Rumor Philadelphia interested in Glencross

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by moon

I think someone is misunderstanding here because I said I think he will end up being a bust not that he is a bust now. I think there is a difference here and that is what it looked like Eddy was saying to me. If I was wrong it what he was saying then sorry.

So keep loling if it makes you feel better.

Always easier to be a cup half empty, eh?

[JiriHrdina]

^That awkward moment when you realize a guy called "DOOM" thinks your pessimistic

[jayswin]

Haha, oh moon, the master of semantics. It's a good way to cover your ass in very argeument, I guess.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by moon

Did you read what I said. I directly said I have not seen him play NCAA games and have seen highlights and some time he had in development camp. There is no dancing around it at all I said it right in this thread twice now.

Yup, read exactly what you said. I'll repost it for you again so it clear to you what you are representing.

"I base it on reading reports from those that have seen him play, comparing stats against others that play with him against him and have played before him, looking at his accomplishments (ie. what teams he has made, what levels he has played at, what individual awards he has won)."

Not a single thing said in there about your own observations other than reading a stats sheet. You base all of your opinion on what you have read from others and stats. Pretty poor way of judging talent.

Don't read blogs so not sure why you are going after me on that. There are scouting services out there that aren't blogs or data aggregators as you call them. If you want to rant about them go ahead but not sure what it has to do with this topic right now.

What scouting services do you subscribe to?

People said that at the draft? I watched it and heard he has intriguing potential and a varied view about what he can become. I also heard he was very raw and would need a lot of work. Didn't hear about this exceptional talent and if it is there why haven't we seen any evidence of it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS_Uw4x-oQY

These are from blogs that picked up and repeated scouting details on Jankowski.

http://hockeyjournal.com/blog/kirks/...Mark_Jankowski

http://www.inlouwetrust.com/2012/6/1...ospect-profile

http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2012/...mark-jankowski

While he doesn't say that Jankowski was exceptional he does state that scouts from everywhere gathered at the Beanpot specifically to view Jankowski. That says he turned a lot of heads with his scoring ability.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...ort/54474130/1

That is what I think he will become not what he is so no I do not think he is a bust yet. If he turns out as I expect then yes he will be a bust. If he were drafted by Detroit or Vancouver I would expect that based on what he has shown he would be a bust. I wouldn't care about him as much but he is a Calgary prospect so I do care about him and do follow what he is doing.

It's what you think he will be. That is what you said and repeated here. That says what you think he will be. That says you think he's a bust. Your words. About a player you admit to not having seen in action yourself.

That certainty about a developing player is what annoys me, especially when we have seen plenty of players with gaudy junior numbers fall from grace quickly, and then college players become late bloomers. Wait until you actually see this kid before judging him. I saw him several times with Providence last season and came away very impressed with his growth and development. He learned a lot about playing within the Providence system, which was a big knock on him. I look forward to seeing if he can step up and become more aggressive this season, as the Flames outlined for him. That will be the big thing to judge him on this year, because the rest of the criticisms of his game have been addressed in a good way. He's still not there, but he's an impressive young man who is making big strides. Give him the credit he deserves.

That's it on Jankowski. Back to Glencross to Philly. You only move him if they overpay. What that overpay is, I don't know. But it better be big and it better be good!

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

^That awkward moment when you realize a guy called "DOOM" thinks your pessimistic

[dammage79]

I'd be alright if they dealt Glencross. That NMC and his blatant comments that he would not waive for anywhere make the idea of Glencross not being a Flame pretty much moot though. But, you never know what happens behind closed doors.

If it were to be Philly he where to go to, Brayden Schenn would be ideal with their center depth. Long shot though.
I don't see the Flames making a left winger for lw winger swap, too much depth.

Honestly, Coburn is about as close to Glencross in value and that's about the only guy I'd like. Of course Schenn or Giroux would be amazing but Glencross alone would never.In a thousand years pry them away from Philly.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by moon

I think someone is misunderstanding here because I said I think he will end up being a bust not that he is a bust now. I think there is a difference here and that is what it looked like Eddy was saying to me. If I was wrong it what he was saying then sorry.

So keep loling if it makes you feel better.

But seriously moon, this is why people take issue with your posting style. You're arguing that you're not saying he's a bust now, but that you think he will be in the future. But if you think he'll be a bust in the future then you technically think he's a bust right now, too.

It's just always goofy semantics with you, so you can say really contrarian/controversial things to get people riled up but then dodge the scrutiny by muddying up the waters on what's being claimed.

[Calgary4LIfe]

For the record - I never insinuated anywhere in my posts that Monahan does NOT have 1st line potential, including offence. I think he will prove himself to be a 1st line center in every sense of the word, and then some. Just because I think Jankowski has more offensive potential (and some disagree, which is fine), doesn't mean I think less of Monahan.

Back on topic:

I doubt Philly is scouting Baertschi (even with Burke's comments, I highly doubt the organization is 'down' on him). Cammy was not playing.

Leaves Glencross, Stempniak, Stajan (if they stopped scouting, maybe it was him?), or perhaps (wishful thinking) Butler in a package for one of their more expensive D.

I am ok with trading Glencross. He is rather perfect for sheltering the youth with his speed and line matching ability (great on defence, is fast enough and defensively strong enough - even with the occasional brain fart). On the flipside, I don't think the Flames will even ask Glencross if it is a 'fair deal'. It will cost Philly an overpayment of sorts.

I don't really think Calgary is in any hurry to unload Glencross. Would he return Schenn? Maybe the defensive brother, but that would probably be what it would take in order for Calgary to part with Glencross. I am not convinced Schenn will be a superstar, but I am convinced he will be a very good center in the middle lines at the very least for his career. He would be a legitimate candidate for the 1st line center position with Monahan and Jankowski (don't laugh Moon) and whomever else the Flames end up possibly drafting this year.

I would prefer a package for Couturier - he hasn't exploded offensively yet, but he is already a complete stud defensively (was great against Malkin in the playoffs 2 years ago). I think he will eventually settle in as a very good 2nd line center with elite defensive ability - the exact kind of player that Calgary seems to be building towards.

[moon]

Originally Posted by New Era

Not a single thing said in there about your own observations other than reading a stats sheet. You base all of your opinion on what you have read from others and stats. Pretty poor way of judging talent.

It is what I and many have to go on when discussing prospects especially when talking about NCAA prospects which are rarely on TV in Canada. Not sure why I can't have an opinion on a guy like most posters here do. 99% of opinion that people have on prospects come from reading what other scouts say, reading reports from scouts, experts, reporters and other sources and highlights of others. We still are able to have conversations about all sorts of prospects with the understanding that none of us are professional scouts with countless hours free to watch every prospect.

What scouting services do you subscribe to?

Redline report although not a fan of what they have in terms of rankings, read McKeens prior to draft, hockey news, TSN reports from Mackenzie and Button are some of the sources. Read articles from news sources when they come out on Jankowski, again can easily access stats and game reports.

While he doesn't say that Jankowski was exceptional he does state that scouts from everywhere gathered at the Beanpot specifically to view Jankowski. That says he turned a lot of heads with his scoring ability.

So they seem to say what I said that he has intriguing skills that has impressed some scouts.

It's what you think he will be. That is what you said and repeated here. That says what you think he will be. That says you think he's a bust. Your words. About a player you admit to not having seen in action yourself.

Yes that is what I think he will be but he still has likely 3-4 years of development left where he can take a big step forward and change that so he is not a bust. It is not a technicality or semantics like Flameswin tries to make it out to be it is what people do all the time. Howse is a bust, Dan Ryder was a bust when he quit, some may argue Nemisz is a bust with the time he has had at the pro level. But because Jankowski still has time to improve his game he is not a bust yet in my view.

That certainty about a developing player is what annoys me, especially when we have seen plenty of players with gaudy junior numbers fall from grace quickly, and then college players become late bloomers.

What certainty? I have said he could be as good as a 2nd line center in the NHL. I have given him a pretty wide range in terms of what he can develop into so not sure why you keep trying to force any certainty onto my views. I have said I think he doesn't work out but that is far from stating anything as certainty and hardly any more certain than most posters views on what he will turn out to be.

Wait until you actually see this kid before judging him. I saw him several times with Providence last season and came away very impressed with his growth and development. He learned a lot about playing within the Providence system, which was a big knock on him. I look forward to seeing if he can step up and become more aggressive this season, as the Flames outlined for him. That will be the big thing to judge him on this year, because the rest of the criticisms of his game have been addressed in a good way. He's still not there, but he's an impressive young man who is making big strides. Give him the credit he deserves.

Its awesome that you have been impressed with him and that is what makes coming to a board like this fun people are able to have different views and talk about them.

[moon]

Originally Posted by flameswin

It's just always goofy semantics with you, so you can say really contrarian/controversial things to get people riled up but then dodge the scrutiny by muddying up the waters on what's being claimed.

There is no goofy semantics many people think prospects won't work out but don't think that they are busts at the time. I think 80% of the draft picks from the last draft won't work out doesn't mean the guys are busts.

And most people agree with me about Monahan having a higher ceiling than Jankowski so not sure what the BS contrarian/controversial angle comes to play here.

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by moon

There is no goofy semantics many people think prospects won't work out but don't think that they are busts at the time. I think 80% of the draft picks from the last draft won't work out doesn't mean the guys are busts.

And most people agree with me about Monahan having a higher ceiling than Jankowski so not sure what the BS contrarian/controversial angle comes to play here.

It is goofy. Why not just wait and see how a prospect develops. There is no need to call players a bust before they have even signed a pro contract.

We might as well trade all our late rounds pick because they are going to be busts, right?

[moon]

Originally Posted by DOOM

It is goofy. Why not just wait and see how a prospect develops. There is no need to call players a bust before they have even signed a pro contract.

We might as well trade all our late rounds pick because they are going to be busts, right?

I literally said I don't consider them busts not sure what you are going on about.

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by moon

I literally said I don't consider them busts not sure what you are going on about.

You don't consider them busts, but you think they will bust = same thing.

You're essentially saying you don't think they have any chance of improving.

Glass half empty.

[moon]

Originally Posted by DOOM

You don't consider them busts, but you think they will bust = same thing.

You're essentially saying you don't think they have any chance of improving.

Glass half empty.

No it isn't it is fact.

[CSharp]

I would love to see GlenX go to an Eastern Conference team. If the last game was any indication, the guy can make some of the stupidest mistakes that you'd expect a rookie to make. It's costed the Flames lots of times in the past as well. Sure, when his game is on, he's good. But, he seems to get into a rut more often than not.

[4oh3]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Giroux 3 games no points and -1.

Giroux just signed an 8 year 8.25 contract extension that kicks in next year so he is bullet proof.

There are many many examples of players getting these big contracts and their production falling off.

The super rich are hard to motivate.

I'm just saying I highly doubt we would want to trade a young kid with promise like baertschi unless it was apart of a big deal to land someone of that calibre

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by moon

No it isn't it is fact.

What is fact? That they will bust? uh what?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by moon

No it isn't it is fact.

What are you even saying here? What's fact?

[moon]

Originally Posted by flameswin

What are you even saying here? What's fact?

That roughly 80% of the drafted players will bust. That doesn't mean they are busts now.

People can think that prospects won't work out without thinking they are busts right now.

[Mister Yamoto]

I don't see why all the fuss when somebody throws out the term "bust" or suggests that a prospect might not ever make the NHL.

Look at the history of the draft. Most players drafted never play an NHL game. Very few players drafted end up playing 400+ plus games. But just about every prospect in the Flames system is going to make it?

I could pick any drafted player at random and call him a bust. 80% of the time I would be right. Really, to predict that a player will be a star is way more of a reach.