I think Pelletier has a good shot at making the team with all of the holes in the lineup currently.
I give him a better shot than Mackey or Kylington, to tell you the truth. Wing is the easiest position for a rookie at the NHL level, and Sutter knows it well.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL
I used to put a lot of stock into what guys like Pronman & Wheeler say (still do, especially when it's good reports on Flames prospects lol), but I've come to realize that what they say isn't all that valuable, as they tend to get really hooked on certain players and, most annoying, act as if they've legitimately seen EVERY prospect play numerous times. I know they also lean on their scout contacts for info, but to watch and have in-depth scouting reports on literally hundreds of prospects a year is impossible.
I much prefer guys like Joel Henderson, who only follow a specific league (in his case, the WHL) in which they can actually get good scouting reports on players, and don't pretend to know jack all about prospects from other leagues.
That's why I've started to lean heavily on prospect models (who tend to really like the Flames choices) from people like Byron Bader and Patrick Bacon, as well as micro-data charts from people like Mitch Brown the last few years, because their numbers are simply, well, number based, and they don't claim to know much about prospects outside of the numbers.
As for NHL teams, they have full scouting teams that allow them to actually watch each prospect numerous times, as well as get inside information about their character and other important behind the scenes info from their coaches/teammates/family/etc. Yes, some scouts still have the same problems of getting too hooked on specific players (sometimes great (Gaudreau/Fox/etc.), sometimes bad (McDonald/Boltmann/etc.)), but most of the time that can be overrun by the rest of the scouting team.
In terms of what I personally value most when it comes to the draft, I would rank it as follows:
1A) NHL scouting teams
1B) Prospect models & micro-data charts
3) Specific league scouts
4) Guys like Pronman & Wheeler
Exactly.
They have biases...they wouldnt be human if they didnt.
then they try so hard to be "right" about their decisions , it completely skews their assessments.
I used to put a lot of stock into what guys like Pronman & Wheeler say (still do, especially when it's good reports on Flames prospects lol), but I've come to realize that what they say isn't all that valuable, as they tend to get really hooked on certain players and, most annoying, act as if they've legitimately seen EVERY prospect play numerous times. I know they also lean on their scout contacts for info, but to watch and have in-depth scouting reports on literally hundreds of prospects a year is impossible.
I much prefer guys like Joel Henderson, who only follow a specific league (in his case, the WHL) in which they can actually get good scouting reports on players, and don't pretend to know jack all about prospects from other leagues.
That's why I've started to lean heavily on prospect models (who tend to really like the Flames choices) from people like Byron Bader and Patrick Bacon, as well as micro-data charts from people like Mitch Brown the last few years, because their numbers are simply, well, number based, and they don't claim to know much about prospects outside of the numbers.
As for NHL teams, they have full scouting teams that allow them to actually watch each prospect numerous times, as well as get inside information about their character and other important behind the scenes info from their coaches/teammates/family/etc. Yes, some scouts still have the same problems of getting too hooked on specific players (sometimes great (Gaudreau/Fox/etc.), sometimes bad (McDonald/Boltmann/etc.)), but most of the time that can be overrun by the rest of the scouting team.
In terms of what I personally value most when it comes to the draft, I would rank it as follows:
1A) NHL scouting teams
1B) Prospect models & micro-data charts
3) Specific league scouts
4) Guys like Pronman & Wheeler
I've noticed that even as a fan, the more you get hooked/fall in love with prospects, the more likely you are to be disappointed.
There are hundreds of players to choose from, and 32 teams. The chance of picking any individual player outside the first round is very slim.
I'm just content when the picks aren't totally off the board headscratchers. This year, the biggest headscratcher was probably Lucas Ciona. If your iffy picks are at the draft, that's fine.
I give him a better shot than Mackey or Kylington, to tell you the truth. Wing is the easiest position for a rookie at the NHL level, and Sutter knows it well.
Pelletier deserves the chance. That said you can not write off Mackey though.
Called the best dman in the AHL. What more do you want from the kid?
Surely that earns him at least the 7th dman on the team? I would say a bigger look.
If the top dman in the AHL cant crack a top seven line up in the nhl?
Guy has earned his chance.
He may fight with Stone and Kylington for minutes. Yet he deserves that chance.
They have biases...they wouldnt be human if they didnt.
then they try so hard to be "right" about their decisions , it completely skews their assessments.
I don’t understand this statement.
I think they have to live with their decisions. Wouldn’t their initial assessment be the basis for the decision/pick?
Is their skewed assessment after the fact, benefiting the poor choices or a detriment to these choices?
Pelletier deserves the chance. That said you can not write off Mackey though.
Called the best dman in the AHL. What more do you want from the kid?
Surely that earns him at least the 7th dman on the team? I would say a bigger look.
If the top dman in the AHL cant crack a top seven line up in the nhl?
Guy has earned his chance.
He may fight with Stone and Kylington for minutes. Yet he deserves that chance.
Sorry probably the wrong thread for this.
No worries. I think you're right about what he deserves, but with Giordano gone it's almost a dead certainty the Flames will pick up the best veteran D they can find in free agency. Mackey will have some stiff competition for a third-pairing spot, and at this point I'd rather see him start the season in Stockton than in the press box. He's still got only 33 total pro games under his belt.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
No worries. I think you're right about what he deserves, but with Giordano gone it's almost a dead certainty the Flames will pick up the best veteran D they can find in free agency. Mackey will have some stiff competition for a third-pairing spot, and at this point I'd rather see him start the season in Stockton than in the press box. He's still got only 33 total pro games under his belt.
How does 4 x $5M for Keith Yandle grab you?
__________________
Mom and Dad love you, Rowan - February 15, 2024
UFA/Trade - Tanev
Hanifin - Andersson
Valimaki - Stone (would be shocked if he isn't re-signed)
Mackey - Kylington
I really like Kylington, but I don't feel he is an asset to the Flames any longer. I am betting he goes on to have an NHL career, but with the way the Flames are structured, and who Sutter seems to prefer, I think he will be gone as a throw-in on a trade, or lost to waivers (though it is tough to claim players as all teams are trying to whittle their own team down), and if he makes it, back in Stockton (which is better for his career than being a 7th or 8th D).
As for the draft...
I love it. I absolutely loved it.
I love players like Gaudreau, Mangiapane, Phillips, Pettersen, Zavgorodniy, Francis, Pelletier and now Coronato (though not exactly undersized really), etc., - they are all skilled guys (and some even have that grit to their game too!!). Then you have guys like Tkachuk and Monahan - no real speed to their game.
I like the look of this draft. Coronato isn't big, but he is an absolute goal scoring terror with tonnes of drive and already relishes playing a 200ft game. That helps, especially at the weakest position organizationally.
Over the years, I have really disliked losing players like Ferland, Bennet and Brodie - players that added speed, some skill, and (except Brodie of course) a lot of grit. It isn't about getting or not getting value for the players you lose (that's a different topic IMO, and one I would rather not get into), but it is about what you are removing from the team. All players that help this team win with what they bring, and all players who have a history of being strong playoff performers.
I like adding Stromgren, Huckins and Ciona to Heinemen, Pospisil and Ruzicka. Obviously they will not all make it (but I bet Heinemen and Stromgren do!).
I look at that '89 team, and they could beat you any way you wanted to play, and anywhere on the ice. In the middle of the ice, that team could match-up with any other team in the NHL. Along the boards? Yep, they will hurt you along the boards. Want a finesse game? Flames could beat you there. Want to play a really aggressive and chippy game? Yep, Flames got that covered too.
The '04 team could beat you all day long along the boards, and almost (the did dammit!) with the cup that year.
This is not to say that you can just assemble a team of big guys and think you can win. It isn't to say that a small team can't win either. I think it gives a team more options by ensuring that they build a skilled, fast and large team overall. Let the undersized players thrive by giving them more room out there. Make it harder for the opposing teams to shut down your team, especially in the playoffs. Discourage other teams in taking runs at your star players by being the bigger and nastier team to begin with. Make other teams not look forward to playing the Flames again.
I was really pleased to see this. Flames (even under Feaster) have been trying to get bigger. Feaster said it was a weakness organizationally. Treliving has spoken about it. Flames have tried to address it in the past. I like how they drafted today.
If I was to bet, Coronato, Stromgren and Whynot make the NHL down the road - and maybe a couple of others. I think this was a really strong draft. I like Whynot a lot.
I usually like most of the picks most years. Still like a lot of the picks from previous years in the organization too. I don't really much care how other people/organizations/outlets rank these drafts, or even how they rank the prospect base. Flames are continually ranked fairly low, but they continually draft and develop NHL players.
This was a good haul this draft. There will be a few good players I would bet. Unless injuries happen (knock on wood) that derail development, I am high on 3 picks, and see 1-2 more with legitimate upside to be happy about (Beck is a total wildcard for me, but I like this mystery pick).
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
Love the interview with Button and its awesome to see him give credit some love to the area scouts in regards to the picks
It is always my favourite post-draft interview. Actually, I find he is always one of my favourite interviews period, at any time of the year. He always seems really insightful.
That’s not to say that’s necessarily a bad thing either. This team needs some bodies and frankly with the weakness and bizarreness of this draft if any of the other picks play to me that’s a home run regardless of their placement in the lineup.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
I have always had the impression that Pronman has an anti-size bias.
I think the Flames did really well. They are not fast enough, not big enough, too easy to play against, and have no RWs,
Not only did they get an RW sniper, but they loaded up on guys with size, speed and potential talent. The Stromgren pick, the Beck pick and the Whynot pick are particularly intriguing.
I think they did better than C+
But time will tell of course.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Nobody knows how this draft is going to play out in 5 years and I'm going to just assume we're all wrong. With that said I think the Flames took a bit more of a risk on this draft. This draft is already risky but the Flames took it a bit farther. After the first round each pick looks like a long term project and a couple of them seem to have low upside. If their first two picks pan out I don't think you can complain.
I'd rank it a C, they left a couple of good prospects on the board when they drafted in the second and third round and some of the upside on the picks seems questionable to me. I hope I'm wrong and they all turn out to be studs and I eat these words.
__________________
Geology rocks but geography is where it's at
Ranked #47 by ELITEPROSPECTS.COM
Ranked #89 by FCHOCKEY
Ranked #112 by MCKEEN'S HOCKEY
Ranked #80 by NHL CENTRAL SCOUTING (NA Skaters)
Ranked #63 by RECRUIT SCOUTING
Ranked #37 by DOBBERPROSPECTS
Ranked #88 by SMAHT SCOUTING
Touted as a high hockey IQ player. Since he is teammates with Poirier and Francis, might be easy to convince him to come to Flames camp
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
