Still have high hopes for Porier the kid is 21 and is far from a bust right now. Typically later first round picks are not NHL regulars until they are in the 23-24 age range.
Also he is an interesting trade chip if the Flames are going after other young players like Drouin
I think the expectations from many fans was unrealistic...he is probably not going to be a first line RW for us.
He can be a 2nd or 3rd liner for sure, but he needs to keep improving.
Maybe he gets a chance to play with Shinkaruk in Stockton and it helps them both, that would be ideal.
It think its interesting to compare Poirier to Markus Granlund. In the trade thread, many people concluded Granlund had "proved" he would never amount to more than a bottom line player in the NHL.
In this thread many people are preaching patience for Poirier.
Granlund is 22, about 20 months older than Poirier. But he has parts of two seasons in the NHL. If anything, he was further along in a trajectory to being an effective NHLer when he got traded. At 21, he was playing in the NHL.
I believe in patience for all these guys. Poirier needs to take a step next year for sure and at least be one of the better players on the AHL squad. Granlund may still turn into a very effective NHLer. With the Granlund trade, Flames get a little younger but are getting a prospect who is a longer shot at this point, IMO.
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
It think its interesting to compare Poirier to Markus Granlund. In the trade thread, many people concluded Granlund had "proved" he would never amount to more than a bottom line player in the NHL.
In this thread many people are preaching patience for Poirier.
Granlund is 22, about 20 months older than Poirier. But he has parts of two seasons in the NHL. If anything, he was further along in a trajectory to being an effective NHLer when he got traded. At 21, he was playing in the NHL.
The key part of the assertion from fans about Granlund's ceiling have to do with the fairly well established fact that between the pivotal ages of 22–24, the majority of NHL forwards have hit their target as to what sort of a player they are and will be for the balance of their careers. There is NOTHING to suggest at this point in his development that Marcus Granlund will be anything more than a third line centre at the NHL level, if that. As for Poirer—and also for Shinkaruk—there is still time for them to realistically emerge as more offensive players and better suited to top six roles. Not so for Granlund, whose development looks to have plateaued—he is what he is.
Quote:
I believe in patience for all these guys. Poirier needs to take a step next year for sure and at least be one of the better players on the AHL squad. Granlund may still turn into a very effective NHLer. With the Granlund trade, Flames get a little younger but are getting a prospect who is a longer shot at this point, IMO.
I think that everyone would by and large agree with your call for patience, but because of the disparity in their age and development, there most certainly is more room to be patient with Shinkaruk and Poirer than with Granlund.
As for your last sentence, I would respond with "a longer shot at what"? A NHL career, most obviously, but I would challenge the notion that Shinkaruk and Poirer are longer shots than Granlund to become scoring forwards in the top-six at some point. It seems most likely that Granlund will not ever play in a scoring role at the NHL level, but that is yet to be determined for the other two.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
The key part of the assertion from fans about Granlund's ceiling have to do with the fairly well established fact that between the pivotal ages of 22–24, the majority of NHL forwards have hit their target as to what sort of a player they are and will be for the balance of their careers. There is NOTHING to suggest at this point in his development that Marcus Granlund will be anything more than a third line centre at the NHL level, if that. As for Poirer—and also for Shinkaruk—there is still time for them to realistically emerge as more offensive players and better suited to top six roles. Not so for Granlund, whose development looks to have plateaued—he is what he is.
I think that everyone would by and large agree with your call for patience, but because of the disparity in their age and development, there most certainly is more room to be patient with Shinkaruk and Poirer than with Granlund.
As for your last sentence, I would respond with "a longer shot at what"? A NHL career, most obviously, but I would challenge the notion that Shinkaruk and Poirer are longer shots than Granlund to become scoring forwards in the top-six at some point. It seems most likely that Granlund will not ever play in a scoring role at the NHL level, but that is yet to be determined for the other two.
So I think you are basically saying that guys like Shinkaruk and Poirier have one more year to prove they can be a top 6 scoring forward in the NHL, because by that point, many had concluded that Granlund would not be.
Since I would argue that Granlund was further along than either player at their current age, both players are much longer shots than he was.
IMO Granlund's value to this team was to make other more expensive players expendable in other deals.
So I think you are basically saying that guys like Shinkaruk and Poirier have one more year to prove they can be a top 6 scoring forward in the NHL, because by that point, many had concluded that Granlund would not be.
Nope. Waiver eligibility.
__________________
Until the Flames make the Western Finals again, this signature shall remain frozen.
So I think you are basically saying that guys like Shinkaruk and Poirier have one more year to prove they can be a top 6 scoring forward in the NHL, because by that point, many had concluded that Granlund would not be.
I'm not keen on arbitrarily fixing these numbers to every player, but I would say that Shinkaruk and Poirier most definitely have more time to prove that they can possibly become top-six scoring forwards than does Granlund. That much, I think, is beyond dispute. I would also point out that the likelihood of Granlund becoming anything more than a utility 3/4 line forward are very slim at this juncture in his development. Like I said: he pretty much is what he is and will be in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
Since I would argue that Granlund was further along than either player at their current age, both players are much longer shots than he was.
And I would counter by pointing out that whatever Granlund did at the same age as Poirer and Shinkaruk is pretty much irrelevant. At that time, many Flames fans and hockey observers a like were justifiably fairly bullish on his ability to translate his game as a scoring forward to the NHL level—much like many are about Poirier and Shinkaruk. In the course of the past two years, he has been unable to do so.
What does this mean for Poirier and Shinkaruk? Practically nothing, since there is still a lot more time for them to develop, and to assess whether or not they will make the transition that Granlund was unable to. In other words, the opportunity is still realistically there for them, while the same window has likely closed for Granlund.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
IMO Granlund's value to this team was to make other more expensive players expendable in other deals.
That value was about to evaporate with the looming change to his waiver status. And besides, because this deal was made with an eye set on the team in 2–3 years time, and beyond the term of these expensive players of which you speak, Granlund's value is pretty fleeting, and arguably not as important as Shinkaruk's. Shinkaruk could in the course of the next calendar year set himself into the future plans of the Flames in a way that Granlund could not, because they have the time to be more patient with his development.
The gamble here is on Shinkaruk becoming at least as effective a NHL player as Granlund has become—a pretty reasonable bet, I would think. BUT, there is also the chance that he could be better—a better chance, I would say, than that Granlund will now suddenly experience a spike in his development to become a top-six scoring forward.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I admit to being a bit of a Granlund fan and think he still has room for improvement. To the point of making a guy like Backlund expendable. Not to dump his salary, but to receive real value in return in another area of need. In this case, Flames decided they would prefer a younger prospect and see how he develops. I do get the logic and buying a couple of years of waiver status is helpful. But I still feel like there is as good a chance, if not better, that Shinkaruk (or Poirier for that matter) does not become as good as Granlund than there is of them exceeding him.
The waiver wire status issue is kind of a side note. It is relevant, but ultimately I am just wondering who will be the better player. Although if your organizational philosophy is that "overcooking" your players is never a bad thing, then waiver eligibility is always going to be something you have to manage.
It is interesting that the two trades with Vancouver have been about trading young guys to get even younger (and buying some potential) vs. classic trading off of veterans.
A thing to remember about Granlund is that he'd already played two years of pro against men when he came to NA. This makes a difference as he had time to find out what would work for him and what wouldn't against tough competition. Meanwhile Poirier and now Shinkaruk have found what works for them in Junior and in the AHL but it hasn't translated in the NHL. From what I understand Poirier has been remaking his game so that it is more suited to the pros. This has come with some disappointing results for those who only stats watch without understanding the background for why this has happened. From what I've read, Shinkaruk will need to go through the same process.
So I think you are basically saying that guys like Shinkaruk and Poirier have one more year to prove they can be a top 6 scoring forward in the NHL, because by that point, many had concluded that Granlund would not be.
Since I would argue that Granlund was further along than either player at their current age, both players are much longer shots than he was.
Granlund wasn't a long shot, he lacked a game-breaking tool to elevate himself.
Poirier has game-breaking speed and is also bigger than Granlund.
So I think you are basically saying that guys like Shinkaruk and Poirier have one more year to prove they can be a top 6 scoring forward in the NHL, because by that point, many had concluded that Granlund would not be.
Since I would argue that Granlund was further along than either player at their current age, both players are much longer shots than he was.
IMO Granlund's value to this team was to make other more expensive players expendable in other deals.
I think you're also missing the idea behind trading Granlund. It was not for a perceived lack of development or anything, it was that the Flames org. review their prospect base and determined they don't have enough players with high-end skill rounding out their system. So they made a move to get one, but had to give something up of technically higher value to get some one that is, while as you say not as far along in development, has a higher projected ceiling.
We have other Granlund-type players in the system (Arnold, Grant, Jooris, Bouma, Agostino, etc..) and so he was able to be traded. No one is going to argue that Granlund is currently a better player than Shinkaruk, but that's not the point of the trade. If you have confidence that one of the above can very seamlessly fill Granlund's shoes, than you can move him out for a higher risk/return player. If Shinkaruk ends up busting, it was still worth the risk IMO.
