Rumor Philadelphia interested in Glencross

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

I will enjoy watching Jank' s development unfold because I think this is the pick that Feaster haters are anxious to sink their teeth into.

Just to be clear Jankowski was a Weisbrod pick. If he does turn into a bust most of the blame has go go to Weisbrod.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Dagger

Do you have the figures on that? And what makes you say player development wasn't a problem? I count Brodie, Moss, Leopold, Phaneuf, Prust, Nystrom, Lombardi and Backlund as players that the Flames have drafted or acquired as a prospect(Leopold) that have become established NHLers since 2001. Nystrom was a bust for his top 10 status, and Phaneuf was found in a draft you couldn't miss in. Moss, Brodie and Lombardi were good finds and properly developed...but that's it.

I'd argue that Giordano's development isn't completely Calgary's to take credit for. He was a great signing for an undrafted free agent as he took himself all the way to fringe NHL player level...but it was only after he went to Russia because he wouldn't accept a 2 way deal(which we can say is how the Flames valued him at the time) that he really took off. What happens if he doesn't go to Russia? To me it comes down to this: does he reach his(now known) potential staying with the Flames his whole career? I say no, and player development by definition is about squeezing every ounce of productivity out of a player and the Flames had tapped some but not all and therefore do not deserve full credit.

Firslty your list only includes draft years 2002 to 2008, which is 7years. So we have 8 players drafted and developed across 7 years. I wouldn't rule out Bouma yet, and yes Giordano counts. So that's 10 players in 7 years, which is solid.

Anything 2009 and later is still too early to tell.

Your logic that the Flames couldn't miss with Phaneuf is perplexing. When the Flames screw up a pick, it's totally there fault. When they hit one, it's because they "couldn't miss". Also, the Flames could most certainly have missed in 2003. Zherdev, Kostitsyn, Steve Bernier, Nilsson, and Jessiman all ended up as misses.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by moon

I am not saying Jankowski can't have a high offensive ceiling I am saying I have seen/read nothing to indicate it so far. Gaudreau also has a lower ceiling in my view than Monahan.

I have to really disagree with Monahan having a higher offensive ceiling than Gaudreau. Monahan will be a much more complete player but he is no where near the offensive skill level of Johnny. If Johnny Gaudreau can overcome his size issue and be an NHLer he will be by far the Flames best offensive player, it won't even be close. I see Monahan's offensive upside at best as Toews. I see Gaudreau's as St. Louis.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by blankall

Firslty your list only includes draft years 2002 to 2008, which is 7years. So we have 8 players drafted and developed across 7 years. I wouldn't rule out Bouma yet, and yes Giordano counts. So that's 10 players in 7 years, which is solid.

Anything 2009 and later is still too early to tell.

Your logic that the Flames couldn't miss with Phaneuf is perplexing. When the Flames screw up a pick, it's totally there fault. When they hit one, it's because they "couldn't miss". Also, the Flames could most certainly have missed in 2003. Zherdev, Kostitsyn, Steve Bernier, Nilsson, and Jessiman all ended up as misses.

I was disagreeing with you about was you saying the Flames do quite well in the draft from slot 20 onwards, and for that statement to be factual the Flames' drafting + developing of players would have HAD to have enjoyed success IN the NHL. That's the only barometer of the success of the draft draft pick. Those guys I mentioned are the only one's we've developed that have done that, and I would have included anyone post 2009 happily had they made an impact already. The 2009 draft is now 5 drafts old and most of the players selected are known qualities. We traded Erixon who would have been the most likely to earn a spot by now but he can't be included since he wasn't developed by the Calgary Flames.

Uhh perplexing? This draft class is universally considered the best ever or at worst the 2nd best. We could have messed up by selecting Zherdev? If my logic on the draft is perplexing, can you please give me an adjective for your logic that we could have selected a player that was long gone by the time we selected?

Ok, well the Flames did do well with Phaneuf but A) he wasn't drafted after 20(was trying to be generous) and B) in a regular draft GMs are lauded for finding good NHLers outside of the elite prospects....in this draft GMs were scrutinized if they couldn't. So, no it's not really a credit to the Flames for getting a good player out of the best draft....almost every single team did.

[Badgers Nose]

So when is this trade going to happen? Will the Schenn brothers and Philli's 1st picks in the next 10 drafts be here for tonight's game?

[Poe969]

No, they're going to let Glencross get 5 goals tonight before they trade him

[Fire]

The Flames have Cammalleri, Stempniak, Stajan, Jackman and Street as pending UFAs in the forward ranks. They could all potentially be gone next season. The Flames need to keep some veterans for next season, so I can't see Glencross being traded.

[Miniac]

Originally Posted by Fire

The Flames have Cammalleri, Stempniak, Stajan, Jackman and Street as pending UFAs in the forward ranks. They could all potentially be gone next season. The Flames need to keep some veterans for next season, so I can't see Glencross being traded.

They could always trade for other veterans or pick them up at UFAs.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Dagger

I was disagreeing with you about was you saying the Flames do quite well in the draft from slot 20 onwards, and for that statement to be factual the Flames' drafting + developing of players would have HAD to have enjoyed success IN the NHL. That's the only barometer of the success of the draft draft pick. Those guys I mentioned are the only one's we've developed that have done that, and I would have included anyone post 2009 happily had they made an impact already. The 2009 draft is now 5 drafts old and most of the players selected are known qualities. We traded Erixon who would have been the most likely to earn a spot by now but he can't be included since he wasn't developed by the Calgary Flames.

Uhh perplexing? This draft class is universally considered the best ever or at worst the 2nd best. We could have messed up by selecting Zherdev? If my logic on the draft is perplexing, can you please give me an adjective for your logic that we could have selected a player that was long gone by the time we selected?

Ok, well the Flames did do well with Phaneuf but A) he wasn't drafted after 20(was trying to be generous) and B) in a regular draft GMs are lauded for finding good NHLers outside of the elite prospects....in this draft GMs were scrutinized if they couldn't. So, no it's not really a credit to the Flames for getting a good player out of the best draft....almost every single team did.

I wasn't disputing that the Flames drafting choices and overall asset management between 2000 and 2008 or so weren't horribly flawed. The team was drafting based on what was successful in the clutch and grab era. We put a premium on big country boys. We also traded away far too many draft picks.

My point was that the issue was not with our development system. We simply did not have enough talent in the pool to begin with. This was due to various factors, including: lack of high draft picks; lack of draft picks, in general; drafting too many goalies and defenders; poor European scouting; and universally choosing big bodies over skill.

Given the picks we did make, our success was actually fairly good. The Flames organization went with the safe picks in the 20+ spots, and that was largely what our system produced. We ended up with a bunch of hard working tweener and depth types. Players like Nystrom and Prust were never meant to be first line players, and our system did not stunt their potential, in any way. In fact, they lived up to their potential due to proper development. The issue is their potential was never that high.

I would also argue that it is still too early to call players from the 2009, or even 2008, draft who have not cracked a full time roster spot busts. Specifically I'm thinking about Ortio and Bouma. Both may end up as full time NHLers, thus adding to our total.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by blankall

I wasn't disputing that the Flames drafting choices and overall asset management between 2000 and 2008 or so weren't horribly flawed. The team was drafting based on what was successful in the clutch and grab era. We put a premium on big country boys. We also traded away far too many draft picks.

My point was that the issue was not with our development system. We simply did not have enough talent in the pool to begin with. This was due to various factors, including: lack of high draft picks; lack of draft picks, in general; drafting too many goalies and defenders; poor European scouting; and universally choosing big bodies over skill.

Given the picks we did make, our success was actually fairly good. The Flames organization went with the safe picks in the 20+ spots, and that was largely what our system produced. We ended up with a bunch of hard working tweener and depth types. Players like Nystrom and Prust were never meant to be first line players, and our system did not stunt their potential, in any way. In fact, they lived up to their potential due to proper development. The issue is their potential was never that high.

I would also argue that it is still too early to call players from the 2009, or even 2008, draft who have not cracked a full time roster spot busts. Specifically I'm thinking about Ortio and Bouma. Both may end up as full time NHLers, thus adding to our total.

You specifically said "If you look at the probability of success of draft picks chosen 20 or later, the Flames actually do quite well." So I asked you to back that up, and you've yet to document where that is from. I gave you every player that the Flames have ever drafted and developed, and there is only 8 players who the Flames have developed and permanently made the NHL. You can try and say X and Y might, but they are still unknown and for what you said they do not factor in. So, I ask once again where is your original statement from?

8 players from 2001-2009 is horrendous. One NHL player per draft? And of the group only Phaneuf and Brodie are top 4 guys while the rest is pure depth. That's putrid....and since we're dealing with 20+ we can discard Phaneuf and Nystrom.

Drafting and development go hand in hand. Maybe we don't like the guy we pick, because his ceiling is too low or floor too high or whatever but the Flames are from that point onwards responsible for making the right decision for his career(at least from when they sign). Developing prospects is also very much in sync with managing assets.....there is no difference. It's up to the Flames FO to make sure these guys play in the right leagues, focus on the right things, have coaches/trainers in place on their AHL teams that will nurture the talent(huge organizational flaw for the Flames in the past) and break them into the NHL as planned. Instead our prospects were largely raised to be cheap depth replacements and call ups when necessary.

Nystrom doesn't apply, but I can tell you that no GM is hoping for only "depth" when he's picking top 10. You want impact. That's universal and we both know that Nystrom was not drafted so he could hopefully one day be a 3rd line guy. The fact that it took him 5.5 years to become a fixture on our team, and as an energy guy is the definition of BLOWN potential. That's down to development and is in no way a good thing. Those players are a dime a dozen.

I'm not disagreeing that most of these guys didn't have a very high ceiling....just that we were terrible at helping these prospects reach their level, which is why a huge chunk of them are out of the league and never got a sniff.

You can think what you want about Ortio and Bouma. Bouma might stick around as a nice depth guy which is good but it's nothing to suggest the Flames are/were good at developing the guys. Ortio is a very long shot, didn't get invited to camp even with 3 replacement level goalies and we have Broissoit and Gillies who appear to be above him in the prospect depth chart. Either way, none of them apply to your earlier statement.