🚨 The Zayne Parekh show has arrived 🚨

[shutout]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I think this quote by St.Louis on coaching Demidov is what we are all looking for:
https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comm...day_on_rookie/

Parekh is going to need to "have some foundation and non-negotiables" as St. Louis says. But because Parekh plays defense his list of requirements is going to be longer and more detailed than it is for a winger like Demidov.

A winger you can let them go and freewheel and play offense because there is a defense back to help out. If you are just expecting the Flames to let Parekh go out and play however he wants and not focus and be committed to what is happening in his own zone than you are crazy.

You want to give Parekh freedom to do whatever he wants than play him as a winger, but as a defenseman you have to play within a team structure in your own zone. Game is to quick and pace to high to be able to improvise every time you get the puck. Systems are in place so that players know what to do with puck when they are pressured.

Once the team has possession and the puck is heading to the opponents end and is in their zone you allow all of the players, Parekh included, to create opportunities.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yes, Boston is well known for just unleashing offensive prospects and not having them work on defence at all, like Bergeron and Marchand. Jake Debrusk? He's a 14 OA who gets around 40 points. Coronato is a 13 OA who gets similar production.

Why did you include Brandon Carlo as some sort of evidence of developing offence? Dude is just shy of being a first rounder and gets around 16 points a year.

Outside of top 10 picks, Calgary has developed Gaudreau, Coronato, Mangiapane, Dube, Giordano (undrafted but still), Backlund, Brodie, Ferland.

Five-hole doesn’t seem to have any idea of what he’s talking about or even what kind of point he’s trying to make. Holy moly.

Brandon Carlo as an example as a high end skill guy?

Boston getting credit for Versteeg who didn’t play a single game with them?

lol

[FlamesAddiction]

With Parekh, is not like trying to teach an old dog new tricks. He is still very much a prospect. Just because he is currently with the NHL team, it's not like the learning ends, so you have to at least try to get him to become a more well rounded player. It would be a disservice not to. If you try and despite best efforts, he settles in as a one-dimensional offensive player, so be it, at least you tried. What I don't like is the notion that it's beneath him or some kind of insult to his talent level.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Independent analysis has been done that shows they are not bottom of the league when normalized for pick volume and quality. This study was done a few years ago by The Athletic looking at draft returns since 2007. It has the Flames at #2.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/508...ng-best-picks/

Here's how they sum it up:
It might be surprising to see Calgary this high but it makes sense once you consider context. The Flames only had 74 picks which is the second fewest of all teams from 2007-2018. We’re measuring teams’ success relative to their draft ammo and in the Flames’ case, they got a strong bang for their (limited) buck.

So when you say they have to be absolute bottom, that's not supported by at least one proper analysis. There could be others. Perhaps you can find one that shows Calgary is at the bottom.

You can feel how you want. I'm not telling you how to feel. But don't be shocked and dismayed when others challenge an opinion that seems to be more emotional based than factually based.

Well, that's a very significant qualifier on the data. As said in the article:

A club with tons of lottery picks and extra top-two-round selections should be judged differently than a contender that drafts late. Because of that, we’ll be using a model to determine each team’s “expected wins added” based on the picks they had each year and the historical worth of those selections. For example, the Edmonton Oilers had by far the most top 10 and No. 1 picks, so they had the highest expected wins added. We’ll compare that with the actual “wins added” based on the drafted players’ NHL performance. A team that drafts well and exceeds the expected value of its draft capital will have a positive “value above expected” rating and vice versa.

A team that only drafts in the 7th round every year and drafts a middling NHLer every time is going to dominate this ranking. This is not a metric for determining how much the draft has added to the overall success of the franchise.

It's ironic that the "best pick" for the Flames was Adam Fox, who never played a game for us.

There were three drafts in this 12 year period where the Flames did notably better than expected. The Gaudreau draft, the Andersson/Kylington/Mangiapane draft, and the Tkachuk/Fox draft. They also ranked the Flames 25th in expected value for first round picks and 16th for the 2nd round. Hardly lighting the world on fire.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I think this quote by St.Louis on coaching Demidov is what we are all looking for:
https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comm...day_on_rookie/

He's saying exactly what Kent said.

Its very true, you could see after his first 7-8 games he lost his swagger and confidence likely because he was too focused on doing what he thought the coach wanted, they were not utilizing him properly and sitting him out of the lineup on and off.

Really hope they dont mess this up.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Royle9

He's saying exactly what Kent said.

Its very true, you could see after his first 7-8 games he lost his swagger and confidence likely because he was too focused on doing what he thought the coach wanted, they were not utilizing him properly and sitting him out of the lineup on and off.

Really hope they dont mess this up.

Or he lost his swagger and focus because he WAS making defensive gaffes and felt bad about it, and he was also getting smoked physically.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Or he lost his swagger and focus because he WAS making defensive gaffes and felt bad about it, and he was also getting smoked physically.

Yeah, I think if anything, his confidence was probably hurt after being manhandled and realizing that he still had a ways to go before his skill could catch up to the speed of the NHL game. He looked like to me that he was trying all the same old tricks from junior and was stymied.

Which is fine, because it takes time for players to get up to speed. Defensemen going straight from junior to the NHL are rare for a reason. It's not a knock on anyone.

[flambers]

Personally I think the defensive issues is way over blown

Any rookie dman coming into the league at 19 will have issues

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by flambers

Personally I think the defensive issues is way over blown

Any rookie dman coming into the league at 19 will have issues

I agree. It would have been the same if we had thrown a 19 year old Rasmus Andersson in there. It's a fast and physical league. He's not Matthew Shaefer. Otherwise, Parekh would've been first overall.
I saw what was advertised. A rare smooth skating, high IQ, offensive Dman who needs time to adjust.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Or he lost his swagger and focus because he WAS making defensive gaffes and felt bad about it, and he was also getting smoked physically.

I recall an anecdote where he called his dad after a game and was frustrated that he just didn't know what he was doing out there.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Well, that's a very significant qualifier on the data. As said in the article:



A team that only drafts in the 7th round every year and drafts a middling NHLer every time is going to dominate this ranking. This is not a metric for determining how much the draft has added to the overall success of the franchise.

It's ironic that the "best pick" for the Flames was Adam Fox, who never played a game for us.

There were three drafts in this 12 year period where the Flames did notably better than expected. The Gaudreau draft, the Andersson/Kylington/Mangiapane draft, and the Tkachuk/Fox draft. They also ranked the Flames 25th in expected value for first round picks and 16th for the 2nd round. Hardly lighting the world on fire.

I agree their work in the late 1st and early 2nd rounds was quite poor. We'll see if it's gotten better in a few years

But at least this is a proper analysis from a 3rd party.

Here's another one:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-at-the-draft/

This one is from Sept 2024, covering drafts from 2010-2019.

It has the Flames ranked 7th, which is based on the Percent of their players who skated 200 games. It also notes that the Flames issue is that they had the third fewest skaters selected during the sample

So that's now two independent analysis that conclude not only are the Flames not at the bottom, but are in the top 1/3rd of the league for draft productivity.

[HighLifeMan]

It's amazing how so many of us can see such different things while watching the same player.

To me Zayne was exclusively focused on playing a far more reserved style of hockey at the beginning of the year. Whether that was a coaching choice, a player choice or a combination of both is unclear (although I have my opinions), you could see the difference immediately between his eleven games to start the year and his first few shifts at the WJC's alone in terms of his mentality and approach in all three zones. Zayne was only on the ice for 2 goals against in 12 NHL games, and although that's wonderful - that's also not his game. To me - that's not worth having him be a complete non-factor offensively and making his confidence and swagger disappear as a result.

Personally - I think you need to allow a player of this skill level and IQ to play to his strengths, gain confidence, and then slowly add to the small details of the game that make such a difference at the NHL level. It's not going to happen overnight. This organization invested high draft capital in the player for what he does well - it would be foolish to try and reign in his game in an attempt of making him a "more complete" player at 19. Let the kid loose.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Also for fun I asked chatGPT.


Draft success in hockey analysis generally considers:

Hit rate (players who become NHL regulars, e.g., 200+ games)

Star–vs–role player output (quality at draft slot vs. expected value)

Total contribution to franchise success (games and production)

Relative pick volume (how many picks a team actually had)

Era and strategy context — some teams tank for high picks; others draft mid-to-late consistently
No single definitive league ranking exists publicly, but combining known analytics and reportage gives a reasonable comparison.

�� Flames Draft Performance (2000–Present)
⭐ Strengths:

Strong efficiency relative to pick volume, especially 2007–2018:
According to analysis using criteria similar to The Athletic’s, the Flames were second in the league from 2007–2018 in drafting value when normalized for how few picks they had. They identified notable NHL regulars and outperformed many teams with more picks.

Produced quality contributors like Johnny Gaudreau, Matthew Tkachuk, Mikael Backlund, Sean Monahan, and T.J. Brodie — foundational pieces for multiple seasons.

Draft classes like 2011 and 2015–2016 laid good depth and long-term NHL contributors.

❗ Weaknesses and Misses:

First-round misses offset some hits — e.g., Greg Nemisz, Mark Jankowski, Sven Baertschi underperformed relative to expectations.

Aggregate success rates are slightly below league average in terms of getting players to 200+ NHL games; the Flames produced ~21% vs. an expected ~23% historical rate.

Lack of high lottery picks: Calgary has rarely picked in the top 5 due to competitiveness most seasons, limiting the chance to land elite franchise talents.

Ranks Calgary in the 4-6 group: Strong relative results vs. pick volume; hit on key middle–round values; solid first-round hits vs. misses

[saillias]

Some hockey is better than no hockey which is why I'm surprised he's not back in the OHL. Huska didn't really want to play Parekh in October/November already and the pace and physicality only increases from there. There's that AHL conditioning stint and not sure how else he gets a chance here. if they do play him, he's not Michael stone who could seamlessly step into a game after 3 months off, hes gonna be a deer in the headlights, he needs to play

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by saillias

Some hockey is better than no hockey which is why I'm surprised he's not back in the OHL. Huska didn't really want to play Parekh in October/November already and the pace and physicality only increases from there. There's that AHL conditioning stint and not sure how else he gets a chance here. if they do play him, he's not Michael stone who could seamlessly step into a game after 3 months off, hes gonna be a deer in the headlights, he needs to play

He is banged up. Playing in a medal game against teenagers was probably deemed a worthwhile, low risk. But playing against men who are bigger and hit to hurt in a meaningless mid-season game when the team is tanking probably seems like an unnecessary risk. Might as well wait until he is 100% healed for that.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by flambers

Personally I think the defensive issues is way over blown

Any rookie dman coming into the league at 19 will have issues

While I agree that most 19 year olds aren't going to be great defensively, there were critics about his defensive game in junior as well. That suggests it isn't just adapting to the NHL, but there are habits and and a style aspect to it. He probably won't work on those things unless they make him.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

He is banged up. Playing in a medal game against teenagers was probably deemed a worthwhile, low risk. But playing against men who are bigger and hit to hurt in a meaningless mid-season game when the team is tanking probably seems like an unnecessary risk. Might as well wait until he is 100% healed for that.

If he was so banged up why is he not on IR?

Considering the Flames needed the roster space and have placed Coleman on the IR

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Also for fun I asked chatGPT. ... [snip]

First off, I've enjoyed the conversation, despite the disagreement.

I think we're trying to make two different points. I think you're arguing that the Flames' drafting has been good relative to pick quantity and quality. I'm arguing that the draft has not contributed enough to the Flames success.

I enlisted Gemini on this. My first prompt:

I am in an argument about the success that my favorite NHL team, the Calgary Flames, has had in the entry draft since the year 2000. I think they have done quite poorly; others are arguing that they extract better-than-expected value from their picks, but have just lacked pick quality and volume during that time.



Please consider and define a metric for how much the NHL draft has contributed to a team's overall success. Things you might consider in this vein are:

1 - Total number of picks;
2 - Total number of picks in each round;
3 - For the first and second rounds (and the first in particular), how high those picks are in the draft;
4 - How many "every day" NHLers were selected, meaning something like more than 200 games played;
5 - How many star players were selected;
6 - If the entire draft class is ranked by points (or wins, in the case of goalies), how many times does the team pick amongst the best players in the draft.

It then essentially repeated what the Athletic said -- the Flames do better than expected:

The Verdict: Who wins the argument?
You are both partially right, but the data tends to lean toward your friends' argument.

The Flames are actually quite good at scouting and identifying talent. When you look at the "Draft Efficiency Score," the Flames often punch above their weight class because they find NHLers in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds more often than many other teams.

The "Poor" feeling you have likely comes from two factors:

Draft Position: They haven't had the "Sure Thing" picks that Edmonton (McDavid/Draisaitl) or Pittsburgh (Crosby/Malkin) had.

Asset Management: Their biggest "Draft Wins" (Adam Fox, Matthew Tkachuk, Johnny Gaudreau) are no longer on the team. It feels like the draft hasn't contributed to success because the players aren't there anymore, even though the drafting itself was successful.

I then said:

Let's consider if we are over-weighting having "better than expected value" versus a total value quotient. It's nice to get slightly better picks than expected, but if you don't have many picks total, and the total quality of those picks is not particularly high, you're not actually building a better hockey team. This is why I emphasized contribution to the overall success of the team, not merely whether the Flames scouting department is doing their job in getting an above-average return on any specific pick.

Gemini said:

That is a crucial distinction. In the world of sports analytics, there is a major difference between Scouting Efficiency (finding the best player at pick #150) and Draft Utility (actually using the draft to build a championship roster).

If we define a metric based on Total Contribution to Team Success, your argument gains a lot of weight. Even if the Flames are "efficient" scouts, their Total Yield has been insufficient to move the needle toward a Stanley Cup.

It then noted that:

1) We have had very poor draft capital since 2000, hampering overall total contribution. (Not the scouts' fault, but certainly the organization's)

2) Efficiency versus impact -- while Gaudreau and Mangiapane are "incredible scouting wins", finding a star in the 4th round is a bonus; finding a star in the 1st round is a requirement for success. The Flames had a lot of 1st round misses.

3) Retention of draft picks is poor. The three best picks in the last 25 years all left the team in their prime (or in the case of Fox, never played for it).

Finally:

[Delthefunky]

I think Huska is working miracles with this team, we're not that good.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Or he lost his swagger and focus because he WAS making defensive gaffes and felt bad about it, and he was also getting smoked physically.

The team as a whole also wasn't scoring