Ferland never coasted like Bourque, ever. If you think they are comparable, then you clearly don't remember Bourque.
This place is terrible sometimes, how it turns on players as soon as they are no longer Flames property.
Flames fans can be bitter. But lets be honest, Ferland was a feel good story that many of us can't help but cheer for, regardless of what team he plays on. I hope he has a long and successful career.
Bourque on the other hand...
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to redpaint For This Useful Post:
Flames fans can be bitter. But lets be honest, Ferland was a feel good story that many of us can't help but cheer for, regardless of what team he plays on. I hope he has a long and successful career.
Bourque on the other hand...
Bourque on the other hand...
averaged 54 points per 82 games over his entire tenure in Calgary.
Yes?
He wasn’t a feel good story because people were talking about him when he was hot, potentially being to displace Iggy, but then he came back to earth.
Produced very well here, far better and more consistently than Ferland, and was fortunately traded at the right time.
was an easy player to dislike. Bumped into him a couple of times at cowboys.
Compare all you want, they are completely different players, attitudes and people in general. expectations may have been the same but in my eyes they were nowhere near the same player, especially in terms of heart and compete level.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to redpaint For This Useful Post:
Bourque for a 2nd round pick with Chicago. Great trade and had some really good years. His best years were with the Flames. I liked the return when we traded him to Montreal.
Ferland a 5th round pick for Calgary. Great pick and had some really good years. Tough to lose him but I like the trade with Carolina.
I have a lot of respect for Ferland and I am glad he is doing well on a new team. I hope that when he comes back to Calgary on January 22 the fans give him a warm welcome.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to TheIronMaiden For This Useful Post:
I disagree his value was near zero and doubt Treliving valued him as such. If he did, that’s an example of extremely poor asset management, not great asset management.
Where would you place the value on a player you hold no rights to, who has yet to play an NHL game and has told you that he will not be signing with your team?
If Bennett is seen as even a hair more valuable than Ferland long term for this organization and the Canes wanted Bennett and Treliving was able to make it Ferland + someone with absolutely no value to your organization (beyond trade bait) then I still believe it is great asset management and excellent asset management assuming Fox tests free agency.
__________________ OFFICIAL CP REALTOR & PROPERTY MANAGER
Travis Munroe | Century 21 Elevate | 403.971.4300
Where would you place the value on a player you hold no rights to, who has yet to play an NHL game and has told you that he will not be signing with your team?
If Bennett is seen as even a hair more valuable than Ferland long term for this organization and the Canes wanted Bennett and Treliving was able to make it Ferland + someone with absolutely no value to your organization (beyond trade bait) then I still believe it is great asset management and excellent asset management assuming Fox tests free agency.
I think two of your first three points aren’t necessarily accurate. Fox has said that he told the Flames no such thing. And the Flames absolutely did hold his rights.
So I do believe Treliving placed value on Fox but it’s ceetainly very subjective as to whether Flames received adequate value for him in the trade.
Wow. Bourque was perceived as having issues with effort but averaged something like 54 points over 82 games in Calgary.
He had such a hot start one year that people were wondering if he would displace Iggy as the top winger. The disappointment was that he ended up with 50 odd points
And the current opinion is that people are turning on Ferland when he left?
Bourque wasn’t god’s gift to hockey. His years after Calgary were nothing to write home about. But his years in Calgary were a heck of a lot more productive, on average across the whole time good and bad, than Ferland’s best year.
And Ferland coasted his ass off on the 4th line many games when he thought he was a scorer.
Silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
Bourque on the other hand...
averaged 54 points per 82 games over his entire tenure in Calgary.
Yes?
He wasn’t a feel good story because people were talking about him when he was hot, potentially being to displace Iggy, but then he came back to earth.
Produced very well here, far better and more consistently than Ferland, and was fortunately traded at the right time.
Not sure exactly what you're arguing here... Yeah, Bourque had a lot of points here and proved himself to be more of a goal scorer and point producer. Then coasted after a larger contract was signed, which brought into question his compete level and effort. He had the talent, but not the effort and it was frustrating as hell.
Ferland is a guy who has less talent, but more effort, which makes him more likeable.
You're right. he produced far better than Ferland over a longer period of time, because Ferland is more of a bottom 6er grinder type, who is more than likely playing over his head right now.
Tell me again how they compare? I must have missed the discussions where fans thought Ferland was the future of Calgary.
The Following User Says Thank You to CalgaryFan1988 For This Useful Post:
When both are on their game they were/are excellent and can put up serious numbers
Both also tend to be extremely streaky players.
Both look extremely disengaged at times.
Yeah, but you can say that for a lot of the snipers out there as well. The thing is, I see no comparison between Bourque and Ferland as players on the ice. Ferland is more like a power forward who can really throw his weight around whereas Bourque had more finesse. Ferland is what Treliving's vision of truculence. This is why trading Ferland was a bit shocking for me.
Sure. But Houston was a pretty good example. Or Pepper, or Plett, or Bridgeman, or maybe Beers.
Funny - hockeydb has Houston listed as a D, which is absolutely not true.
Houston was streakier than all those other guys. He would score half his points in a week or two every year.
In 1980-81, he had 20 points over a 14 game stretch, but only finished with a total of 30 (in 42 games).
In 1981-82, he had one stretch with 9 points in 6 games, and another of 14 points in 6 games. He finished with 44 points.
Last edited by Eric Vail; 10-24-2018 at 09:39 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Eric Vail For This Useful Post:
Possibly but MacLellan was a horrible fighter. Plus he didn't have the offensive acumen and hands that Ferland has. Nor did he hit like Ferland. He was merely big.
