Pronman: Flames with the 29th ranked farm system

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Off course, the Flames's "win-now mode" is not the same as it is for a team like Minnesota or Anaheim. The Flames with a sizeable group of young players are also fortunate to have a long window which extends for several years.

And a balance to said youth.

They've graduated impact young forwards in Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk ... and now the impact portion of their prospect base is coming from the blueline to do the same.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don’t know about that Bingo. Some of the more “pessimistic” tend to express their views without denigrating the views of others. Some of the more “optimistic” posters like to be pretty condescending or take personal shots.

This is just my opinion obviously and may well reflect my own biases.

The emotional side of me feels that there is more condescension from the pessimistic crowd
But if I distance myself and try to take an honest look at it, I think the reality is that across the board people simply aren't as respectful as they should be to differing views. But we are more sensitive to it when we are on the receiving end.
But I don't think it makes sense that one side does it more or less than the other, because the behavior at play is simply that when someone's views don't align with ours, there is a temptation to take shots at them.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

From where I stand, it's pretty simple psychology. If you're on the "more optimistic" side for the team you already are emotionally invested in - say you're a Flames fan with a brighter than normal opinion about the future of Flames prospects - that emotional investment is tied up in your optimistic position, too. As a result, you'll have a greater emotional reaction to someone criticizing that position. If you're on the pessimistic side for the team you're a fan of, your views are actually at odds with what you'd like to be the case - passion isn't influencing your views as much. The result is that the optimists are both more likely to perceive any criticism as a personal affront, and are more likely to respond in kind - that is to say, emotionally, with anger.

Of course, the inverse would be true also - if you're a Flames fan with a pessimistic opinion about the future of Oilers' prospects, for example.

Motivated reasoning. Can't avoid it.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

And a balance to said youth.

They've graduated impact young forwards in Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk ... and now the impact portion of their prospect base is coming from the blueline to do the same.

They have graduated Jankowski, Hathaway and Kulak.

They drafted Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk who were NHL ready before signed their first Flame contract.

There are no blueliners ( or forwards) that currently fit the Flame team model of Draft and play.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

They have graduated Jankowski, Hathaway and Kulak.

They drafted Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk who were NHL ready before signed their first Flame contract.
.

Why does this matter? If they move from the prospect list to the roster, it impacts the quality of the prospect list.
You are using a narrow definition of "graduate"

[VladtheImpaler]

I kind of assume that there is nothing coming from the system except replacement level players (unless one of the goalies does one of those magical goalie things and becomes Carey Price), so to me the whole thing rests on how good Tkachuk and Hanifin can be. To a lesser extent, Monahan and Lindholm, but those 2 might be old enough that this is what they are. Bennett is a dark horse, but I put that one in the "faint hope" category. I am curious about Hanifin because I had crazy high opinion of him from afar...

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

They have graduated Jankowski, Hathaway and Kulak.

They drafted Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk who were NHL ready before signed their first Flame contract.

There are no blueliners ( or forwards) that currently fit the Flame team model of Draft and play.

They have a team model of draft and play?

(Or, more realistically, they were fortunate enough to have a few prospects that could jump into the NHL. But that doesn't make it a model.)

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

From where I stand, it's pretty simple psychology. If you're on the "more optimistic" side for the team you already are emotionally invested in - say you're a Flames fan with a brighter than normal opinion about the future of Flames prospects - that emotional investment is tied up in your optimistic position, too. As a result, you'll have a greater emotional reaction to someone criticizing that position. If you're on the pessimistic side for the team you're a fan of, your views are actually at odds with what you'd like to be the case - passion isn't influencing your views as much. The result is that the optimists are both more likely to perceive any criticism as a personal affront, and are more likely to respond in kind - that is to say, emotionally, with anger.

Of course, the inverse would be true also - if you're a Flames fan with a pessimistic opinion about the future of Oilers' prospects, for example.

Motivated reasoning. Can't avoid it.

Oh that's just so much bull####. I couldn't step foot into the game thread or PGTs last year because of all the "passion" being thrown all over the place by the pessimists.

And I'll say this, the pessimists around here last year were constantly angry. If anything, the optimists were saying "chill out, there's no need to get so angry about things. It'll get better....at some point".

However, if you're beaten over the head with enough angry negativity, an optimist just might respond in kind. That shouldn't be surprising.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

They have graduated Jankowski, Hathaway and Kulak.

They drafted Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk who were NHL ready before signed their first Flame contract.

There are no blueliners ( or forwards) that currently fit the Flame team model of Draft and play.

Everything is always so binary with you, isn't it? No nuance at all. One wonders how you manage in day-to-day life.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

They have graduated Jankowski, Hathaway and Kulak.

They drafted Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk who were NHL ready before signed their first Flame contract.

There are no blueliners ( or forwards) that currently fit the Flame team model of Draft and play.

I think we know the players haven't gone to the AHL, but that doesn't change the fact that they made the NHL team after being drafted.

The funny thing is the word graduated was the least important thing in what I said.

My whole point was that the roster is young and forward slanted in terms of youth. The fact that the next wave of players coming are on the blueline provides the balance, which was my point in the first place.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Oh that's just so much bull####.

The thing you bolded and referred to as bull#### was that what those people wanted to happen and what they thought would happen were at odds. Are you suggesting that the people who were negative about the team last year, when things were going badly, wanted the team to fail?

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The thing you bolded and referred to as bull#### was that what those people wanted to happen and what they thought would happen were at odds. Are you suggesting that the people who were negative about the team last year, when things were going badly, wanted the team to fail?

No, the bull#### I'm referring to is you characterizing the pessimists as calm and unemotional, when that was the furthest thing from the truth.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I didn't say they were calm and unemotional. I said that their emotional motivations weren't pushing in the same direction as the positions they were taking. If you want something to be true, you'll be more emotionally invested in arguing that it is, and less willing to accept a contrary position. That's really not something you can argue against; it's indisputable human psychology at this point.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The thing you bolded and referred to as bull#### was that what those people wanted to happen and what they thought would happen were at odds. Are you suggesting that the people who were negative about the team last year, when things were going badly, wanted the team to fail?

There are definitely posters here who are 'party over country' types. They would rather be proven right about their negative thinking, than be proven wrong, even though being proven wrong would mean the Flames were doing better.

Also, there is a non-zero number of posters that aren't even Flames fans, but masquerade as them to post negatively about the Flames. In fact, aren't you actually a Canucks fan? And ricardow is a Jets fan that has been pretending to be Flames fan for many years. And I'm sure there are others that are a little more subtle about it.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

No one is saying you’re a homer because you believe a prospect has upside. But you are trying to argue that fans of a team are totally objective in assessing their own prospects?

No. I am arguing that some fans are biased in favour of their own prospects, some fans are biased against them, and some don't have a lot of bias one way or another.

To paint them all with the same brush is an instance of… you guessed it… bias.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I didn't say they were calm and unemotional. I said that their emotional motivations weren't pushing in the same direction as the positions they were taking. If you want something to be true, you'll be more emotionally invested in arguing that it is, and less willing to accept a contrary position. That's really not something you can argue against; it's indisputable human psychology at this point.

You're assuming their desire for the Flames to do well outweighs their desire to be proven right. In some (many?) cases I don't think that is true.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I didn't say they were calm and unemotional. I said that their emotional motivations weren't pushing in the same direction as the positions they were taking. If you want something to be true, you'll be more emotionally invested in arguing that it is, and less willing to accept a contrary position. That's really not something you can argue against; it's indisputable human psychology at this point.

But this still goes in both directions. If a more pessimistic fan is already conditioned to accept his own pessimism at face value he will be equally reluctant to believe something different.

[Vinny01]

The system is not as deep but the Flames have 5 top 6 picks from the last 6 drafts on the roster. They additionally have Gaudreau, Jankowski, Kulak, that we’re drafted by the team and are 25 or younger. Looking at the roster today discounting 2018 you have to go back to 2011 where the Flames do not have a first rounder on the roster.

Not having picks this year hurt but moving a 25 and 26 year old and a 20 year old 3rd rounder for a 23 and 21 year old help keep the core young. I think it is fair to say that 2 of Valimaki/Andersson/Kylington will be NHLers and at least one of Dube/Mangiapane will also be a NHLer

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But this still goes in both directions. If a more pessimistic fan is already conditioned to accept his own pessimism at face value he will be equally reticent to believe something different.

I think you're probably right that there are some fans that actually, somewhat perversely, want to see their team fail, or have such a hate on for management that they want to see management fail more than they want the team to succeed. But I suspect that's a small minority of fans. I think most people here fall into one of two camps, illustrated by the below example:

1. "I think Kylington has a lot of skill, and it'd be great if he was the next Erik Karlsson, but I really don't think he's likely to make it to anywhere near that level", and
2. "I think Kylington has a lot of skill, and I hope he becomes the next Erik Karlsson or close to it - I think he has a real shot at it."

Neither of those are totally crazy, but obviously one view is aligned with the wishes of the person stating it and the other isn't. Science would suggest that the latter type of person will be less likely to tolerate criticism of his position.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I think you're probably right that there are some fans that actually, somewhat perversely, want to see their team fail, or have such a hate on for management that they want to see management fail more than they want the team to succeed. But I suspect that's a small minority of fans.

It may be a small minority of fans, but it is not such a small minority of posts. Those fans who want the team to fail, and most particularly those who hate management and want to see them crash and burn, tend to be very loud, argumentative, and repetitive.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If a more pessimistic fan is already conditioned to accept his own pessimism at face value he will be equally reticent to believe something different.

I hate to be the one to do this to a Textcritic, but here goes—

Reluctant. ‘Reticent’ means unwilling to speak. Goodness knows, if there's one thing about these pessimistic fans, it's that they are pretty much always willing to speak.