Who do we hope ends up GM?

[getoverit]

Ummmm I thought this thread was about who we hope to have next as a GM

Just no Nieuwy, don't need another ol' boys club

[dammage79]

I'm going to hazard a guess and say Mike Futa is Burkes target. And he will be GM of Calgary.

[Enoch Root]

Futa, Benning, Fenton.

I'm flexible

[metroneck]

Not that Nieuwendyk would be my choice, but I don't see how that hiring him would be similar to the Oilers Glory club, or a any old boys club.

Joe did not leave on the best of terms, and there really isnt anyone from that management group left. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not see a connection to Burke either.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by metroneck

Not that Nieuwendyk would be my choice, but I don't see how that hiring him would be similar to the Oilers Glory club, or a any old boys club.

Joe did not leave on the best of terms, and there really isnt anyone from that management group left. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not see a connection to Burke either.

Nieuwendyk was hired by Burke to work in Toronto, just prior to him getting the GM position in Dallas

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Maata and TT... seems to be what people are arguing...

But Jankowski hasn't busted. Hindsight is 20/20, these guys (TT, Matta etc.) today could've just been bad players, would that make Jankowski a good pick then?

We haven't lost anything till Jankowski busts so I don't know why people are already declaring it as a bust.

These same people are probably declaring Poirer a homerun pick cuz Shinkaruk is struggling.

Let these prospects develop and at least play out their junior careers before saying who's a bust or who's a boom.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

But Jankowski hasn't busted. Hindsight is 20/20, these guys (TT, Matta etc.) today could've just been bad players, would that make Jankowski a good pick then?

We haven't lost anything till Jankowski busts so I don't know why people are already declaring it as a bust.

These same people are probably declaring Poirer a homerun pick cuz Shinkaruk is struggling.

Let these prospects develop and at least play out their junior careers before saying who's a bust or who's a boom.

The glaring problem with the whole Janko situation is that he is probably 4-5 years away from really contributing at the NHL level (if development goes great and he progresses at a pretty substantial level). That's a long time, and while we may be in a rebuild, I'd wager that most fans hope the Flames are a contender by then, but everyone CERTAINLY expects them to be in the playoffs by then.

I think the most frustrating part of that pick is it doesn't help our rebuild. Janko is likely coming in at the tail end when the Flames are already a year or two into the upswing.

I'm of the mind that he could very easily be a fantastic pick, but I'm still 'meh' on it in general. I'm certainly not going to hassle people for not liking the pick or showing their frustrations with it though, it's entirely understandable.

I mean, let's look at it this way: He is currently well under half as productive as Gaudreau, while being just 1 year younger and in a much more 'NHL size' frame. A lot of people think Gaudreau is going to play, but there are a ton of questions on how effective he will be. Take a guy half as productive, and tell the fans he's going to be an all-star and the best of his draft class, and watch the reaction.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by strombad

The glaring problem with the whole Janko situation is that he is probably 4-5 years away from really contributing at the NHL level (if development goes great and he progresses at a pretty substantial level). That's a long time, and while we may be in a rebuild, I'd wager that most fans hope the Flames are a contender by then, but everyone CERTAINLY expects them to be in the playoffs by then.

I think the most frustrating part of that pick is it doesn't help our rebuild. Janko is likely coming in at the tail end when the Flames are already a year or two into the upswing.

I'm of the mind that he could very easily be a fantastic pick, but I'm still 'meh' on it in general. I'm certainly not going to hassle people for not liking the pick or showing their frustrations with it though, it's entirely understandable.

I mean, let's look at it this way: He is currently well under half as productive as Gaudreau, while being just 1 year younger and in a much more 'NHL size' frame. A lot of people think Gaudreau is going to play, but there are a ton of questions on how effective he will be. Take a guy half as productive, and tell the fans he's going to be an all-star and the best of his draft class, and watch the reaction.

I'm going to dismiss your "likely coming in at the tail end when the Flames are already a year or two into the upswing." comment by pointing out what the Hawks have been doing. Guys like Saad, Pirri are coming through the system. In a cap era you need cheaper home grown talent. If he develops properly, would it be a bad thing to get guy of his size, IQ, skill coming in 4-5 yeears and manning 2nd/3rd line? I don't think so. All top teams have guys drafted from different years emerging, thats what you need.

You need a wave of player or else we'll end up doing what the folks up north are doing, handing out 6 mill a year contracts to everyone and their mailman.

As for as Gaudreau goes, he production is an exception, how many NCAA guys are producing at his rate? Where Jankowski lacks in points right now he makes up for it in size. Right now imho Gaudreau is a bigger question mark then Jankowski and thats simply cause of his size.

Janko is at 0.65 ppg right now in a very defensive system
His first year playing center
His wingers aren't the most skilled guys

I agree he's a question mark but WE all knew this, we all knew he was a project that will take time but how many other guys are out there like him? His size, skill, vision? if he puts is all together then we have a gem on our hands, thats what excites me if he doesn't? well we then missed out.

[strombad]

I don't disagree with anything you said, as my post was pointing out the most logic driven reasons people would have to be less than thrilled about the pick.

You're preaching patience, understanding, and optimism to the varied fanbase of a sports franchise regarding a long-shot prospect years away from even being relevant.

That's pretty much the exact meaning of "to fight a losing battle". Good luck.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by strombad

I mean, let's look at it this way: He is currently well under half as productive as Gaudreau, while being just 1 year younger and in a much more 'NHL size' frame. A lot of people think Gaudreau is going to play, but there are a ton of questions on how effective he will be. Take a guy half as productive, and tell the fans he's going to be an all-star and the best of his draft class, and watch the reaction.

I don't quite agree with looking at it in this fashion.

I think there are two really important things to consider during someone's growth and development stages.

1) Physically Immature vs Mature: Gaudreau and Jankowski both share this - Compare them to guys like Rocco Grimaldi. Rocco was a short player, but he was way above average in terms of being physically developed. He was easily a step ahead of everyone at his age in his junior years. He was built like at tank - a prototypical 'man' body amongst boys. Fast forward a few years since the draft, and it seems his peers caught up with him, and now he doesn't dominate as well. Gaudreau and Jankowski were both rail-thin. That means their production isn't a product of their physical statures, but rather that of their skills and IQ. They BOTH share in this, and you can expect the both to improve as they both fill out.

2) Early growth spurt vs Late growth spurt: Jankowski had a huge late growth spurt. Gaudreau didn't. What happens to a body after they go through such a spurt? They generally get clumsy. A bit uncoordinated. While it is true that Jankowski has the 'size advantage' over Gaudreau right now, it might just be a size disadvantage for now. MAYBE. What isn't a maybe is that Jankowski was a small player who is still learning to use his advantage. He hasn't yet, and you can tell by how he plays - though he is getting better at this.

Had Jankowski experienced a normal pattern of growth rate, I would tend to somewhat agree with you here. With Jankowski's more recent growth spurt, he has only just started realizing how to use his advantage, while trying to become more coordinated. Gaudreau is uber-coordinated in comparison. He will improve in necessary areas as he increases his size (center of gravity, puck battles, better speed and a more explosive first step, harder to take the puck off, and increased shot velocity as all positive and important improvements as a byproduct of gaining a bit more muscle mass) so I am NOT insinuating in the least that Gaudreau is fully developed already, just slightly ahead of Jankowski physically (in a way.. must be the only person saying Gaudreau is ahead of anyone physically, right? lol).

Everyone is different. I stopped growing when in grade 6 (though I didn't know it at the time). I hit 6'0" then. Tallest kid in the class, and was uncoordinated somewhat. By grade 9 (and lasting through most of high-school), I was a 'man's body' already, and was a great athlete. Made every single team I ever tried for. By university, these less developed kids caught up and surpassed me. Jankowski really reminds me of some lanky kids who were on some of my teams that weren't all that effective, but then in a blink of an eye, they were way beyond my capabilities. Once their bodies caught up with their growth, they took off.

He needs patience. He is still catching up to his body, and he is still catching up to how to play in a system - especially defence - which he will require to make the NHL.

This is part of the reason why it makes his development arc one that is so fascinating to watch. There are so many 'unknowns' as to how good he can be, given the storyline around this kid.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Futa, Benning, Fenton.

I'm flexible

One of those three would be my preferences too.

[FlameZilla]

I'd be happy to wait until after the draft to hire Futa. Los Angeles is unlikely to let him leave before then anyway. In the meantime I expect Burke to stay on and make a couple of moves to shake up the franchise, particularly at the draft.

With any luck history repeats itself and Burke trades up to #2 to draft a big franchise defenceman, then hands the reins over to Futa.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I don't quite agree with looking at it in this fashion.

I think there are two really important things to consider during someone's growth and development stages.

1) Physically Immature vs Mature: Gaudreau and Jankowski both share this - Compare them to guys like Rocco Grimaldi. Rocco was a short player, but he was way above average in terms of being physically developed. He was easily a step ahead of everyone at his age in his junior years. He was built like at tank - a prototypical 'man' body amongst boys. Fast forward a few years since the draft, and it seems his peers caught up with him, and now he doesn't dominate as well. Gaudreau and Jankowski were both rail-thin. That means their production isn't a product of their physical statures, but rather that of their skills and IQ. They BOTH share in this, and you can expect the both to improve as they both fill out.

2) Early growth spurt vs Late growth spurt: Jankowski had a huge late growth spurt. Gaudreau didn't. What happens to a body after they go through such a spurt? They generally get clumsy. A bit uncoordinated. While it is true that Jankowski has the 'size advantage' over Gaudreau right now, it might just be a size disadvantage for now. MAYBE. What isn't a maybe is that Jankowski was a small player who is still learning to use his advantage. He hasn't yet, and you can tell by how he plays - though he is getting better at this.

Had Jankowski experienced a normal pattern of growth rate, I would tend to somewhat agree with you here. With Jankowski's more recent growth spurt, he has only just started realizing how to use his advantage, while trying to become more coordinated. Gaudreau is uber-coordinated in comparison. He will improve in necessary areas as he increases his size (center of gravity, puck battles, better speed and a more explosive first step, harder to take the puck off, and increased shot velocity as all positive and important improvements as a byproduct of gaining a bit more muscle mass) so I am NOT insinuating in the least that Gaudreau is fully developed already, just slightly ahead of Jankowski physically (in a way.. must be the only person saying Gaudreau is ahead of anyone physically, right? lol).

Everyone is different. I stopped growing when in grade 6 (though I didn't know it at the time). I hit 6'0" then. Tallest kid in the class, and was uncoordinated somewhat. By grade 9 (and lasting through most of high-school), I was a 'man's body' already, and was a great athlete. Made every single team I ever tried for. By university, these less developed kids caught up and surpassed me. Jankowski really reminds me of some lanky kids who were on some of my teams that weren't all that effective, but then in a blink of an eye, they were way beyond my capabilities. Once their bodies caught up with their growth, they took off.

He needs patience. He is still catching up to his body, and he is still catching up to how to play in a system - especially defence - which he will require to make the NHL.

This is part of the reason why it makes his development arc one that is so fascinating to watch. There are so many 'unknowns' as to how good he can be, given the storyline around this kid.

such an excellent post, thanking it wasn't enough

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

such an excellent post, thanking it wasn't enough

Well I don't know if it was THAT excellent. I mean.... he called his development arc "fascinating".... that's like saying the bowl of cereal you had this morning was "awesome".

[keratosis]

Originally Posted by strombad

that's like saying the bowl of cereal you had this morning was "awesome".

It moved me

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I'd be happy to wait until after the draft to hire Futa. Los Angeles is unlikely to let him leave before then anyway. In the meantime I expect Burke to stay on and make a couple of moves to shake up the franchise, particularly at the draft.

With any luck history repeats itself and Burke trades up to #2 to draft a big franchise defenceman, then hands the reins over to Futa.

How good is Futa, really? This is the same team that drafted Thomas Hickey fourth overall, right?

[moon]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

How good is Futa, really? This is the same team that drafted Thomas Hickey fourth overall, right?

He joined the Kings 2 weeks before that pick so how much of a role did he have in it?

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by moon

He joined the Kings 2 weeks before that pick so how much of a role did he have in it?

He let them make it, that's enough for me. Just a head shaker.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

He let them make it, that's enough for me. Just a head shaker.

It isn't that bad now that you look at it. Alzner probably better, Gagner much worse and Voracek a wash.

Obviously Couture would have been the guy but since 3 forwards picked between Hickey and him looks like a lot of teams got that one wrong and it would have been a bit of an off the wall pick.

[Red John]

Originally Posted by moon

It isn't that bad now that you look at it. Alzner probably better, Gagner much worse and Voracek a wash.

Obviously Couture would have been the guy but since 3 forwards picked between Hickey and him looks like a lot of teams got that one wrong and it would have been a bit of an off the wall pick.

Thank goodness the Oilers beat the Flames on the last day of that season. Pat Kane is on pace to hit 100 points and Gagner is proving to be an overpaid bum with a NTC. That said he's probably still a better pick than Hickey unless your point is that Gagner carries negative value which may be a stretch.