The Kids: Expectations vs. Reality

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Revisionist history and more hyperbole on your part. Picks like Nemisz were criticized from day 1 by many - I'm always amazed when posters claim to have been these "lones voices in the wilderness" while the rest of the board was blind to reality. Every day on this site there is a wide variety of opinions about each and every player and prospect discussed.

But I suppose you can group "people like you" in terms of those that take the pessimistic viewpoint - and probably more often than not you will be right about a player - because more often than not prospects fail to become impact NHLers. The odds of becoming an impact player are very slim. Or to put it another way: the odds favor those that take the negative view. So if you want to pat yourself on the back about being right about Nemisz (Sven is too early to call) then I guess congrats. You projected that a late 20s pick didn't become an NHLer. Woot.

People here are well aware of what Johnny Hockey is and the long odds he has to over come - your concerns are hardly ground breaking or news. You've picked up on a couple of comments about Kane/Toews that are probably too optimistic and are suddenly using that to suggest that a lot of fans are blindly optimistic.

But the bigger point is this - sometimes it is fun as a fan and get excited. I'll take that any day of the week over someone who takes a crap over anyone who chooses to get fired up over a prospect like Gaudreau.

Sports is supposed to be fun.

Point out the one area where I have "taken a crap" out of any prospect.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

[strombad]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Revisionist history and more hyperbole on your part. Picks like Nemisz were criticized from day 1 by many - I'm always amazed when posters claim to have been these "lones voices in the wilderness" while the rest of the board was blind to reality. Every day on this site there is a wide variety of opinions about each and every player and prospect discussed.

But I suppose you can group "people like you" in terms of those that take the pessimistic viewpoint - and probably more often than not you will be right about a player - because more often than not prospects fail to become impact NHLers. The odds of becoming an impact player are very slim. Or to put it another way: the odds favor those that take the negative view. So if you want to pat yourself on the back about being right about Nemisz (Sven is too early to call) then I guess congrats. You projected that a late 20s pick didn't become an NHLer. Woot.

People here are well aware of what Johnny Hockey is and the long odds he has to over come - your concerns are hardly ground breaking or news. You've picked up on a couple of comments about Kane/Toews that are probably too optimistic and are suddenly using that to suggest that a lot of fans are blindly optimistic.

But the bigger point is this - sometimes it is fun as a fan to get excited. I'll take that any day of the week over someone who takes a crap over anyone who chooses to get fired up over a prospect like Gaudreau.

Sports is supposed to be fun.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Point out the one area where I have "taken a crap" out of any prospect.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

Have you read your own prospect rankings? Not only is it easy to identify the prospects you don't like, you put them down with nothing to back it up. I don't mind taking a run at players, but it would be nice to see something other than generalities to describe them.

Sent from a completely unpretentious PC using a regular keyboard.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Revisionist history and more hyperbole on your part. Picks like Nemisz were criticized from day 1 by many - I'm always amazed when posters claim to have been these "lones voices in the wilderness" while the rest of the board was blind to reality. Every day on this site there is a wide variety of opinions about each and every player and prospect discussed.

But I suppose you can group "people like you" in terms of those that take the pessimistic viewpoint - and probably more often than not you will be right about a player - because more often than not prospects fail to become impact NHLers. The odds of becoming an impact player are very slim. Or to put it another way: the odds favor those that take the negative view. So if you want to pat yourself on the back about being right about Nemisz (Sven is too early to call) then I guess congrats. You projected that a late 20s pick didn't become an NHLer. Woot.

People here are well aware of what Johnny Hockey is and the long odds he has to over come - your concerns are hardly ground breaking or news. You've picked up on a couple of comments about Kane/Toews that are probably too optimistic and are suddenly using that to suggest that a lot of fans are blindly optimistic.

But the bigger point is this - sometimes it is fun as a fan to get excited. I'll take that any day of the week over someone who takes a crap over anyone who chooses to get fired up over a prospect like Gaudreau.

Sports is supposed to be fun.

The name of this thread is "Expectations vs Reality." If the "reality" crowd isn't welcome to express their opinions, that should be made clear. Maybe a more explicit thread naming format would keep the excitement vs analysis posters on this site from annoying one another.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Point out the one area where I have "taken a crap" out of any prospect.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

If you assess a Flames prospect with the same critical eye you would assess a Jets, Wild, or Hurricane prospect, you are crapping on him. In fanworld, there is only love and hate.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The name of this thread is "Expectations vs Reality." If the "reality" crowd isn't welcome to express their opinions, that should be made clear. Maybe a more explicit thread naming format would keep the excitement vs analysis posters on this site from annoying one another.

The problem with what you are saying is that reality for these players has not yet been defined. No matter how much of the supposed high ground you want to claim, they have not yet defined themselves and all the hand wringing in the world does not change that fact. You are no more correct in your estimation of the players than those who want to believe they are something greater. So please, save your obnoxious claims of these being any level of analytic data available to prove your cynicism correct in any shape of form.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

The problem with what you are saying is that reality for these players has not yet been defined. No matter how much of the supposed high ground you want to claim, they have not yet defined themselves and all the hand wringing in the world does not change that fact. You are no more correct in your estimation of the players than those who want to believe they are something greater. So please, save your obnoxious claims of these being any level of analytic data available to prove your cynicism correct in any shape of form.

By that reasoning, nobody can challenge a Canucks fan's sincere belief that they have the best pool of prospects in the NHL. Because hey, we don't know yet.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

By that reasoning, nobody can challenge a Canucks fan's sincere belief that they have the best pool of prospects in the NHL. Because hey, we don't know yet.

That is correct. And the Oilers have had the best prospects in the league for the past three or four years, just ask the analytical junkies out there.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Point out the one area where I have "taken a crap" out of any prospect.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

Didn't say you crapped on a prospect I said you crapped on people who get excited about a prospect though upon re-reading I admit my wording was confusing

[Knalus]

So, anyone else getting a really weird, St. Louis-y vibe about this rebuild? At least early on in St. Louis' actual rebuild.

About the current Flames rebuild, and with the comments about "Toews and Kane", makes me think a little. There is more than one way to skin a cat. If this doesn't specifically look like a Chicago rebuild, what else might it look like?

[Enoch Root]

nm

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Knalus

There is more than one way to skin a cat. If this doesn't specifically look like a Chicago rebuild, what else might it look like?

I was thinking Boston, at least attitude wise. Was in one of the very early early episodes where they were going over the trade that among others, sent Seguin and Peverley to Dallas and Loui Eriksson to Boston. When Eriksson was being introduced to Chiarelli, the GM told him "The fans here are smart. They know their hockey. If you come to play and put your work boots on and give a blue collar effort, they'll like you very fast. You'll fit in fine."

[kehatch]

I think St Louis is a good example of what the Flames may become. To some extend LA and Boston, but those teams are full of stars, they are just understated.

The thing about those teams is they weren't built over night. They are the results of years of good drafting and they have impact players at every age bracket. The Flames have one of the worst drafting records in the NHL outside of the last three seasons. That is why I don't see us turning things around quickly. We are still laying the foundation.

It will also be interesting to see if Burke and his new guy try and build St Louis. His MO has been get a centre piece D, get a star goalie, fill the top end with skill forwards, and surround all of that with a "black and blue" team. His teams have always been star heavy.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Didn't say you crapped on a prospect I said you crapped on people who get excited about a prospect though upon re-reading I admit my wording was confusing

I am crapping on posters? Maybe you should reread the last page or two. Pretty sure I am the crappee in this case. Anyway, nobody likes to watch a message board fight. So back to the prospects.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by kehatch

This place is nuts sometimes. In a thread called Kids: Expectations vs Realities I make an innocent and generally positive thread. Basically saying we are moving in the right direction but still have a lot of holes. All of a sudden I am accused of taking runs at prospects, trying to be the lone voice in the wilderness (and in the same thread trying to represent a group of people - not sure how that works -), of hyperbole, and as a bonus I get to have my auto signature on my smart phone app made fun of.

Maybe we need a new thread with rainbows, roses, and perfectly browned marshmallows to discuss nothing but how excited we are about these kids. But that isn't this thread. So if it is okay with you (and the mob) I will continue to state my opinions within the context of this thread.

I wasn't even being negative. Sheesh. People are too sensitive.

Well, you also said you weren't trying to start a debate, then you debated people; said you were being taken too literally, then denied being hyperbolic; and made hyperbolic claims (which you denied being hyperbolic but also said weren't literal) while refusing to explain yourself on those specific claims (like "just about every" team having a prospect as good as Monahan or better).

If that's how you're going to act, nobody is going to want to engage you properly, since you're just being evasive and troll-like. Trust me, there are enough people out there who have me blocked that I'd say I know I thing or two about how to come off like a troll to some people, and you're doing a great job.

Enough of the victim card.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by strombad

Well, you also said you weren't trying to start a debate, then you debated people; said you were being taken too literally, then denied being hyperbolic; and made hyperbolic claims (which you denied being hyperbolic but also said weren't literal) while refusing to explain yourself on those specific claims (like "just about every" team having a prospect as good as Monahan or better).

If that's how you're going to act, nobody is going to want to engage you properly, since you're just being evasive and troll-like. Trust me, there are enough people out there who have me blocked that I'd say I know I thing or two about how to come off like a troll to some people, and you're doing a great job.

Enough of the victim card.

Edit: Removed. Sorry Strombad, my mistake.

Anyway, I deleted the thread you quoted. You must have hit reply before I finished. Nobody wants to read an Internet fight. So moving in.

[strombad]

Nm

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Anyway, nobody likes to watch a message board fight.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Pick up THN Future Watch. They have Gaudreau ranked as the 29 best prospect with fewer than 50 NHL games played. They have Calgary ranked at 23 for prospects. Monahan is 8 in rookie scoring and 5 players were selected before him less than a year ago. So yes, other teams have their own list of equal or better prospects.

Colorado added Mackinnon to go with O'reilly, Landeskog, and Duchene. Tampa is sitting on Drouin and other high end prospects to join Stamkos and company. Minnesota is sitting on an army of kids led by Granlund to join a great core. Etc.

The hyperbole is that all of Calgary prospects are going to meet potential and be stars allowing us to leap frog other teams with established young players and their own great list of prospects. Monahan and Gaudreau are going to be our Toews and Kane? Two of the best NHL players in the world? Maybe. But the odds say no.

I love Monahan, Gaudreau, and the like. Some prospect sites have the Flames in the top 10 and it's great to see. But this rebuild still has a long ways to go.

You use one appeal to authority to back your opinion, and you grab the outlier.

Here's another that is very recent:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...adline/page/24

they have the Flames 8th, and that doesn't include Monahan.

Hockey 's Future (widely regarded as Flame haters) had them 13th before the season and before the emergence of Granlund, Ortio and Reinhart. It is safe to say the Flames will climb in the ranks when updated.

These are ALL just opinions. But you pull out the most negative in an attempt to show that you are the voice of reason.

The prospect pool still has a ways to go, but it has improved immensely in the last 3 years and only a hater would rank them 23rd at this point.

[theoforever]

Flames have the best prospect pool since the 80's.
There is enough there to work with, something that organization is doing a better job at as well.

Not all of those guys will be Flames or NHL'ers but more than the so called voices of reason are letting on.