[PGT] Flames dominate, but lose 2-1 to the Sharks in OT.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Ferland needs a coach like Mike Keenan. When Roenick passed up an opportunity to finish his check, Keenan grabbed him around the neck, leaned down and told him that if he does that again, he will not play him.

I suspect that the feel good story of Ferly's adversity last year has bought him some extra rope with the coaching staff.

Players who can do little things right but not be an impact player are a dime a dozen. That is what Ferly is until he can figure out what he can bring consistently and then deliver.

He had 6 G in 25 GP in the AHL then 7 in 32. Glencross was great than point per game in Syracuse before coming up. Even Glencross's late trajectory puts him as an outlier and he also showed more than Ferly at the AHL level.

This is an emotional argument from folks expecting an impact winger.

Never say never, but nothing points to him suddenly becoming something consistently, that he showed he was for one playoff series.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

W/E. We're not going to change each others minds. Let's see how Ferland looks in 2-3 years.

BTW you can't refute an argument about a young player's upside by pointing to his stats when he's not fully developed. Joe Thornton had 19 points in 55 games in his rookie year. Clearly he didn't have top two line upside right?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

It was an argument meant to show how silly your argument was. I guess it failed? Do you need me to find endless examples of players who broke out after their first full season? Cause there are ENDLESS examples of it. Ferland not producing as a rookie means absolutely nothing about how much he could produce when fully developed.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Ferland needs a coach like Mike Keenan. When Roenick passed up an opportunity to finish his check, Keenan grabbed him around the neck, leaned down and told him that if he does that again, he will not play him.

I suspect that the feel good story of Ferly's adversity last year has bought him some extra rope with the coaching staff.

Players who can do little things right but not be an impact player are a dime a dozen. That is what Ferly is until he can figure out what he can bring consistently and then deliver.

He had 6 G in 25 GP in the AHL then 7 in 32. Glencross was great than point per game in Syracuse before coming up. Even Glencross's late trajectory puts him as an outlier and he also showed more than Ferly at the AHL level.

This is an emotional argument from folks expecting an impact winger.

Never say never, but nothing points to him suddenly becoming something consistently, that he showed he was for one playoff series.

Yep, I agree with that pretty much. That's why I was so shocked when people in the Ferland Contract talks thread kept saying Ferly would be foolish to accept a multiyear deal. He should accept a 1 year deal, then collect a major payday after that deal.

It seemed like that was the majority opinion. A minority of guys said that if the club offers a multiyear deal, Ferly should jump at the chance. He's not an impact player (yet) nor does he have the high end skill to be a hard negotiator like that and turn down multi year offers. Ferly was smart to accept a 2-year deal and it was a smart deal for the Flames too. It'll give them time to see what Ferly actually is, and in my mind, he's forever a bottom 6 energy guy. And there's nothing wrong with that.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This is an emotional argument from folks expecting an impact winger.

Never say never, but nothing points to him suddenly becoming something consistently, that he showed he was for one playoff series.

I don't know what to expect from Ferland but I want to give him a chance to show it. It is totally emotional because Ferland has a lot of differences from the average NHL prospect. Starting real hockey at 17 with the WHL, having alcohol abuse problems at such a young age and working through them, showing up not even close to in shape got him sent to the WHL as an over-ager.

He might end up being a full on bust, or he might blossom at 25. I just argue against the idea that he is too old to gain anymore development and he is what he is. I think for all those reasons he has a lot more growing to do, and if he turns out to be an under-producing regular season guy and over-achieving playoff guy then he is totally an asset to hang on to.

Not arguing that he will ever be impact, just arguing that based on his circumstances, and yes his great playoff performance, that he deserves some rope and a couple years in the NHL before people write him off. He hasn't even seen 100 games yet.

[Roof-Daddy]

A rebuilding team that is trying to get bigger and tougher to play against should NOT be giving up on a 23 year old Micheal Ferland after only 90 career NHL games, and anyone who thinks they should is just plain old wrong IMO.

Even if he just stays what he is right now and doesn't develop any further he is worth keeping around as a bottom six forward, but personally I think we will gradually see more from him if he can stay healthy.

[Enoch Root]

When Colborne was 23, he had 0G, 0A in 5 games with the Leafs.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Yep, I agree with that pretty much. That's why I was so shocked when people in the Ferland Contract talks thread kept saying Ferly would be foolish to accept a multiyear deal. He should accept a 1 year deal, then collect a major payday after that deal.

It seemed like that was the majority opinion. A minority of guys said that if the club offers a multiyear deal, Ferly should jump at the chance. He's not an impact player (yet) nor does he have the high end skill to be a hard negotiator like that and turn down multi year offers. Ferly was smart to accept a 2-year deal and it was a smart deal for the Flames too. It'll give them time to see what Ferly actually is, and in my mind, he's forever a bottom 6 energy guy. And there's nothing wrong with that.

It's kind of a minor point as to whether he should have signed a 2 year deal or not as the money would not have been much different.

But his play this year (not horrible at all) is exactly why the Flames should have locked in on a one year deal. Current management is a little too in love with multi year deals for my taste. We might be seeing better years from Bouma and Ferland if they were on 1 year deals. Neither of those guys had accomplished enough to warrant multi year deals IMO.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Ferland needs a coach like Mike Keenan. When Roenick passed up an opportunity to finish his check, Keenan grabbed him around the neck, leaned down and told him that if he does that again, he will not play him.

So what he needs is a manipulative ######bag who'd rather a player sacrifice his safety, health, and enjoyment of the game to recreate some adrenaline fueled post-season fools gold rather than just play the game. Right.

Sorry if I prefer players play the game the way they enjoy playing the game while still being effective rather than playing the game the way one guy wants them to play the game from the comforts of behind the bench.

And yes, Ferland is still effective. If he wasn't he'd be behind Bollig on the depth chart. He must be doing something right considering he's the LW on the Backlund line, a role that isn't exactly handed out like candy.

[polak]

So much hope for Ferland but the finish is not there and when he isn't playing like a freight train (rarely does) then he's a 'tweener. The offense simply isn't there. Maybe he'll find it but I predict people will want him gone by this time next year as the Vancouver series will be pretty much forgotten and we'll want to give other b-prospects a shot.

[Southside]

Originally Posted by codynw

You know Ferland leads the team in hits and that nobody else is close to him, right?

That doesn't surprise me. The Flames are in the bottom third of the league in hits, Ferland ranks in the mid 20's in the league. Ferland averages 3 hits per game, the leaders average 4. But, there is more to it than that. Watch those hit leaders play, they get that extra hit, get into those extra scrums, dole out some face washes, cross checks in the crease and just generally get under the opponents skin.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

So what he needs is a manipulative ######bag who'd rather a player sacrifice his safety, health, and enjoyment of the game to recreate some adrenaline fueled post-season fools gold rather than just play the game. Right.

Sorry if I prefer players play the game the way they enjoy playing the game while still being effective rather than playing the game the way one guy wants them to play the game from the comforts of behind the bench.

And yes, Ferland is still effective. If he wasn't he'd be behind Bollig on the depth chart. He must be doing something right considering he's the LW on the Backlund line, a role that isn't exactly handed out like candy.

This is not kindergarten. For these guys it is a job, not free play time.

Don't let your view on Keenan's personality skew the intent and detract from the point.

There is a boss on successful teams and the players do what they are told. Not what they feel like. The Devils did it Lou's way from top to bottom. Scotty didn't even talk to his players one on one a lot of the time, he left that to the assistants. Darryl from all accounts had loyalty to his guys outside the room but is very demanding inside. And so on.

Energy guys who don't score should perhaps check with intensity, wear down the opposing D with a vigorous forecheck, get in people's faces and under their skin. At least do something that gives your team an advantage.

Unless Bob is asking him to do something else. That is another story

If Ferland can't summon the energy to play the style that makes him effective consistently, he needs to be reminded that there are guys nipping at his heels every day that would love his job.

He made a difference by getting under Vancouver and Bieksa's skin. Now he doesn't get under anybody's skin. So how else is he differentiating himself? Sympathy for overcoming off ice issues?

I suspect he is on the depth chart ahead of Bollig due to age and the coach who has taken him under his wing and thinks he is teaching him something or can make him better. He is being given the chance to establish what he is. And this season, it is not any more than last.

And is he effective? Because the team isn't

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

When Colborne was 23, he had 0G, 0A in 5 games with the Leafs.

Congrats. I suspect most of the pro-Ferland crowd would expect Ferland to be better than Colborne.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Congrats. I suspect most of the pro-Ferland crowd would expect Ferland to be better than Colborne.

If you can't follow a conversation, that's not my problem

[Flash Walken]

How many days old was Colborne vs. Ferland? That's the most important part of the discussion.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This is not kindergarten. For these guys it is a job, not free play time.

And for Bob Hartley, he's obviously doing his job pretty well.

There is a boss on successful teams and the players do what they are told.

And maybe they're told not to be idiots.

Energy guys who don't score should perhaps check with intensity, wear down the opposing D with a vigorous forecheck, get in people's faces and under their skin. At least do something that gives your team an advantage.

You would think the team leader in hits despite missing a dozen games, sixth in takeaways despite missing a dozen games, and has one of the best carry-in percentages among forwards is doing "something" that gives his team an advantage.

Unless Bob is asking him to do something else. That is another story

Well based on the fact that he has not "grabbed him around the neck, leaned down and told him that if he does [that] again, he will not play him" that might be a reasonable assumption.

(whatever [that] is, considering Ferland finishes his checks just fine.)

If Ferland can't summon the energy to play the style that makes him effective consistently, he needs to be reminded that there are guys nipping at his heels every day that would love his job.

Running buckwild and charging people is not a "style" that makes him effective consistently. It's a style that gets him called for phantom charging penalties even when he's making a clean hit.

Making smart reads with and without the puck, getting shots towards the general vicinity of the net, being hard on puck battles, clogging the neutral zone with a great stick, and screening goaltenders with his frame, is a style that makes him effective consistently. And he does those little things better than anyone else on the team. And if Hathaway is doing them similarily well, that too is not a knock on Ferland, it's a compliment to Hathaway. The fact that they're both on a line together flanking our best defensive center should tell you what Hartley sees in this player.

He made a difference by getting under Vancouver and Bieksa's skin. Now he doesn't get under anybody's skin. So how else is he differentiating himself?

Do you not realize there's a difference between playoffs and regular season? How are Matt Stajan, or Lance Bouma, or Michael Frolik "differentiating" themselves? They're not, they're playing the sport they're paid to play, not being a side show. And if someone else, like Hathaway, wants to be an agitator, that also has no effect on Ferland. Ferland didn't make it to the NHL by being an agitator, he chose to be an agitator in the playoffs but that doesn't mean he "has" to agitate to play in the NHL.

Ferland brings a lot to the table with his intelligence, puck skills, and strength down low. These are more valuable traits than running guys through boards to impress his coach.

And is he effective? Because the team isn't

Well, if that's your measure of effectiveness we should just trade Johnny Gaudreau for Artem Anisimov. "Because team success".

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

If you can't follow a conversation, that's not my problem

Top contribution.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Top contribution.

His point was very valid.

[PeteMoss]

In all honesty this boils down to the same conversation about prospects that always happens here. There's the optimistic group (Enoch/FDW and probably others) and then the pessimistic group.

For the optimists its always too soon to give up on prospects and we'd still be sitting here talking about Greg Neimsz finally coming around if he was still in the organization.

Its entirely possible the optimistic viewpoint could be right about Ferland. Jankowski is one guy who's taken a step forward this year after many of the pessimists have written him off.

On the whole though - the pessimists are right more often than not when it comes to prospects. Most players follow a normal development path and don't stall and then improve again. Even guys like Brodie, Gaudreau and Giordano who were late picks/undrafted guys were always looking good from the second they were drafted. Guys like Brodie/Gio were surprises at their early camps when they didn't make the teams and then succeeded in the AHL and then worked their way up in the NHL. Even when they were getting limited time, the vast majority here thought they looked good and deserved more ice time. Even Jankowksi is a guy who's improved every year since being drafted even if it was slower than most hoped at first.

A plateau or drop-off is a huge red-flag of the guy becoming anything more than a 3rd/4th line guy. Particularly when the player is 23 years old.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

His point was very valid.

How? Do you not expect Ferland to be a better player than Colborne when he's 26/27?

And that last comment added absolutely nothing to the discussion, although neither did my reply so I shouldn't throw stones.