Marty St Louis wasn't a full-time NHLer until he was 27. He had his first PPG season at 29.
So even if we are to assume that this kid is the next St Louis, he's got a very long way to go before before he's an impact player at the NHL level.
Don't disagree about not rushing, but I have to tell you how invalid the comparison to Martin St. Louis is.
It's a different era in the league. Organizations aren't afraid to take chances on smallish players anymore. St Louis wasn't drafted despite doing historic things at Vermont. Gaudreau was a 3rd round pick BEFORE he played a single NCAA game. Gaudreau wouldn't have been drafted in those days either.
While it may be prudent not to rush him, the assertion that he has a very long way to go based on Marty St. Louis' path doesn't hold water.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Don't disagree about not rushing, but I have to tell you how invalid the comparison to Martin St. Louis is.
It's a different era in the league. Organizations aren't afraid to take chances on smallish players anymore. St Louis wasn't drafted despite doing historic things at Vermont. Gaudreau was a 3rd round pick BEFORE he played a single NCAA game. Gaudreau wouldn't have been drafted in those days either.
While it may be prudent not to rush him, the assertion that he has a very long way to go based on Marty St. Louis' path doesn't hold water.
Agreed, however note that he was a fourth (104th overall) round pick.
I think Jay has said that he was hoping Johnny would sign and get a shot before the end of the year. If someone had the quote it would help me out, but I believe there was a bit of an implication to say that they would be willing to put him in the lineup as soon as he comes in.
Whether or not he sticks is dictated by his play though.
EDIT:
Here are some quotes to address some of the concerns raised in this thread:
Regarding him getting a shot in the NHL:
“Whatever the case may be, as I say, we’ll be there watching you, we’ll be there supporting you and we’ll be there for you when you decide you want to turn pro.” - Feaster
“The big thing is that I think we’re getting to the point with Johnny where, clearly, it’s fine to go back there now and play a year with his brother. But from our perspective, and we’ll talk to him about it here, we’d like to see him here." - Feaster
"We know how good this guy is. We know what he’s capable of. I’ve been thrilled — especially after him getting cut last year and knowing how much that hurt him — that he’s been able to have so much personal success and, to this point, team success." - Weisbrod
Regarding him doing a runner:
“I’m not concerned that he’s going to college as a ruse for ‘I don’t want to be play in Calgary.’ That’s not the case.” - Feaster
“The Schultz thing — I know that’s something that’s pretty big and some players do it,” Gaudreau said. “But I’m strictly just going back to school just to improve my game and not to wait out the years just to try to sign with someone else. I’m just really focused on my education and trying to get better on the ice and off the ice. I really enjoy it here, and hopefully, I get the chance to play here someday.” - Gaudreau
If you think the guy is directly lying to the media, nothing is going to convince you otherwise.
Last edited by Scoutski; 12-04-2013 at 12:08 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Scoutski For This Useful Post:
Am I alone, or is the fact that his name is 'Connor McDavid' preventing anyone else from getting on this hype train a bit more enthusiastically? It's just such a chunky, boring name. I'm sure he'll be a wizard at this level but still. We need a good 'Yzerman' type name back in the league.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
I posted this in the Prospect forum, but with the discussion of St. Louis being a comparable, seems relevant here:
Anyone else catch Kerr mentioning Cam Atkinson as a size comparable player to Gaudreau when the Flames played CBJ?
Seems they're pretty similar size wise, with NHL.com listing Atkinson as 5'8 and 174lbs. BC Eagles list Gaudreau as 5'8, and 159lbs (hopefully JG can put on some weight over the next year).
Other similarities:
- Both Hobey Baker finalists
- Both went to BC (Atkinson spent 3 years, Gaudreau hopefully will only spend 3)
- Atkinson's 2nd year point total was 53 in 42 games, Gaudreau 51 in 35 games
- Atkinson wore #13 at BC, Johnny's current #
While Gaudreau definitely has higher end skill, it's nice to see another small size player be able to stick it out and find success in the big league. Currently he's on pace for 20 goals.
The fact that his name is almost Connor McLeod automatically makes his name awesome.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
I have no problem with people having different views. If I did, the last thing I would do is participate in a forum. Telling another poster he needs a break is what the issue is. Thanks for your keen insight though.
I agree with you in that there should be no issue with people having different views but as you can see by flameswin's comment and the people thanking that comment that different views generally aren't accepted by many. They want everyone to be in unison thinking the Flames are in good hands with the current staff. Sorry that's not going to happen nor should it.
It's funny that even you take no issue with him calling me insufferable yet you take issue with me telling him to take a break if he can't handle it. At least I don't call other posters names or bully posters like others.
Last edited by Erick Estrada; 12-04-2013 at 02:42 PM.
Do you get the feeling Baertschi is keeping Gaudreau's spot in the lineup warm for him? Bartschi better start thinking about being a nice complimentary player to Jankowski or Colborne. I think that's where he ends up slotting in, as Monahan and Gaudreau are our go-to pair up front.
Geez...what unsure-ness? Let him finish his season. Why should he abandon his teammates mid season? What college player does that? It just doesn't happen.
He can't. And wouldn't. That's not my point. (facepalm)
I'm talking about in April, when his season is done (obviously he's already made the commitment this year...). He seems firmly on the fence about what he wants to do after this season, and that to me is confusing. I just expected him, now in his third year and the nation leader statistically, dominating the league, to come out and say that making the move to Abby at season's end would be the plan, barring any setbacks with his physical training or whatnot. But instead it's more of, "I'm not sure now, we will see how I feel then". Just doesn't sound that eager to take the next step as most players of his caliber would be. You always hear other kids in junior coming through camps here saying they want to make the jump sooner than later and are chomping at the bit to move up. Monahan made it his 'plan' to be here this fall, even though the odds were stacked against him as a first year. And none of them dominated their respective leagues at the level Johnny is currently. Just confuses me a bit is all. But maybe that's a sign of his maturity and not getting ahead of himself right now with his frame and the work he knows is still ahead to get it to where he'll need it to be, but it seems almost a no brainer at this point. I expected him to sound a little more assuring considering the level he's playing at and that he must realize he's well beyond this level of hockey already.
No player... Prospect, rookie, or veteran goes into a contract negotiation guaranteeing that he is going sign. Why would you? Both on the game side and business side of the deal, you want to go into the negotiation from a position of strength so it's better to have the team think there is a chance that you will not sign. This way you can get the best contract possible and have the best chance to make the team. I'm sure he will sign with the flames and all this is just the business side of the game.
I am 95% confident that Gaudreau will sign in April.
I feel the same way. I was nervous prior to the development camp last summer but you could see Johnny really wanted to be here. He loves that hockey is #1 in this city. The fact the team is rebuilding and he is currently the top porospect not on the roster bodes well for him making the big team sooner than later.
I also know that you have spoken to Johnny himself and it is great you have that confidence
I agree with you in that there should be no issue with people having different views but as you can see by flameswin's comment and the people thanking that comment that different views generally aren't accepted by many. They want everyone to be in unison thinking the Flames are in good hands with the current staff. Sorry that's not going to happen nor should it...
That's not really what I see happening. There are a number of posters that are critical about management, but what I think people are taking issue with is the fact that you have taken it upon yourself to remind everyone about your displeasure at every opportunity, whether or not it is germane to the topic under discussion. We get it. You don't like Hartley. You don't need to litter every thread on the board with criticisms about coaching. In a thread about Gaudreau's great season, and a discussion about his expected professional debut in 2014, it is unnecessary to complain about the Flames coaches.
For the record, I don't think Hartley is a great coach. I also don't think he is a terrible coach. He is probably an average NHL coach, perhaps maybe even a little better than that, but honestly, I don't think it matters much at this point in the Flames's trajectory. For the next few years the most important things for this team will be to focus on the development of their young players into seasoned NHL regulars. There needs to be a strong focus on discipline, hard work, routine, and the general day-to-day requirements for coping with a long 82-game schedule. At minimum, the Flames coaching staff are providing that much. They are teaching the kids to work their asses off, to avoid falling into bad habits, to develop a successful routine.
Hartley & co. are providing that much, and that's enough for now.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
That's not really what I see happening. There are a number of posters that are critical about management, but what I think people are taking issue with is the fact that you have taken it upon yourself to remind everyone about your displeasure at every opportunity, whether or not it is germane to the topic under discussion. We get it. You don't like Hartley. You don't need to litter every thread on the board with criticisms about coaching. In a thread about Gaudreau's great season, and a discussion about his expected professional debut in 2014, it is unnecessary to complain about the Flames coaches.
For the record, I don't think Hartley is a great coach. I also don't think he is a terrible coach. He is probably an average NHL coach, perhaps maybe even a little better than that, but honestly, I don't think it matters much at this point in the Flames's trajectory. For the next few years the most important things for this team will be to focus on the development of their young players into seasoned NHL regulars. There needs to be a strong focus on discipline, hard work, routine, and the general day-to-day requirements for coping with a long 82-game schedule. At minimum, the Flames coaching staff are providing that much. They are teaching the kids to work their asses off, to avoid falling into bad habits, to develop a successful routine.
Hartley & co. are providing that much, and that's enough for now.
Haven't seen you posting for a while but I agree with you in that my original comment in this thread was probably not warranted and for the most part I have kept that stuff to Hartley specific threads. Everyone makes mistakes and I will accept that in this occasion.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
I agree with you in that there should be no issue with people having different views but as you can see by flameswin's comment and the people thanking that comment that different views generally aren't accepted by many. They want everyone to be in unison thinking the Flames are in good hands with the current staff. Sorry that's not going to happen nor should it.
It's funny that even you take no issue with him calling me insufferable yet you take issue with me telling him to take a break if he can't handle it. At least I don't call other posters names or bully posters like others.
I included my response in NSFW tags so not to further take this thread off-topic. You (or whomever else that feels like it) can read it.
NSFW!
Are you sure that your post wasn't designed to illicit this type of reaction though?
This is your original post:
Quote:
I sure hope he has a stellar two way game or Bob will find a warm spot in the press box for him right next to the other kid.
You really don't expect this kind of post to ruffle a few feathers and cause other posters to respond the way they have?
It isn't what you said so much - it is how you said it. I do think you often design your posts (or it seems) to illicit these types of reactions. When you get called out on it.
You could have easily said: "I hope Gaudreau has a more advanced 200ft game so that he can step in and become a more effective player from the start, rather than going through what Baertschi has been."
However, you included 3 things in your post in such a way that makes people respond the way they do:
1) Exaggeration - I sure hope he has a stellar two way game - does Monahan have a stellar 2-way game? Would the expectation of all rookies coming in require them to be stellar 2-way players? What about Colborne? Stellar 2-way game? Of course not.
2) Talking in 'absolutes' - Bob will find a warm spot in the press box - if the exaggeration is not met (which of course would be impossible), then without a doubt Gaudreau is going to get benched. So you take the wind out of everyone's sails a bit by insisting Gaudreau is going to get benched, absolutely.
3) Incorrectly grouping - right next to the other kid. - What about the even younger kid playing every night as a 19 year old? What about that other kid who is 6'5" and playing as the2nd line center most nights and never getting scratched?
Your post was overly-negative and showed your extreme bias against Hartley (who has benched Sven, not Colborne or Monahan even though they are also both rookies), and was written in an overly negative way that other posters (myself included) took as a 'troll post' designed to illicit the same exact reactions that you just got.
Your initial post that started this kerfuffle was about you having reservations on Gaudreau's 200ft game, and how Hartley will like him.
I would say that Gaudreau's game is probably a bit more advanced offensively, and he is better than expected defensively (as long as York doesn't utilize him in a cherry-picking role any further, as some posters at HF were complaining about not long ago).
It wouldn't surprise me either way, however, if Gaudreau was sat now and then if he was not fitting into the system, or continually failing assignments out there. Only way to find out is to have him play. I would be surprised if he doesn't get a bit of leeway to start. I don't think anyone is that certain at how well Gaudreau performs in the NHL until he starts playing, and we can start gauging his strengths and weaknesses (other than the obvious size disadvantage) and see how his game translates.
I would expect him to get benched by Hartley - or any other coach - if he is not meeting expectations - just like every other player in the NHL should. I do not, however, expect him to be in any doghouse unfairly (and I do not think this is the situation with Baertschi at the moment either), but if so, then I would expect a coach to be relieved of his duties if he was unfairly treating any player - prospect or not - in such a way as to impede his development and the related future success of the franchise.
