[PGT] Flames dominate, but lose 2-1 to the Sharks in OT.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Can you provide examples of this statement? (legit question, don't know if its right or wrong)

Another perspective. Some people asking for a steady 20-25 G, it is a pretty tall order.

Firstly, the power forwards mentioned all came straight from junior to the NHL. (Iggy, Bert, Lucic, Shanahan). They didn't need seasoning in the minors.

Lucic peaked at age 23. 30 G 62 points. Had 27 points his first season straight out of junior. Paid the price earlier, picks his spots more now. Reasonably steady now, 5 seasons later, probably good for 25 G 50

Iggy came out of the gate with 21 G and 50 pts. When he was 23 he had improved to 29 G 63 pts in 77 GP. 2 years later the peak -52 G, 96 pts.

Shanahan had 72 points in 73 games in his third season at age 21. Peaked at age 25 with 52 G, 102 Pts. He was also putting up at least 100 PIMs like clockwork from year 1 through his 18th season. Engaged.

Bertuzzi peaked around 27-28 where he had his only two seasons greater than point per game. 85 in 72 then 97 in 82. From age 25-30 he was consistently good for 25 G (x3) with single instances of 36 and 46. The rest of his career outside those years, 5 or 6 seasons with 15-18 G and 40-45 pts. When Bert had his couple of big seasons, he was playing a big game still. Bert broke in at age 20 with 39 pts in 76 GP, regressed for a few years, then was good for points in the 30s, hitting 50 at age 25.

Now Ferly is 23. Last year 2 G 5 pts in 26 GP. This year 4 G 12 pts in 55 GP. Gone from +1 to -15. The eye test says he is not engaged on a regular basis.
The guy projects for 6 G 18 points.

Owen Nolan is another power forward. Came out fully baked with greater than a point per game at 20 and so on for his first few years, then declined after a few years with a single anomaly season at age 28 where he hit 84 points.

Never mind power forwards. Gretzky's two seasons with greater than 200 points, he was, what 23 and 24?

Back to Ferly

"Being good for 20-25" consistently is hoping that this guy triples or quadruples his production.

He already has stopped playing the game that worked against Van in the playoffs.

In my opinion he is what he is. People don't magically turn in to 3 or 4 times the player they were at the peak age for players, as they move forward. Particularly when you are observing plateau or regression when they are at their peak.

By the way, guess how old Bouma was last year? 25? That was likely the peak.

Sorry to the Ferly lovers, but the probabilities don't project to him being somebody who magically becomes something that he is not already. He may have actually peaked in the playoffs last year

[Calgary4LIfe]

I think you just need to show patience with a lot of these guys. Yes, they are all disappointing from time to time - but Iginla even at his prime had disappointing games.

I love how Ferland tries to dangle sometimes. I think it is a combination of 'bad luck' and just needing to fine-tune his shot at the NHL level. He has a very deceptive shot, and the way he carries the puck is something you don't expect from a grinder/fighter type. I said this a few years ago, and I will keep saying it - Ferland will be a fan favorite. He will be a fan favorite for more than just his hits and his occasional fights - the kid will help drive offence for the Flames. I do think he can get 20+ goals in a season down the line - might even really surprise you with how much he can produce. I think he is a better player than Kassian - they are both similar in certain ways, but Ferland's hockey sense is so much better. We just need to give him time to adapt.

Also, I mentioned this in a game thread not to long ago - but I am almost personally convinced that Ferland has been told to avoid fighting by the staff. Remember, this kid was almost always ready to go and was looking for a fight early on. Concussions are a very real concern with him. He is at least toned down that part of his game quite a lot, and that is ok. He isn't causing that ruckus that you would normally expect out of him, but I think he is still fairly quick to step-in and support his teammates when things start happening. You always see him go straight at the net when play is stopped, not to cause stuff, but to make sure he is there in case something does start. That's important.

Colborne has been trending up. Many posters wanted (and probably still do) him traded at the deadline for a pick. Heck, I would think twice for a late first. He has really good speed (big guys like him are so deceptive). He has only been learning how to play a 'bigger' game in the last couple of seasons, and is starting to be better at it. He can provide good depth scoring. Yes, he has his warts - but don't let his age fool you. This is a kid that grew up being a certain type of player, and now he is changing his game (as should have happened years ago) to play a different type of game. I think he is still a developing player who could really be extremely useful in a bottom 6 role. I think you get happy if a late first turns into a bottom-6 useful player that can provide depth scoring.

Poirier is having a down season - but I am still very high on him. Kid plays with that snarl, and he has a tonne of speed. Remember, he had more SH goals than PP goals his draft + year. Any way you slice it, that is damn impressive for that age. He had a marvelous rookie season in the AHL and was an all-star. First season he is having a bit of trouble, and that's ok. 2 consecutive seasons of issues turning into 3 is when you can start writing them off. If anything, he has been rebounding lately, and that is a great sign.

I am not very high on Jooris myself. I just see him as a guy that is often easily replaceable. Doesn't really drive offence, doesn't make other players better, but just works hard out there and has good wheels. In my opinion, he is losing his job to Hathaway. I personally don't really think Agostino is going to make it anywhere close to a top 6 player (though I think some people do think so). I see Agostino stealing Jooris' job next season. Jooris will get a bit more expensive with the qualifying offer (automatic marginal increase). I think he will get replaced.

Hathaway has really come in and done well for himself. I do wonder if he keeps it up - not that I am putting it all on just 'youthful exuberance' that will fade, but interested to see if he keeps it up having to actually fight guys, or getting a lot more attention as the games wear on. Even as an agitator, you sometimes just have to pick your spots and your games.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Another perspective. Some people asking for a steady 20-25 G, it is a pretty tall order.

Firstly, the power forwards mentioned all came straight from junior to the NHL. (Iggy, Bert, Lucic, Shanahan). They didn't need seasoning in the minors.

Lucic peaked at age 23. 30 G 62 points. Had 27 points his first season straight out of junior. Paid the price earlier, picks his spots more now. Reasonably steady now, 5 seasons later, probably good for 25 G 50

Iggy came out of the gate with 21 G and 50 pts. When he was 23 he had improved to 29 G 63 pts in 77 GP. 2 years later the peak -52 G, 96 pts.

Shanahan had 72 points in 73 games in his third season at age 21. Peaked at age 25 with 52 G, 102 Pts. He was also putting up at least 100 PIMs like clockwork from year 1 through his 18th season. Engaged.

Bertuzzi peaked around 27-28 where he had his only two seasons greater than point per game. 85 in 72 then 97 in 82. From age 25-30 he was consistently good for 25 G (x3) with single instances of 36 and 46. The rest of his career outside those years, 5 or 6 seasons with 15-18 G and 40-45 pts. When Bert had his couple of big seasons, he was playing a big game still. Bert broke in at age 20 with 39 pts in 76 GP, regressed for a few years, then was good for points in the 30s, hitting 50 at age 25.

Now Ferly is 23. Last year 2 G 5 pts in 26 GP. This year 4 G 12 pts in 55 GP. Gone from +1 to -15. The eye test says he is not engaged on a regular basis.
The guy projects for 6 G 18 points.

Owen Nolan is another power forward. Came out fully baked with greater than a point per game at 20 and so on for his first few years, then declined after a few years with a single anomaly season at age 28 where he hit 84 points.

Never mind power forwards. Gretzky's two seasons with greater than 200 points, he was, what 23 and 24?

Back to Ferly

"Being good for 20-25" consistently is hoping that this guy triples or quadruples his production.

He already has stopped playing the game that worked against Van in the playoffs.

In my opinion he is what he is. People don't magically turn in to 3 or 4 times the player they were at the peak age for players, as they move forward. Particularly when you are observing plateau or regression when they are at their peak.

By the way, guess how old Bouma was last year? 25? That was likely the peak.

Sorry to the Ferly lovers, but the probabilities don't project to him being somebody who magically becomes something that he is not already. He may have actually peaked in the playoffs last year

These are all good points - but Ferland started out in hockey much later than these guys. Most of the guys you are using in your example were all way ahead of Ferland and were relatively high picks. Ferland was a 5th round pick, who then blossomed into a scorer.

It is always difficult to find comparables in such cases, but I don't think any of the guys you mentioned are really direct comparisons - at least when it comes to development timelines.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

These are all good points - but Ferland started out in hockey much later than these guys. Most of the guys you are using in your example were all way ahead of Ferland and were relatively high picks. Ferland was a 5th round pick, who then blossomed into a scorer.

It is always difficult to find comparables in such cases, but I don't think any of the guys you mentioned are really direct comparisons - at least when it comes to development timelines.

Yeah when I picked those power forwards it was a comparison of years development in the NHL instead of age. These guys were always going to be better but still needed a few years experience compared to snipers and skill guys that came into their own in 2-3 seasons compared to power towards needing 4-5.

I don't know if Ferland is going to be top 6 material, but I think a good direct comparison is Glencross who took a few years and three teams to finally develop into a strong third liner who could fill in top 6 minutes. I think the biggest disservice ever done to him was trying to force him into top line minutes when he was always more effective at the 15 min range.

Its easy for Hathaway to play with that intensity for 8-10 mins a game, if the coaches want Ferland playing 15-18 (I don't actually know what he's at) I could see them teaching him to reign in the aggression and saving energy and I feel this season is him learning the balance, some games he's 100%, some he's 20% but with more experience he will find the good balance like Glencross did. Thats my hope at least.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

These are all good points - but Ferland started out in hockey much later than these guys. Most of the guys you are using in your example were all way ahead of Ferland and were relatively high picks. Ferland was a 5th round pick, who then blossomed into a scorer.

It is always difficult to find comparables in such cases, but I don't think any of the guys you mentioned are really direct comparisons - at least when it comes to development timelines.

This just sounds like saying our guy is different than every other guy who's played so he won't follow the same development path of everyone else.

I'll take the 100s of guys who came before instead of expected our guy to be a special flower who's different.

Ferland scored a bunch in junior (way more than Lucic). His late start didn't seem to effect him there, but now 5 years later its an issue?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Yeah when I picked those power forwards it was a comparison of years development in the NHL instead of age. These guys were always going to be better but still needed a few years experience compared to snipers and skill guys that came into their own in 2-3 seasons compared to power towards needing 4-5.

I don't know if Ferland is going to be top 6 material, but I think a good direct comparison is Glencross who took a few years and three teams to finally develop into a strong third liner who could fill in top 6 minutes. I think the biggest disservice ever done to him was trying to force him into top line minutes when he was always more effective at the 15 min range.

Its easy for Hathaway to play with that intensity for 8-10 mins a game, if the coaches want Ferland playing 15-18 (I don't actually know what he's at) I could see them teaching him to reign in the aggression and saving energy and I feel this season is him learning the balance, some games he's 100%, some he's 20% but with more experience he will find the good balance like Glencross did. Thats my hope at least.

Hathaway so far this season is playing 12:06 per game, Ferland is playing 12:26. He's not playing much more often.

[Southside]

I was always a Ferland supporter. I really enjoyed his coming out party (last year playoffs series vs Canucks) but I am not enjoying his game at all anymore. Truth is the guy is only effective when fully engaged and playing on the edge. We haven't seen that this year, but for a few choice moments. Bieksa could well call him irrelevant now.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Hathaway so far this season is playing 12:06 per game, Ferland is playing 12:26. He's not playing much more often.

Thanks, didn't know that one for sure. Maybe Ferkland should pick it up then! More smash needed!

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Ferland scored a bunch in junior (way more than Lucic). His late start didn't seem to effect him there, but now 5 years later its an issue?

Actually it did.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...php?pid=119077

We picked him in his first junior season after he scored half a point per game. The year after? Point per game. The year after? One of the WHL leaders in goals and points. He was even sent back to junior as an overager to get him more experience. His pro career? We didn't leave him in the minors long enough for him to learn to dominate that level. So much like the older Colborne we're still developing him while he's playing in the NHL.

Not sure why people don't want to be patient with a kid who started playing hockey VERY late, had conditioning/legal/substance abuse issues and shows a lot of promise at the NHL level.

You can't fast forward development. Ferland is going to continue to improve, NO reason to think he won't. He's a late bloomer due to his starting hockey so late so his timeline doesn't have to be the same as other players.

Go ahead and give up on him if you want, I don't think management and the coaches will be and that's what it is important. He still has the chance to develop into a very useful and important player for us. His skill level seems to be very underrated by some fans, he makes a lot of simple and smart players. He plays the game the right way IMO.

[Flash Walken]

Saying he was sent back to junior as an over-ager is like saying the Flames sent down Ortio to the AHL for experience.

The real reason is they weren't good enough for the league they were in, otherwise they would've stayed up with the club and gotten experience in a better league.

Ultimately it comes down to this:

When given comparable icetime, guys like Colborne, Jooris, Byron etc have all significantly outproduced Ferland in the same role. This year, the waiver wire pickup Paul Byron, has twice as many goals as Ferland in less games.

He's 23 years old, it's put up or shut up time for him. Adding Hathaway to the mix and seeing what he has to offer is just making Ferland look worse as he is clearly lacking in the same get up and go that some of the other roster players have shown this year.

If he has such offensive upside, why aren't we seeing any of it?

The simple answer is that it isn't translating to the NHL. It's as simple as that.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Reading is fun.

As is being an ass, apparently.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

When given comparable icetime, guys like Colborne, Jooris, Byron etc have all significantly outproduced Ferland in the same role. This year, the waiver wire pickup Paul Byron, has twice as many goals as Ferland in less games.

Ferland is 23. Colborne is 26. Byron is 26. Jooris is 25. Try comparing apples to apples.

Ferland at 23 is more comparable to Freddie Hamilton, Turner Elson, Kenny Agostino, Drew Shore and Bill Arnold in terms of age and players in our organization. Have you written off Bill Arnold too? I didn't even notice him last game!

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

He's 23 years old, it's put up or shut up time for him.

Nope, it's development time for him still. You wanting to fast forward that doesn't change anything. Plenty of players haven't even made the NHL by 23. Ferland isn't a finished product.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If he has such offensive upside, why aren't we seeing any of it?

We are, try watching him more closely if you aren't noticing it. He's making small, skilled plays that will result in points at some point. He's doing the right things, making smart plays. I can't make you watch the kid closely but a lot of the fans that are watching him closely are noticing him playing well and showing a lot of signs of promise for when he's fully developed. Sorry that a late blooming player isn't fully developed by 23.

I mean what more can we say (those who believe Ferland is still developing and on the right track)? Either people don't appreciate the type of game he plays or aren't really watching him closely.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Ferland is 23. Colborne is 26. Byron is 26. Jooris is 25. Try comparing apples to apples.

3 years ago Colborne scored 10 goals and 28 points. Last year at 24 years old, Jooris scored 12 goals in 60 games. Paul Byron scored 7 goals in 47 games 3 years ago. There's your apples to apples comparison, and it doesn't look good for Ferland.

Ferland at 23 is more comparable to Freddie Hamilton, Turner Elson, Kenny Agostino, Drew Shore and Bill Arnold in terms of age and players in our organization.

Drew Shore has better career NHL numbers than Ferland.

When Drew Shore was the same age as Ferland he put up more points in less games, and now he's not even in the league 2 years later.

I mean what more can we say (those who believe Ferland is still developing and on the right track)? Either people don't appreciate the type of game he plays or aren't really watching him closely.

Either I agree with your or I'm not watching him play? Larf.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Sorry but you can't judge developing forwards at the NHL level just on points, that's silly. Judge him based on every single action he makes in the game and then get back to us. What parts of his game don't you like?

We have no indication you actually watch Ferland. You haven't talked about how he plays at all or the decisions he makes. All you do is point to the stat sheet. For all we know you aren't even watching the Flames play. People when they complain about certain players like Colborne usually bring up particular plays they don't like or habits or style of play. You on Ferland? Just looking at the point sheet and don't say a word about how he plays.

Your opinion on him is worthless so far, you haven't backed it up with anything.

[Southside]

I'm not looking for points from Ferland. Points would be gravy. Where the hell are the meat and potatoes? That's what I'm looking for and not finding it.

[sinceAtlanta]

Thus far, Ferland has played 90 games (PO included) in the NHL. Hathaway has just started.
They'll keep improving, that's for sure -- Flames brass believes in them and will give them every opportunity to do so.
If they continue developing into Calgary's version of (NYI) Matt Martin and Cal Clutterbuck, fans alike will be stoked.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Sorry but you can't judge developing forwards at the NHL level just on points, that's silly. Judge him based on every single action he makes in the game and then get back to us. What parts of his game don't you like?

We have no indication you actually watch Ferland. You haven't talked about how he plays at all or the decisions he makes. All you do is point to the stat sheet. For all we know you aren't even watching the Flames play. People when they complain about certain players like Colborne usually bring up particular plays they don't like or habits or style of play. You on Ferland? Just looking at the point sheet and don't see a word about how he plays.

Your opinion on him is worthless so far, you haven't backed it up with anything.

There it is again: I must not be watching the games. Ludicrous.

Ferland has no finish at the NHL level. That's why arguments about the little things he does are the makeup of your argument. I'm not the one making the argument that Ferland has top 6 upside, that's your argument and the stat line is a pretty easy way of refuting it. You don't get top 6 icetime for dumping the puck in at the right time or making a good play in the corner. You get top 6 icetime by producing goals and points and Ferland simply does not do that.

You are assuming that possession statistics and the eye-test correlate with an unchanging linear progression. Enoch Root made the same argument, the only difference between Byron and Ferland for him is that last year the goals weren't going in for Byron and this year they are. Well, when the goals weren't going in for Byron last year, he was still out producing what Ferland is doing this season and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Byron was getting much choice icetime with the team's best offensive players at even strength and on the power play.

The other aspect of this is Ferland's team worst -15. That doesn't necessarily reflect on his ability to play top 6 minutes, but it definitely reflects on his ability to play at the NHL level. 4 Goals, 12 points, -15 in 55 games is not exactly a ringing endorsement for his future at 23 years old. That's Linden Vey territory and you'd be laughed off this message board if you argued Vey projects to be a top 6 forward in the NHL.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

W/E. We're not going to change each others minds. Let's see how Ferland looks in 2-3 years.

BTW you can't refute an argument about a young player's upside by pointing to his stats when he's not fully developed. Joe Thornton had 19 points in 55 games in his rookie year. Clearly he didn't have top two line upside right?

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Southside

I'm not looking for points from Ferland. Points would be gravy. Where the hell are the meat and potatoes? That's what I'm looking for and not finding it.

You know Ferland leads the team in hits and that nobody else is close to him, right?

[heep223]

Ferland:

*good skater
*good size
*good physicality
*shows flashes of top six skill and seems to get scoring chances, but hasn't been able to translate into points
*shows flashes of "truculence", but then will disappear for a while
*issues with consistency
*was a major factor in winning a playoff series
*if he doesn't progress over the next two years or so, this might be what he is

He's pretty much all potential right now that hasn't been met, with a few flashes of brilliance such as round 1 last year.