Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-12-2017, 12:20 PM   #201
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
Obviously it's a projection. I'm not an idiot. I defend Pronman as much as anyone on this forum but Puljujarvi just finished off a really really poor season. I don't see the justification behind putting him ahead of many players on this list.
Well if you're using projection then his poor season doesn't necessarily really matter in the grand scheme of things. And as I pointed out Bennett is also coming off a really poor season in terms of points and is older than Puljujarvi and yet we believe he could still be a star and wouldn't trade him for a variety of players. This justification for putting Puljujarvi high would be that you feel he's going to be a star NHLer. That's the upside he had when drafted and it didn't disappear just because he didn't instantly excel in the NHL.

Lots of reasons why Puljujarvi didn't excel in the NHL. Chiarelli went over a few of them in his 50 minute interview with Bob Mackenzie. First off Puljujarvi's english was pretty bad. He comes from a pretty remote area of Finland from what I'm led to believe. Chiarelli thinks his transition to NA was a bit rough and I think that's a totally valid assessment. I think having Jokinen will help him quite a bit this season.

I mean it'd be great if Puljujarvi busted but the kid is a beast with serious skill. I don't think that's a likely outcome.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:23 PM   #202
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher View Post
Well if you're using projection then his poor season doesn't necessarily really matter in the grand scheme of things. And as I pointed out Bennett is also coming off a really poor season in terms of points and is older than Puljujarvi and yet we believe he could still be a star and wouldn't trade him for a variety of players. This justification for putting Puljujarvi high would be that you feel he's going to be a star NHLer. That's the upside he had when drafted and it didn't disappear just because he didn't instantly excel in the NHL.

Lots of reasons why Puljujarvi didn't excel in the NHL. Chiarelli went over a few of them in his 50 minute interview with Bob Mackenzie. First off Puljujarvi's english was pretty bad. He comes from a pretty remote area of Finland from what I'm led to believe. Chiarelli thinks his transition to NA was a bit rough and I think that's a totally valid assessment. I think having Jokinen will help him quite a bit this season.

I mean it'd be great if Puljujarvi busted but the kid is a beast with serious skill. I don't think that's a likely outcome.
Bennett was ranked in the 70s, Pulijujarvi was ranked 18th. Wee bit of a difference.
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:24 PM   #203
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
A complete bust? Pretty sure the Oilers would be over the moon if Pulijujarvi is a guy who scores 27-31 goals and ~60 points a year. That's not a bust.

Pronman is huge on skill but you have to balance out with smarts/hockey sense.
Over the moon? I think that's what they expect and project of Puljujarvi long term. His upside didn't disappear after one year. We expect Bennett to be a star centre. His upside didn't disappear just because he's had some issues realizing his upside.

Puljujarvi has skill, smarts, hockey sense, skating and size. He has no real weaknesses. He has all the tools to be a star winger in this league. If you guys were on the Puljujarvi hype train before the 2016 draft then you should still be on it. His upside is the same now as it was then.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:26 PM   #204
Resolute 14
One of many who is too boring; thinks that there should be rules regarding grammar in custom user titles, and also makes moderators wonder if there is a charachter limit here. I mean come on- you would think that would be a limitation in the software
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
It was a poor NHL season for sure, but he had a great AHL season as an 18 year old. Albeit, only playing 39 games (0.72 pts/gm). Very similar to Nylander's 18 year old season.
Monahan put up the same PPG in the NHL as Puljujarvi did in the AHL. So if that's our basis for judgment...

Of course, that isn't Pronman's basis. He's projecting who he feels will have the best career, and it is quite clear reading that article that gut feeling is the primary criteria he is judging by. And that's fair. It's just one man's opinion.
__________________

Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:31 PM   #205
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
Bennett was ranked in the 70s, Pulijujarvi was ranked 18th. Wee bit of a difference.
Well I don't have access to the list. I'm just trying to explain why a scout might have a player ranked above established NHLers because of upside. You might prefer the established NHLer, a scout or GM might prefer the upside of a young player, who knows.

It's like TB trading Drouin for Sergachev. Drouin is an NHL proven forward. Sergachev hasn't proven he's an NHL at all. And yet they were traded for each other. TB is projecting Sergachev to be a top 3 defenseman and a very valuable player when he's fully developed. They were confident enough in their projection of Sergachev to deal Drouin who likely is a star forward. Pronman is projecting Puljujarvi to be a 1st line star winger. You may disagree with the projection because you hate the Oilers or w/e but that was Puljujarvi's projection at the draft and nothing has changed that. He hasn't busted. His upside didn't disappear because he struggled to adapt to North America.

Last edited by Flames Draft Watcher; 09-12-2017 at 12:37 PM.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:40 PM   #206
robaur
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Exp:
Default

Mike Smith wasn't even the worst goaltender in the league when he played for Arizona last year....but now CGY's goaltending is going to be the worst in the league?

Whoever the author is needs to give their head a shake.

Also, Pronman is the biggest sham in the business. His opinions/writing is comparable to low-grade cow manure.
robaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:45 PM   #207
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robaur View Post
Also, Pronman is the biggest sham in the business. His opinions/writing is comparable to low-grade cow manure.
Eh, he gets out there and scouts. It's his personal opinion. I think you have to filter it a bit since I think he underestimates the role size, strength and physicality play in the NHL and therefore underrates certain types of players and overrates others. Certain posters on this site do the same. But I've actually warmed up to him a bunch since he first started doing his scouting. I mean I'd still take Craig Button over him. But as fans we have very little access to scouting resources for free so Pronman has some use as long as you recognize his biases and limitations. He'll likely improve over the years as he finds out he was wrong on certain players and why he was wrong on them and I think we've already seen a lot of improvement in his scouting. In the end I do disagree with him a bunch of but its still useful to hear from someone who has actually seen a player vs fans talking about guys they've never seen outside of clips.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:44 PM   #208
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher View Post
It's called projection. Or do you actually think Puljujarvi will be a complete bust? Puljujarvi was considered not far behind Laine and Matthews in his draft and those two look like superstars. Plenty of time for Puljujarvi to turn out.

If he wasn't using projection then Bennett shouldn't be on the list.
Yes, but that was a year ago.

Over this past season, while the other two verified the lofty projections placed upon them, Puljujarvi struggled. He had a pretty disappointing season, relative to the expectations placed upon him.

So that has to be factored into the projections. Calling him a bust is ridiculous. But so is relying entirely on the projections from a year ago.

Monahan broke into the NHL immediately, and has been an impact player ever since. And even though he may not have been quite as highly touted at the draft as Puljujarvi was, that progression has to be factored in.

I get that there are different criteria that can be considered, and people have their own opinions, but ranking Puljujarvi ahead of Monahan is flat out wrong. Period.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:21 PM   #209
Tinordi
Franchise Player
 
Tinordi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Exp:
Default

If you really think Pulju is going to be more than a 25-30 goal, 60 point player then you rank him above Monahan. The challenge is justifying why you think so.
__________________
Sent from a computer using the internet
Tinordi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:30 PM   #210
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi View Post
If you really think Pulju is going to be more than a 25-30 goal, 60 point player then you rank him above Monahan. The challenge is justifying why you think so.
Do you think Monahan is going to be a 25-30 goal, 60 point player? Why do you not think he will also progress? Especially when he already has progressed substantially from his draft year.

We have one year of (non)progression for Puljujarvi and 3 years of progression for Monahan. Based on that somewhat small sample size, it's pretty clear who's better.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:37 PM   #211
Tinordi
Franchise Player
 
Tinordi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Exp:
Default

I dunno, I think Monahan is pretty set as a 30-60 guy. That's great. He could push higher point totals if he has a better option on his RW or if Gaudreau takes another step. But, I haven't seen Monahan's offensive game progress too much from his rookie year in all honesty. I agree he has progressed, but at the other end of the rink. If anything, as Monahan becomes a more complete player, we could probably expect his scoring to level off or decline a bit.

I wouldn't hold my breath expecting him to be a 35 - 70 player. It's possible but it would be because of better linemates, not because of Monahan finding another gear. I mean, what gives you the impression that there's another offensive dimension to him?

What you see is what you get with Monahan. Which is a damn good player.
__________________
Sent from a computer using the internet
Tinordi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:42 PM   #212
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi View Post
I dunno, I think Monahan is pretty set as a 30-60 guy. That's great. He could push higher point totals if he has a better option on his RW or if Gaudreau takes another step. But, I haven't seen Monahan's offensive game progress too much from his rookie year in all honesty. I agree he has progressed, but at the other end of the rink. If anything, as Monahan becomes a more complete player, we could probably expect his scoring to level off or decline a bit.

I wouldn't hold my breath expecting him to be a 35 - 70 player. It's possible but it would be because of better linemates, not because of Monahan finding another gear. I mean, what gives you the impression that there's another offensive dimension to him?

What you see is what you get with Monahan. Which is a damn good player.
This boggles my mind about Flames fans... everybody else in the league is going to get better and better, but our beloved Flame is what he is.

You said it yourself - he is getting better and better defensively. Centres are more valuable than wingers, and top line Cs are the rarest of commodities. Even if 30/60 is what he is (which I highly doubt), becoming a more complete top line C makes him an extremely valuable player.

Puljujarvi would need to be consistently producing a fair bit more points points than Monahan to even be in the discussion for being a better player. But let's see him actually make the NHL roster first.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 03:47 PM   #213
Tinordi
Franchise Player
 
Tinordi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Exp:
Default

I'm not arguing that Pulju is a better player. Re-read my post before you fly off the handle. And thank you for aggressively agreeing with me I guess?
__________________
Sent from a computer using the internet
Tinordi is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Tinordi For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 03:51 PM   #214
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Where did I go off the handle? You claimed Monahan is what he is, and then went on to discuss how he will get better anyway. I pointed out that defensive improvement is important too.

By better, I was referring to the article and being top 100 under 25 (thought that was obvious). In order to put Puljujarvi ahead on Monahan, one would have to think that Monahan is basically going to not get any better, and Puljujarvi is going to be at least a 70 point guy.

Those are both huge assumptions, and assuming both are going to be true is pretty obtuse.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 04:52 PM   #215
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Thought I'd do a bit of a comparison...

Monahan in his draft year, put up 78 points in 58 games in the OHL, an NHLe of 34
In his draft +1 year, he made the NHL and put up 34 points
In his draft +2 year, he put up 62 points
Since then, he has plateaued at about 60 points, but has become a much more complete C

Puljujarvi, in his draft year, put up 28 points in 50 games in SM-liiga, an NHLe of 20
In his draft +1 year, he played 28 NHL games and put up 8 points (23 point pace)
He then went to the AHL for 39 games and put up 28 points, an NHLe of 28 points

So even if we ignore than Monahan plays top line C and just look at points (Puljujarvi's presumed forte), Monahan has been better at each year of comparative data.

I am not saying that Puljujarvi can't or won't be better than Monahan - he might be - but for the author to rank him higher in the top 100, he is saying that he will be.

Even if Monahan plateaus from here and remains a 60 point C, and never improves defensively, Puljujarvi must hit 70 points to be better. The argument requires two things:

1) Monahan doesn't get any better
2) Puljujarvi's floor is 70 points. His floor, not his ceiling. I would agree that his ceiling is probably 70 points, but assuming 70 points is a given for him is a pretty big stretch.

Also, I predict Monahan will hit 70 points this year.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 06:17 PM   #216
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
Yes, but that was a year ago.

Over this past season, while the other two verified the lofty projections placed upon them, Puljujarvi struggled. He had a pretty disappointing season, relative to the expectations placed upon him.

So that has to be factored into the projections. Calling him a bust is ridiculous. But so is relying entirely on the projections from a year ago.
Disagree. He projects to be the same player. There is nothing worrying to me that he struggled last year. There's reasons why he did, reasons why I thought he might. He couldn't speak english in his draft year. Couldn't really answer any questions. How is he going to understand the coach? How much harder is it going to make his adaptation to NA? I don't think any less of Puljujarvi's upside after the year he had. He still has the same upside. I always thought he was the least likely of the big 3 that year to excel immediately. His upside is still tremendous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
Monahan broke into the NHL immediately, and has been an impact player ever since. And even though he may not have been quite as highly touted at the draft as Puljujarvi was, that progression has to be factored in.

I get that there are different criteria that can be considered, and people have their own opinions, but ranking Puljujarvi ahead of Monahan is flat out wrong. Period.
I don't rank him ahead of Monahan either but I don't think its as controversial as you seem to think. It's one guys opinion, its based on projections of how good they think they'll be at their peak. Saying someone's opinion is flat out wrong period is kind of pointless. You have a different opinion? Great. But there's legitimate reasons why someone could have Puljujarvi ahead of Monahan. I understand people on here are going to favour the Flames player. There's very compelling and solid arguments as to why Monahan should be considered more valuable. I just think you're overreacting a bit to one person's opinion. Would we trade Monahan for Puljujarvi? No, for a variety of reasons. But someone thinking Puljujarvi might be a bigger star when he's fully developed isn't completely outrageous IMO.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2017, 11:00 AM   #217
nobles_point
Scoring Winger
 
nobles_point's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lake Candle
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher View Post
Over the moon? I think that's what they expect and project of Puljujarvi long term. His upside didn't disappear after one year. We expect Bennett to be a star centre. His upside didn't disappear just because he's had some issues realizing his upside.

Puljujarvi has skill, smarts, hockey sense, skating and size. He has no real weaknesses. He has all the tools to be a star winger in this league. If you guys were on the Puljujarvi hype train before the 2016 draft then you should still be on it. His upside is the same now as it was then.
Not elite hockey sense from what I've heard from Finnish journalists. Which makes sense why a Finnish GM pass on him? He's not Laine.
__________________
Problems can't be solved on the same level they are created.
nobles_point is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2017, 11:10 AM   #218
Resolute 14
One of many who is too boring; thinks that there should be rules regarding grammar in custom user titles, and also makes moderators wonder if there is a charachter limit here. I mean come on- you would think that would be a limitation in the software
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
Looks like I'm just misinterpreting his comment then. He could mean then that the Oilers finish 1 spot ahead.

His reply to an Oilers fan comment saying he's happy the Flames are predicted to miss the playoffs: "Uh, please don't come back tomorrow and see who's next (sorry) ((i promise there's a reasonable explanation))"
Now it makes sense. Pronman has them at the very same 93 points he has us. That's going to go over like a lead balloon in mulletville.
__________________

Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-13-2017, 11:30 AM   #219
Love
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher View Post
Over the moon? I think that's what they expect and project of Puljujarvi long term. His upside didn't disappear after one year. We expect Bennett to be a star centre. His upside didn't disappear just because he's had some issues realizing his upside.

Puljujarvi has skill, smarts, hockey sense, skating and size. He has no real weaknesses. He has all the tools to be a star winger in this league. If you guys were on the Puljujarvi hype train before the 2016 draft then you should still be on it. His upside is the same now as it was then.
Hockey sense has never really been Puljujarvi's calling card. He also has the tendency of handling the puck like a grenade at times. He's just a freak athlete, not many players that size can move that fast and shoot the puck that hard. I'm hoping he follows Nichushkin's trajectory.
Love is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2017, 11:31 AM   #220
FiveSeven
Crash and Bang Winger
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Holland
Exp:
Default

I think Mony also greatly improved in his puck possession. He actually hangs on to the puck and makes plays which just started last season. This season I'm betting he will make even more use of having the puck more. I'm sure he will also get better defensively.
__________________
Mark my words this is a Brouwer contract except on the backend - Parallex on signing Stone.
FiveSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:59 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016