Oliver Kylington

[imeubu]

Originally Posted by the2bears

Actually you're not going out on any limb. You're opining on a forum. Treliving, when he makes a decision, will be going out on a limb.

You're here trying desperately to convince people of what? Almost all think he's a great d-man who has a high ceiling and is progressing very well. You? You're worried for some reason that he's not considered ultra elite already.

Not for "some reason". For a very specific and to me readily identifiable reason. He has "ultra-elite" (boy am I regretting using that) in him and the others (to me at least) do not.

I'm not desperate. I'm convinced he is good enough to be considered more valuable than I think he is currently being valued. I've been convinced about things before and been wrong.

Going out on a limb here - obviously meant "risking" the backlash of folks stating the safe, legacy ladened and obviously popular posits ad nausea as if it or they have some ecclesiastical authority.

I'm not trying to be popular or convincing... I'm trying to get folks like you to go back over the tapes and isolate on just OK especially when he does not have the puck. He is awesome! Not just good... awesome!.

I don't know what his "points" would be if he played Hanifin minutes and saw PP duty... and I'm for sure not saying he is offensively better necessarily. I'm saying he... to me... is showing Gio like (R. Ramage like, B. Park like) capacity to quarterback, read, anticipate, headman, jump up, calm and control the flow of a hockey game). I do not see that very often... so I'm impressed. Maybe I'm mistaken... but I'm pretty sure I'm not.

[Geeoff]

Obviously, things can change a lot in 2 years, but I think I'd protect 4 defensemen right now and risk losing Jankowski or Bennett instead of one of the young D.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Valimaki over Kylington is size bias.

No it is not (in fact, you often demonstrate anti-size bias).

I am a big fan of Kylington and he has tons of talent. But Valimaki is a more complete player and is demonstrating that completeness at a younger age.

Valimaki isn't like an Andersson, who is pretty good at everything, he is more like a combination of Andersson and Kylington - good at everything like Andersson, but also just as talented as Kylington.

Valimaki has the potential to be a #1. Kylington has the potential to be a #2 or #3, your top offensive defenseman.

If you think people like Valimaki better because he is bigger than Kylington, you're way off on this one.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No it is not (in fact, you often demonstrate anti-size bias).

I am a big fan of Kylington and he has tons of talent. But Valimaki is a more complete player and is demonstrating that completeness at a younger age.

Valimaki isn't like an Andersson, who is pretty good at everything, he is more like a combination of Andersson and Kylington - good at everything like Andersson, but also just as talented as Kylington.

Valimaki has the potential to be a #1. Kylington has the potential to be a #2 or #3, your top offensive defenseman.

If you think people like Valimaki better because he is bigger than Kylington, you're way off on this one.

With respect, these are just made up rankings based on pure speculation. It's perfectly reasonable to think Kylington might end up the best of the three, or Andersson, or Valimaki. Or that they all end up different, yet equally valuable players.

[Samuelsson]

What a problem to have. Three young defencemen who were drafted by us, and who all should remain on this team for years to come.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Coach

With respect, these are just made up rankings based on pure speculation. It's perfectly reasonable to think Kylington might end up the best of the three, or Andersson, or Valimaki. Or that they all end up different, yet equally valuable players.

They aren't based on pure speculation. At worst, they are opinions based on observation of all three guys and what they've done so far (including Andersson and Kylington in the minors).

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No it is not (in fact, you often demonstrate anti-size bias).

I am a big fan of Kylington and he has tons of talent. But Valimaki is a more complete player and is demonstrating that completeness at a younger age.

Valimaki isn't like an Andersson, who is pretty good at everything, he is more like a combination of Andersson and Kylington - good at everything like Andersson, but also just as talented as Kylington.

Valimaki has the potential to be a #1. Kylington has the potential to be a #2 or #3, your top offensive defenseman.

If you think people like Valimaki better because he is bigger than Kylington, you're way off on this one.

Calling Kylington just an offensive defenseman is flawed, and evidence of your size bias.

There is nothing stopping Kylington from being a #1 Defenseman, in the same vein as Roman Josi, Kris Letang, PK Subban, Duncan Keith, etc. His defensive game is not the weakness you are painting it out to be, even if it took a while for him to get there.

Maybe he doesn't get there, but putting a ceiling on him as a #2/#3 offensive defenseman shows me you're not giving credit to his two-way game and letting dated perceptions, and probably his lack of size guide your perception. You can deny it, but that ceiling tells me more than your words or your accusations of "anti-size bias" (? Why would anyone inherently want a smaller team?)

As for Valimaki demonstrating completeness at a younger age, that doesn't really speak to either player's potential. It only speaks to their unique development curve.

There is nothing about Kylington's skillset that time can't perfect. And yes, I also think Valimaki has #1 potential - just not more so than Kylington.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Calling Kylington just an offensive defenseman is flawed, and evidence of your size bias.

There is nothing stopping Kylington from being a #1 Defenseman, in the same vein as Roman Josi, Kris Letang, PK Subban, Duncan Keith, etc. His defensive game is not the weakness you are painting it out to be, even if it took a while for him to get there.

Maybe he doesn't get there, but putting a ceiling on him as a #2/#3 offensive defenseman shows me you're not giving credit to his two-way game and letting dated perceptions, and probably his lack of size guide your perception. You can deny it, but that ceiling tells me more than your words or your accusations of "anti-size bias" (? Why would anyone inherently want a smaller team?)

As for Valimaki demonstrating completeness at a younger age, that doesn't really speak to either player's potential. It only speaks to their unique development curve.

There is nothing about Kylington's skillset that time can't perfect. And yes, I also think Valimaki has #1 potential - just not more so than Kylington.

lol at the bold.

Projections aren't ceilings. Saying someone projects to be this or that is not saying that they can't become more, it simply means that the evidence, to date, suggests that the reasonable expectation is such.

We have been able to watch Kylington for 4 years now, and his defensive game has not been his strength. To be clear, I think many people are way too hard on him, and it isn't as bad as some would suggest. Nonetheless, it isn't great, it's fine, okay. I woulkd even say it's coming along quite well. But it isn't his strength.

Valimaki, by contrast, has already shown a more rounded game, despite being younger and having less pro experience.

In order to be a true #1, you have to be great offensively AND defensively. At this point, Valimaki shows reasonable promise on both fronts. To date, Kylington shows promise offensively, but less so defensively. Not terrible though, which is why I suggested a #2-3, not a #4-5 as many do.

There is definitely some bias in this thread, but it isn't coming from me.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Nonetheless, it isn't great, it's fine, okay.

Well we will have to disagree. His play in the defensive and neutral zones at this point been better than his play in the offensive zone to me. If anything I have bigger reservations about his offense at this point as he seems overly very deferential.

This isn't really about where he was at 4 or 3 years ago, because he has made rapid improvement. The reticence to give credit to his defensive play doesn't jive with my observations. Sure he could stand to improve on his net front play... so could a lot of #1s at the same age. There is a lot more to defense than just net front play though, and even a guy like Keith generally let a Seabrook or Hjalmarsson handle that for him... didn't make him a #2. Karlsson playing with Methot didn't make him a #2 either.

Alex Pietrangelo might be the single most complete defenseman in the NHL, but that doesn't mean he's better than other, less rounded, more skilled players. That's where I stand on this Valimaki vs Kylington debate. Dynamic skill is still paramount- in all three zones - and Kylington still has that edge.

[sun]

Can we pause for a moment to savour the fact that we are arguing about which one of our FOUR 20-22 year old STUDS is our most likely future #1 D?

Life is good, Flames fans.

[imeubu]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

^ Valimaki will not be exempt from expansion

Back to Kylington..I really like him and think he has the most offensive potential out of all the rookie dmen.

I defiantly think he has the potential of Brodie in that he can be a higher end fleet footed offensive defenceman. I think he could have more offensive potential really because he can shoot the puck better than Brodie.

I want the Flames to keep all 3 of the rookie D and would be extremely disappointed if any were traded.

Most anything else in the cupboards would be on the table for Stone but those 3 should be here to stay.

Worry about expansion when the time comes.

Hear Hear!

[imeubu]

Ok so I have listened to everyone and have begun my re-evaluation regarding how great I think Kylington can be.

I took three 30 second examples from the third period today because I'm hoping some of the readers will still have access to that video.

Example 1 - 3rd Period: 19:30 remaining. A two on two opportunity for Arizona (Krause and Archibald) at the Flames blue line.

Here I'm trying to communicate the "type" of skill set I'm seeing from Kylington and because this sort of play is not scoring chance or a physically demanding play it is seldom noticed and so is a little harder to illustrate. We all get replays of big checks and goals/nifty offensive chances.

That's not what I am so excited about with Kylington even though I think he will have offensive skills for sure.

This is an example of when "elite" comes in and what I'm asking everyone to look for in Kylington.

Kylington (based on many other times I've seen him do it) manages these situation so much better than the average good defense man. He would not have shown that much respect to the play. He would have stood up just a split second longer, not backed in as far and would never have allowed that much distance between himself and Archibald. He would then have been in position to step back up with a stick check as the pass back was arriving and no shot would have ever resulted.

Kylington it seems is always that much more "in tune" and "aware". It's a positioning/probability estimate that seems for him to be an innate thing.

Example 2: Same period between 7:30 and 7:00 minutes remaining:

Watch as two Flames defense men (IMO) seem to be at times both out of position (both below the goal line leaving opposing player alone in front of Smith) and disoriented (for example... one of them turning away from opposing players rather than towards them).

This creates several bad situations culminating in a dangerous point shot... primarily because the same defense man who turned away from the play was most likely feeling a little impotent in the moment... then compounds the issue by actually and inexplicably trying to deflect that point shot... one on which clearly Smith was not screened and would otherwise have had an easy save.

I picked that last clip because it leads into this next 30 seconds (continue watching from 7:00 to 6:30 minutes remaining) as Kylington comes on the ice to (as usual) do absolutely nothing... but again... that is not what I see.

Watch how Kylington always seems to have everything in focus... you get the feeling he knows where everyone is and where everyone is likely to be. Doesn't overplay, doesn't get out of position... moves to the puck at exactly the right time and does the most efficient thing when he arrives to quickly reposition again perfectly... then guess who happens to be in exactly the right place to jump up and join a breakout rush... finding all the open ice north of the 49th parallel... provides a great opportunity but as usual... no one notices him.

Just sayin.

[dirk diggler]

its just nice that the Flames have some good young d that they developed. for a long time, they developed nothing in the way of d men

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by imeubu

Ok so I have listened to everyone and have begun my re-evaluation regarding how great I think Kylington can be.

I took three 30 second examples from the third period today because I'm hoping some of the readers will still have access to that video.

Example 1 - 3rd Period: 19:30 remaining. A two on two opportunity for Arizona (Krause and Archibald) at the Flames blue line.

Here I'm trying to communicate the "type" of skill set I'm seeing from Kylington and because this sort of play is not scoring chance or a physically demanding play it is seldom noticed and so is a little harder to illustrate. We all get replays of big checks and goals/nifty offensive chances.

That's not what I am so excited about with Kylington even though I think he will have offensive skills for sure.

This is an example of when "elite" comes in and what I'm asking everyone to look for in Kylington.

Kylington (based on many other times I've seen him do it) manages these situation so much better than the average good defense man. He would not have shown that much respect to the play. He would have stood up just a split second longer, not backed in as far and would never have allowed that much distance between himself and Archibald. He would then have been in position to step back up with a stick check as the pass back was arriving and no shot would have ever resulted.

Kylington it seems is always that much more "in tune" and "aware". It's a positioning/probability estimate that seems for him to be an innate thing.

Example 2: Same period between 7:30 and 7:00 minutes remaining:

Watch as two Flames defense men (IMO) seem to be at times both out of position (both below the goal line leaving opposing player alone in front of Smith) and disoriented (for example... one of them turning away from opposing players rather than towards them).

This creates several bad situations culminating in a dangerous point shot... primarily because the same defense man who turned away from the play was most likely feeling a little impotent in the moment... then compounds the issue by actually and inexplicably trying to deflect that point shot... one on which clearly Smith was not screened and would otherwise have had an easy save.

I picked that last clip because it leads into this next 30 seconds (continue watching from 7:00 to 6:30 minutes remaining) as Kylington comes on the ice to (as usual) do absolutely nothing... but again... that is not what I see.

Watch how Kylington always seems to have everything in focus... you get the feeling he knows where everyone is and where everyone is likely to be. Doesn't overplay, doesn't get out of position... moves to the puck at exactly the right time and does the most efficient thing when he arrives to quickly reposition again perfectly... then guess who happens to be in exactly the right place to jump up and join a breakout rush... finding all the open ice north of the 49th parallel... provides a great opportunity but as usual... no one notices him.

Just sayin.

Look, I'm happy you are excited about Kylington. But taking a couple plays where the guy did something right, or even great, doesn't prove much. I could play a couple clips of lots of players where they will look all world. Conversely, I can play a couple clips of Gio or Hedman or Lidstrom or Orr where, without knowing their body of work, would make you wonder how they ever got an NHL job.

I can tell you that Kylington has made many rookie mistakes this year, which you seem to have missed. But so what - he's a rookie. He's going to be good IMO, and much better than his scouting, and even his play in the AHL, suggested. I think he's almost certainly a second pairing guy. His ceiling is a top skating offensive guy.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I noticed one play where Kylington was sitting on the bench and one of the other D was coming off the ice on a linechange. Without even looking up, Kylington slid down the bench to make room for this guy. I agree he keeps everything in focus and he innately knows when to slide and how far to slide. Ultra elite.

[imeubu]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Look, I'm happy you are excited about Kylington. But taking a couple plays where the guy did something right, or even great, doesn't prove much. I could play a couple clips of lots of players where they will look all world. Conversely, I can play a couple clips of Gio or Hedman or Lidstrom or Orr where, without knowing their body of work, would make you wonder how they ever got an NHL job.

I can tell you that Kylington has made many rookie mistakes this year, which you seem to have missed. But so what - he's a rookie. He's going to be good IMO, and much better than his scouting, and even his play in the AHL, suggested. I think he's almost certainly a second pairing guy. His ceiling is a top skating offensive guy.

Seriously I've looked hard for them and have not found many if any. Physical mistakes are not as important as mental. I've not seen a single example of a mental mistake. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'd just appreciate it if you could direct me to them. I have all the games on tape so I'd really like your help. Thanks.

Obviously I sent a few clips from one recent period for the convenience of the reader. I wouldn't expect you to go looking for old clips.

Obviously I sent those examples not to "prove" anything but to "illustrate" what I'm have difficulting communicating. I used to call it the "it" factor".

I believe he has a clear and obvious leg up when it comes to "on ice awareness" and that is what I'm hoping someone with some influence might be convinced to "re-examine" at that crucial moment just before they decide to trade him or leave him unprotected. Thanks again. Cheers!

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by imeubu

Cherry picking of small sample size

What is your goal here? We think he's progressing very well, with a fairly high ceiling for potential. That's not enough for you?

Why are you so bothered we're not fawning over him all the time? Why the need to constantly fluff him? It's actually possible for the Flames to have a few good, young, d-men at the same time.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by imeubu

I believe he has a clear and obvious leg up when it comes to "on ice awareness" and that is what I'm hoping someone with some influence might be convinced to "re-examine" at that crucial moment just before they decide to trade him or leave him unprotected. Thanks again. Cheers!

if anyone from the Flames organization is looking to anonymous message boards for scouting information to help them decide on whom to protect during an expansion draft they ought to be fired.

immediately.

[bigrangy]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

if anyone from the Flames organization is looking to anonymous message boards for scouting information to help them decide on whom to protect during an expansion draft they ought to be fired.

immediately.

Montreal’s pro scouts were watching reddit/youtube and it paid off on them picking Byron on waivers

There’s a lot the internet can tell actual professionals about running a hockey team, sometimes.

Ask Edmonton fans if any random could have done a better job than their GM did

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by bigrangy

Montreal’s pro scouts were watching reddit/youtube and it paid off on them picking Byron on waivers

There’s a lot the internet can tell actual professionals about running a hockey team, sometimes.

Ask Edmonton fans if any random could have done a better job than their GM did

Pretty low bar.