lack-lustre performances in a meaningless, short tournament? Some perspective here is all that I ask.

I respect your argument until you make this comment. What exactly has Baertschi proved to this point? Anything? He's played 25 NHL games and has 13 points to show for it. Does 25 games establish a player? I don't believe so. I do believe the league still considers him a rookie and he is still eligible for the Calder. So I don't see much of a track record that should allow for a player to take this self-entitled path to training camp. The Flames certainly let Mr. Howse know how they felt about guys with entitlement issues.

I think there is reason for concern here and there should be some interest in how the coaches and management handle their young players. Need you be reminded of Baertschi's reaction to his demotion last season and how his pouting affected not only his performance but that of the Abbottsford team? As a player he has a long way to go before he can claim he has proven anything. Once you take a look at this player's performance from that perspective would you not agree he has a long way to go and a lot more to prove?

Historically, this would seem not to be the case, actually. It would be great if they did, but it is okay as fans to accept that young, developing star players are not always going to put forth their best effort, for whatever reasons, without histrionic predictions about what it means for their future. In the end, it probably doesn't mean anything.

Where are these histrionic predictions? I've seen some histrionic reactions to simple observations, which led to some ridiculous claims of future predictions, but I haven't seen any predictions of the demise of any players. Sadly, this little mini-tournament does have consequences for many of these young men, many of which are playing their asses off and giving it their all. Many of these kids will see their dreams delayed or come to an end when this camp comes to a conclusion, and many of them out-performed some of the guys that came with high expectations. It is sad the meritocracy doesn't work for them but that is the cold harsh reality that they must face and you are ignoring.

That he had a bad game and wasn't playing his best. But what it does not mean is that he is suddenly now endangering his own career potential and that his "attitude problems" will prevent him from being a great player.

The problem here is that it isn't just a bad game. It's two bad games. It's a less than spectacular performance at development camp where he was over-shadowed at a moment where he should have stood out. It's the memory of his demotion and the poor performance in the AHL. They all add up and should give you pause to consider, using a comparison from one of our rivals, if he is more Schremp than Eberle.

I have yet to see a single poster say they were "thrilled" with Baertschi's performance. But I submit that the more patient and thoughtful observers have not jumped to conclusions about what a poor performance means. Or for that matter, a great performance. It is awesome to hear that Ferland is playing so well, and I think this deserves lots of discussion and celebration. But by the same token, while we may be more encouraged about his future as a NHL player today than last week, it is still real, REAL early to know much of anything about what this "means".

I agree with what you're saying, but at the same time I have to ask, is it really too early to ponder what this means? There are outcomes from every action, positive and negative. Using the Ferland example, he has stepped up and his play has vastly improved. He has made a huge impression and has moved back into the spotlight and will garner further attention. The potential of him achieving his NHL dream has greatly improved in a very short period of time. Using the Howse example, he has not met team expectations and that has resulted in his suspension and likely departure from the Flames organization. His dream has died, also in a very short period of time.

There is an inequity in the system, where some players are going to granted much more leeway than others, but the reality is that these kids have to continue to perform. Their draft position will only buy them so much time before they become the forgotten man in the mix and have to do everything possible to claw their way back into the picture. These kids only get so many opportunities to prove they are more Backlund than they are Nemisz. I think we can all appreciate that as we continue to discuss this meaningless camp and share our impressions of these young players.

Sorry for the wall of text, but you raise some interesting points worthy of discussion.

[moon]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

This!

Just about once every 1-2 seasons this happens to a team. Most recently with Bobrovsky and the Jackets. Prior to Gaborik they were playing with ZERO proven 1st line forwards, yet they were tenacious as a team and supported each other well. And then Bob did the rest. You don't always need star power to come out and have a meaningful season. Sometimes a strong goaltender who can keep you in most games and a committed team in sync with eachother, playing a solid team style can bring a team more Ws than expected.

I just hope we have that goaltender in our ranks. Whether it be Ramo, Berra or Ortio, I hope one of them can rise up and be that guy for us. Would be amazing to see us actually do some damage when everyone is least expecting it. Am I expecting this? No, of course not. But as a fan, one can always hope.

The Jackets finished 9th and out of the play-offs.

This is now what we are hoping can happen if we get lucky this year?