Bob Mckenzie: Flames could have had Nyquist and Tatar for Bouwmeester

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Giving guys a chance is fine. Advertising that you've signed the best centre not in the NHL and he turns out to be one of 17 small soft LWs that you've somehow accumulated, is not fine. And as someone pointed out this left us high and dry with not enough NHL centres.

If Wolf turns out to be not much good, so what, we won't be relying on him.

No, not having enough quality centres left us high and dry at centre.

The fact that Feaster tried several options, including this one, to acquire more is not what left us short.

And the fact that he over-talked the situation does not make it worse. It gives fans something to whine about, but it doesn't make him a worse talent-assessor.

Not that I expect any kind of rational opinion from you on this subject

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No, not having enough quality centres left us high and dry at centre.

The fact that Feaster tried several options, including this one, to acquire more is not what left us short.

And the fact that he over-talked the situation does not make it worse. It gives fans something to whine about, but it doesn't make him a worse talent-assessor.

Not that I expect any kind of rational opinion from you on this subject

I'm pretty sure he admitted that he wasn't a talent assessor. So being worse doesn't compute.

[RM14]

Porier (6'1) is bigger than both Nyquist & Tatar (Both 5'11), and a potential 30 goal scorer with grit. Also, this years 2nd we received for Berra could be a good player.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by RM14

Porier (6'1) is bigger than both Nyquist & Tatar (Both 5'11), and a potential 30 goal scorer with grit. Also, this years 2nd we received for Berra could be a good player.

There is no doubt that this organization needs a Poirier type of guy way more than Nyquist or Tatar. I think Poirier will be excellent player for years to come, he is our top prospect.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by theoforever

There is no doubt that this organization needs a Poirier type of guy way more than Nyquist or Tatar. I think Poirier will be excellent player for years to come, he is our top prospect.

As far a difference makers I would go.

Gaudreau
Sven
Poirier

One could say Poirier is just what the doctor ordered for Gaudreau to be successful and I'm still hopeful Sven finds his way...far too much talent to waste.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is sort of what I"m talking about. I'm not trying to suggest that signing Cervenka cost the flames dearly, but it's one of Feaster's bigger blunders because of what it said about his ability to assess talent and implement a team building philosophy.

If this Wolf guy comes in and turns out to be nothing, it won't bother me much either. If Burke says this guy is going to be a top 6 forward for Calgary next year and he turns out to be a defensemen, it's serious cause for concern.

Okay that I 100% agree with. That's a little different then your first post though.

Signing Cervenka wasn't the problem, Feaster running his mouth was. If that was your angle then Yup, I'm totally on board with that. That was Feaster's constant problem, doing the sell job. The consistently put unneeded and totally unnecessary pressure on players.

Agreed with Erick Estrada on his post as well, pencilling Cervenka in a top line role was a big mistake too.

Feel bad for Cervenka overall, I wish he would have signed with another team for one year. Had a full training camp and without the health problems he had going into that season for the Flames. H

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Still disagree.

I think Cervenka is at least as talented as Brunner. It just didn't work out.

That happens and it isn't Feaster's fault. He thought he could be a C and maybe you can throw some criticism on that, but if Cervenka had been successful as a winger, I don't think anyone would have cared.

Nothing wrong with giving guys a chance. If it works out, great. If it doesn't, that doesn't make the GM a bad assessor of talent.

Why isn't it feasters fault?

He assembled a team with 7 or 8 LWs and 2 centres, one of which was Backlund. A guy he brought in to improve that situation turned out not to be a centre.

Cammalleri/Stajan/Backlund/Cervenka/Jones is awful centre depth, but it looks a hell of a lot worse when it is actually Stajan/Backlund/nothing.

That's Feasters fault, and it in part fueled the attempt to go after Ryan O'Reilly. These things are all related.

I don't understand why bringing in players who were abject failures is just 'ho hum it didn't work out'. That is essentially the only metric by which you can judge Feaster aside from drafting.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Okay that I 100% agree with. That's a little different then your first post though.

Signing Cervenka wasn't the problem, Feaster running his mouth was. If that was your angle then Yup, I'm totally on board with that. That was Feaster's constant problem, doing the sell job. The consistently put unneeded and totally unnecessary pressure on players.

Agreed with Erick Estrada on his post as well, pencilling Cervenka in a top line role was a big mistake too.

Feel bad for Cervenka overall, I wish he would have signed with another team for one year. Had a full training camp and without the health problems he had going into that season for the Flames. H

It's the self delusion, MMF. Do we think Feaster signed Cervenka and then publicly proclaimed him a top 6 centre just to get one over on the fans? No, he signed him for that role because that's where he believed he would play. It was part of the plan. It's the same self delusion we all roll around the floor laughing about with the Oilers.

If you sign a guy who you think will play second line centre, it prevents you from signing another guy to play second line centre. When that first guy turns out not to be a centre at all, that ripples through the lineup. It's the same thing with Justin Schultz in Edmonton. The guy isn't close what he's billed as, but makes the dollars and plays in the position anyway.

If you're going into the season believing you have filled gaps that you haven't, that's a big problem. It was a big problem for Calgary; they finished 6th last in the league.

I'm willing to give Feaster a ton of leeway actually, because I don't think he was really in control, buuuuuuuuuuuuut, his track record is still his track record.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by T@T

As far a difference makers I would go.

Gaudreau
Sven
Poirier

One could say Poirier is just what the doctor ordered for Gaudreau to be successful and I'm still hopeful Sven finds his way...far too much talent to waste.

I like the other guys as well.
Johnny has great talent but the size is an issue and Sven seems to be soft both physically and mentally.
Poirier looks he has what it takes to be an NHL, toughness, size and skill.
It would be great if all of them workout.

[neo45]

Cervenka could have been a top 6 forward if he was in shape and adjusted to the NA game. He looked to have the same skill level as Hudler

The problem was that Feaster signed him, brought him over, and then let the coach he hired bench Cervenka for half the games. Was it low risk? Yes, doesn't mean it wasn't handled poorly between Feaster and the coaching staff.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's the self delusion, MMF. Do we think Feaster signed Cervenka and then publicly proclaimed him a top 6 centre just to get one over on the fans? No, he signed him for that role because that's where he believed he would play. It was part of the plan. It's the same self delusion we all roll around the floor laughing about with the Oilers..

Yeah haha, like I said, I'm with you on that. Your inital post made it seem like signing Cervenka was a big blunder but if you're saying Feaster's continued oversell job is one of his worst features then I'm with you on that.

Overselling Cervenka, Berra. Almost making it impossible for a guy like Jankowski to just be left alone to developed, overstating his draft list by saying Monahan, Poirier, Kklimchuk were all in their top 10(?). It's fine if a GM thinks he got a steal but just shut up about it, don't put that pressure on the players needlessly.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Yeah haha, like I said, I'm with you on that. Your inital post made it seem like signing Cervenka was a big blunder but if you're saying Feaster's continued oversell job is one of his worst features then I'm with you on that.

Overselling Cervenka, Berra. Almost making it impossible for a guy like Jankowski to just be left alone to developed, overstating his draft list by saying Monahan, Poirier, Kklimchuk were all in their top 10(?). It's fine if a GM thinks he got a steal but just shut up about it, don't put that pressure on the players needlessly.

I agree.

When you're selling bull#### instead of gold, it takes a hell of a lot more time to shine it up.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Yeah haha, like I said, I'm with you on that. Your inital post made it seem like signing Cervenka was a big blunder but if you're saying Feaster's continued oversell job is one of his worst features then I'm with you on that.

Overselling Cervenka, Berra. Almost making it impossible for a guy like Jankowski to just be left alone to developed, overstating his draft list by saying Monahan, Poirier, Kklimchuk were all in their top 10(?). It's fine if a GM thinks he got a steal but just shut up about it, don't put that pressure on the players needlessly.

He did oversell, kind of like used car salesman.

I thought it was established Feaster was referring to internal top 10 list that didn't include all the names that they thought would be gone anyway.

As for putting pressure on players, some will thrive others will crumble. Pressure is a good thing and winners love it, that's what makes them tick.
However, I agree in this context no point putting extra pressure.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Stanathan

I don't want to temper my expectations. I expect a lot and I want to be extremely excited . I don't care if I end up disappointed. I'm not going to bum myself out so that the disappointment isn't so bad if things don't go well.

You can do whatever you like. Fact of the matter is we finished 27th in the league and our roster is likely to be similar or possibly even worse next year. Optimism is great but you need to be realistic as well. Just because you shoot for the stars in your own mind doesn't make you any more of a fan. Despite having a bad year statistically we seen a lot of positives. If next year is the same it's a win to me. We have some nice prospects but anyone who has followed this team for the last 10-15 years knows we have had a lot of prospects who were suppose to be quality NHL'ers come and go. (Fata Tkachuk Saprykin Kobasew Chucko Negrin Pelech Ramholt Boyd etc) Don't count your eggs before they hatch. Be positive but don't be oblivious.

[theoforever]

Hartley, seems to have adjusted his approach to players over his tenure with the Flames. I wasn't very impressed with his handling of players earlier on, it was like he was looking for whipping boys.
For some reason, he changed for the better.
Upbeat and positive is the way to go with a bunch of rookies especially.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by theoforever

There is no doubt that this organization needs a Poirier type of guy way more than Nyquist or Tatar. I think Poirier will be excellent player for years to come, he is our top prospect.

I agree we need a player like Poirier and I think he is a quality prospect but I still think we could have had him 3 spots later based on where he was ranked.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by Hackey

I agree we need a player like Poirier and I think he is a quality prospect but I still think we could have had him 3 spots later based on where he was ranked.

100% we don't get him, Montreal was all over him and somebody said Penguins too. We were going after Klimchuk ahead of Shinkaruk.
It was 6 spots. Ratings are just approximation, every team has their own which are only influence by general consensus.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by theoforever

100% we don't get him, Montreal was all over him and somebody said Penguins too. We were going after Klimchuk ahead of Shinkaruk.
It was 6 spots. Ratings are just approximation, every team has their own which are only influence by general consensus.

Ya 6 spots my bad. Still far from a 100% guarantee.

[Vox]

Originally Posted by theoforever

100% we don't get him, Montreal was all over him and somebody said Penguins too. We were going after Klimchuk ahead of Shinkaruk.
It was 6 spots. Ratings are just approximation, every team has their own which are only influence by general consensus.

I recall the same media reports saying that Montreal was expected to pick Poirier.

Burke stated publicly that Anaheim scouts told him Calgary won the draft with Poirier, Monahan and Klimchuk. Anaheim picked four spots after Calgary picked Poirier and two spots before Calgary picked Klimchuk. Hard to imagine that Poirier would have made it past Anaheim, let alone Montreal, based on this.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by theoforever

He did oversell, kind of like used car salesman.

I thought it was established Feaster was referring to internal top 10 list that didn't include all the names that they thought would be gone anyway.

As for putting pressure on players, some will thrive others will crumble. Pressure is a good thing and winners love it, that's what makes them tick.
However, I agree in this context no point putting extra pressure.

I think that was established but regardless he should have just been polite towards the new draft pick and moved on, not make bold statements.

Pressure is good but there is no need to apply that pressure the moment the kid is drafted. Look at how people still view Jankowski.. some posters here still flippantly write Jankowski off because of Feaster's crazy statement the day he was drafted.