Carty Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 11 minutes ago, jjgallow said: The same question remains for Tkachuk as well, imho. No matter how good he was in his first year, it doesn't really answer what was best for him. Doesn't matter, it's a mute point now... He stayed up with the team and isn't going anywhere... He earned it, and that became the answer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, jjgallow said: True, but I still think the question remains, as it does for Monahan. Monahan also made his case, and remained on the roster, yet the question remains what was really Best For Him (and thus the Flames) in his first year. I might suggest he would be a more elite player if he were given another year to develop. And yes, I know all about the struggles with his junior team etc. The same question remains for Tkachuk as well, imho. No matter how good he was in his first year, it doesn't really answer what was best for him. They should have done this experiment on the Sedin twins when they broke into the league! For sure. The Sedins have shown their development was stalled by playing in the NHL. Gaudreau never should have played in the NHL the first year. 64 points proves that. Tkachuk is scoring in the NHL while starting mostly in the D-zone and playing some of the toughest assignments. HE clearly is not ready for the NHL and would benefit from playing in junior. Put Marner in his role and see how he does. <<sarcasm off>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 2 hours ago, travel_dude said: For sure. The Sedins have shown their development was stalled by playing in the NHL. Gaudreau never should have played in the NHL the first year. 64 points proves that. Tkachuk is scoring in the NHL while starting mostly in the D-zone and playing some of the toughest assignments. HE clearly is not ready for the NHL and would benefit from playing in junior. Put Marner in his role and see how he does. <<sarcasm off>> One thing about what JJ is saying, that he doesn't actually say, but I think could be part of it is, we are putting so much pressure on the young kids to perform that it could hinder their development... AKA the Oilers. It's not like we have a generational player. Nor were the likes of RNH, or Hall, Eberle, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 7 hours ago, robrob74 said: One thing about what JJ is saying, that he doesn't actually say, but I think could be part of it is, we are putting so much pressure on the young kids to perform that it could hinder their development... AKA the Oilers. It's not like we have a generational player. Nor were the likes of RNH, or Hall, Eberle, etc. I think we all knew or should of anticipated some growing pains with the players we call our future. I have said this many times that the Flames have done a good job surrounding our young players with solid NHL experienced veterans. As soon as you start paying players 6M plus the expectations change not only from fans but management as well. What does doesn't change is where the development level of the player is truly at on the ice. robrob you are right, we don't have a McDavid but we have an exciting player in Gaudreau who needs his space in order to do his thing. Monahan demands some of the opposition's attention but Chiasson does not which makes it easier to shut down Gaudreau, which is what has been happening. When we had Hudler, he knew how to find the openings to be a sniper but he was also a very good feeder himself, Chiasson is neither. I see where Tkachuk could be this player on that line even now at 18 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 8 hours ago, robrob74 said: One thing about what JJ is saying, that he doesn't actually say, but I think could be part of it is, we are putting so much pressure on the young kids to perform that it could hinder their development... AKA the Oilers. It's not like we have a generational player. Nor were the likes of RNH, or Hall, Eberle, etc. Yes, I should have said that. Not only pressure, but it is a well documented and scientific fact that subjecting a young mind to high levels of stress dramatically reduces key learning. We call it other things in the sport, we describe it other ways, but it's a simple biological and medical fact. Even the "harsh" coaches, the Darryl Sutters out there, they may have seemed harsh to their team, and even harsher by sending youngsters down to the minors and junior, but they were Actually doing them a favour, because it Consistently worked for them. And there's reasons why that are well studied. But it's not only pressure. I'm not so sure that Tkachuk is learning his true position right now. In Junior, he would be. I'm not sure that Tkachuk is learning about championships right now. In junior he would be. All the garbage we heard about the bad environment of his junior team, turned out to be just that. And you can make the arguement that "you don't know that, you can't predict the future". But after watching just one team...the Oilers...over the last decade...is that really a valid statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 35 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Yes, I should have said that. Not only pressure, but it is a well documented and scientific fact that subjecting a young mind to high levels of stress dramatically reduces key learning. We call it other things in the sport, we describe it other ways, but it's a simple biological and medical fact. Even the "harsh" coaches, the Darryl Sutters out there, they may have seemed harsh to their team, and even harsher by sending youngsters down to the minors and junior, but they were Actually doing them a favour, because it Consistently worked for them. And there's reasons why that are well studied. But it's not only pressure. I'm not so sure that Tkachuk is learning his true position right now. In Junior, he would be. I'm not sure that Tkachuk is learning about championships right now. In junior he would be. All the garbage we heard about the bad environment of his junior team, turned out to be just that. And you can make the arguement that "you don't know that, you can't predict the future". But after watching just one team...the Oilers...over the last decade...is that really a valid statement? re: bolded... I'll give you a valid statement, every player is different... To try and pigeonhole a player like Tkachuk into a group by saying due to his age he must be treated the same way as even a young borderline NHL player makes little sense... What you have given is an opinion, which you have attempted to represent as a fact... While the list of young players that have been kept in the NHL and gone on to be successful is a relatively small one, it's there... I'll give you a fact, aside from bringing an important element of grit which the team needs , Tkachuk is tied with Monahan for second most points on the entire team... Do you want to send the rest of the team that has less points than Tkachuk back to the minors too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, jjgallow said: Yes, I should have said that. Not only pressure, but it is a well documented and scientific fact that subjecting a young mind to high levels of stress dramatically reduces key learning. We call it other things in the sport, we describe it other ways, but it's a simple biological and medical fact. Even the "harsh" coaches, the Darryl Sutters out there, they may have seemed harsh to their team, and even harsher by sending youngsters down to the minors and junior, but they were Actually doing them a favour, because it Consistently worked for them. And there's reasons why that are well studied. Regarding this statement, you are arguing against yourself... How many times have you tried to make the case of bringing up a young goaltender?... I'll give you just a few of them... Good luck finding your way out of the corner that you have backed yourself into... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 13 hours ago, travel_dude said: For sure. The Sedins have shown their development was stalled by playing in the NHL. Gaudreau never should have played in the NHL the first year. 64 points proves that. Tkachuk is scoring in the NHL while starting mostly in the D-zone and playing some of the toughest assignments. HE clearly is not ready for the NHL and would benefit from playing in junior. Put Marner in his role and see how he does. <<sarcasm off>> With the Sedin clones I'm hoping he meant send 1 to the AHL to develop while letting the other grow up in the NHL. An experiment worthy of Mengele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 9 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said: With the Sedin clones I'm hoping he meant send 1 to the AHL to develop while letting the other grow up in the NHL. An experiment worthy of Mengele. Yes, and I should have referred to them as clones...my bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 37 minutes ago, Carty said: Good luck finding your way out of the corner that you have backed yourself into... Matt Murray. Done. With Gillies, we're talking about a 23 year old. With Tkachuk, we're talking about an 18 year old. Quite honestly, if any player, at any position, can't hack it at 23, questions are raised. And any time an 18 year old is thrown on the big stage, questions are raised. In both cases, rightly so. My stance is fairly consistent across the positions, with 1-3 years more development time for the more defensive positions. It is the extremes that I argue with. That a goalie should take 6-8 years before being given an opportunity. And we should do a 50% job of investing in them in the meantime. Because that makes sense. Or that a forward should take Zero years to develop after the draft. Because we're desperate to sell tickets and finish in the middle of the pack. There is a middle ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Carty said: re: bolded... I'll give you a valid statement, every player is different... To try and pigeonhole a player like Tkachuk into a group by saying due to his age he must be treated the same way as even a young borderline NHL player makes little sense... What you have given is an opinion, which you have attempted to represent as a fact... While the list of young players that have been kept in the NHL and gone on to be successful is a relatively small one, it's there... I'll give you a fact, aside from bringing an important element of grit which the team needs , Tkachuk is tied with Monahan for second most points on the entire team... Do you want to send the rest of the team that has less points than Tkachuk back to the minors too? I'd like to see that documentation of jj's facts myself. I've witnessed a player like Schiefele who was left in the OHL for 2 years & brought along slowly thrive when he hit the big payday 2nd contract but seen more (Oilers 1/1s & currently Gaudreau & Monahan) seem to hit a wall & go backwards after the big $s. Saying they can't cope with the big $s is a generalization much like the sophmore slump. There is no 1 size fits all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 57 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said: I'd like to see that documentation of jj's facts myself. I've witnessed a player like Schiefele who was left in the OHL for 2 years & brought along slowly thrive when he hit the big payday 2nd contract but seen more (Oilers 1/1s & currently Gaudreau & Monahan) seem to hit a wall & go backwards after the big $s. Saying they can't cope with the big $s is a generalization much like the sophmore slump. There is no 1 size fits all. Oh c'mmon, FF http://bfy.tw/9d84 Another way of looking at it (I don't personally place Quite as much emphasis on contracts), is when they're thrust immediately into the NHL, it impedes their learning/development at a Critical point in their development, and plateaus their elite skills. When the contract arrives, they've missed out on that opportunity to jump to the next level. So we blame the contract. Definitely some validity there, but some of the damage may have been done earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zima Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I wonder if Mr T asked for Burns autograph on the stick at the end of the game Just saying LOL. Wouldn't surprise me if he did I think he is that kinda kid very determined while playing his roll but has a great sense of humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, jjgallow said: Matt Murray. Done. So you will argue why it is a good thing if a goaltender comes up at what is considered a young age, but not any other position?... Thank you for making my point... 1 hour ago, jjgallow said: With Gillies, we're talking about a 23 year old. With Tkachuk, we're talking about an 18 year old. Bollig is 29, made his NHL debut at 23 and is back in the minors, so what's your point?... Mine is that every single player is unique as far a talent, potential and when/if they are ready for the NHL... Unless as you pointed out they are a goaltender, like Matt Murray... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Carty said: So you will argue why it is a good thing if a goaltender comes up at what is considered a young age, but not any other position?... Thank you for making my point... Considered by whom? Flames forum members? There's no changing the fact that you're lumping 18 year olds in with 23 year olds to try and "catch" me. You have to admit that's a tough sell. A lot of this has to do with brain development, not just position. 1 hour ago, Carty said: Bollig is 29, made his NHL debut at 23 and is back in the minors, so what's your point?... Mine is that every single player is unique as far a talent, potential and when/if they are ready for the NHL... Huh? 1 hour ago, Carty said: Unless as you pointed out they are a goaltender, like Matt Murray... Funny But the kid spent two solid seasons in the minors and was a better player for it. Jon Gillies has spent four. Anyway...you're too nice to argue with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 22 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Considered by whom? Flames forum members? There's no changing the fact that you're lumping 18 year olds in with 23 year olds to try and "catch" me. You have to admit that's a tough sell. A lot of this has to do with brain development, not just position. Huh? Funny But the kid spent two solid seasons in the minors and was a better player for it. Jon Gillies has spent four. Anyway...you're too nice to argue with. Jon Gillies has barely spent 1 year in the minors. What was Monahan and Tkachuk going to learn in the OHL that they hadn't already learned or couldn't learn in the NHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubblejumper1 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 On 2017-01-21 at 9:45 AM, AlbertaBoy12 said: who did you see claiming this lmao There was a trade thread where the Smid trade was well debated. Some were in favour, some were against. I took a lot of heat over my opinion that he was a marginal NHLer...but I can't find the thread. So, take it for what it's worth. On 2017-01-21 at 10:14 AM, travel_dude said: What exactly was Smid before he was broken? I guess it depends on when one would consider Smid to have been broken. In the Czech Republic he played 88 games, scored 6 points (0.07 pts/gm) and was a -6. Numbers good enough to get him drafted in the first round. In the AHL he played 79 games, scored 33 points (0.4 pts/gm) and was a +17. Numbers good enough to get him promoted to the NHL. In Edmonton he played 474 games, scored 65 points (0.14 pts/gm) and was a -45. Numbers indicating he was in the right place at the right time. On a better team (i.e. any other team in the NHL between 2006 and 2013) he would have seen his ice time drastically reduced. In Calgary he played 109 games, scored 7 points (0.06 pts/gm) and was a -23. Not great by any measure. Sorry to hijack the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 50 minutes ago, JTech780 said: Jon Gillies has barely spent 1 year in the minors. You're using a highly questionable technicality there imho. His US College experience was extensive and valuable. Quote What was Monahan and Tkachuk going to learn in the OHL that they hadn't already learned or couldn't learn in the NHL? Talk to any successful NHLer and ask them if they learned anything in their last year. No matter what age they were/are, let me know when one of them says "nothing". But to be brief....their actual roles, for starters (something he is not learning now). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 33 minutes ago, stubblejumper1 said: There was a trade thread where the Smid trade was well debated. Some were in favour, some were against. I took a lot of heat over my opinion that he was a marginal NHLer...but I can't find the thread. So, take it for what it's worth. I guess it depends on when one would consider Smid to have been broken. In the Czech Republic he played 88 games, scored 6 points (0.07 pts/gm) and was a -6. Numbers good enough to get him drafted in the first round. In the AHL he played 79 games, scored 33 points (0.4 pts/gm) and was a +17. Numbers good enough to get him promoted to the NHL. In Edmonton he played 474 games, scored 65 points (0.14 pts/gm) and was a -45. Numbers indicating he was in the right place at the right time. On a better team (i.e. any other team in the NHL between 2006 and 2013) he would have seen his ice time drastically reduced. In Calgary he played 109 games, scored 7 points (0.06 pts/gm) and was a -23. Not great by any measure. Sorry to hijack the thread. I remember the debate, I just don't remember who said what. I was upset we traded Brossoit because our goalie depth was so thin and kind of isn't yet figured out. Some convinced me it was a good deal, but now I am reverting back to my original thinking. His salary is a bit of an albatross. But being in LTIR is the only thing saving that. Would a healthy Smid fit as a 6th D? Maybe 7th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 2 hours ago, jjgallow said: Considered by whom? Flames forum members? There's no changing the fact that you're lumping 18 year olds in with 23 year olds to try and "catch" me. You have to admit that's a tough sell. A lot of this has to do with brain development, not just position. Matter of fact that Tkachuk currently has has as many points as Hall, Oshie, Kadri, Okposo, Drouin, etc.... Maybe I should also just mention that he has more points than Hossa, O'Reilly, Forsberg, Silverberg, Krejci, Nylander, Jagr, Couture, Rakell, Duchene, Galchenyuck, Barkov, Kopitar, Nugent-Hopkins, Teraveinen and many others including anyone that plays for the Nucks and let that speak for itself... Tkachuk also doesn't back down from anyone... It takes balls to steal a stick from a sasquatch... I also don't think that I am going too far out on a limb here to make this prediction... He will remember the crosscheck from McDavid last night, and he will get even, and it will happen as soon as he gets the right opportunity next season... MickeyD better keep his head up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 32 minutes ago, Carty said: Matter of fact that Tkachuk currently has has as many points as Hall, Oshie, Kadri, Okposo, Drouin, etc.... Maybe I should also just mention that he has more points than Hossa, O'Reilly, Forsberg, Silverberg, Krejci, Nylander, Jagr, Couture, Rakell, Duchene, Galchenyuck, Barkov, Kopitar, Nugent-Hopkins, Teraveinen and many others including anyone that plays for the Nucks and let that speak for itself... Tkachuk also doesn't back down from anyone... It takes balls to steal a stick from a sasquatch... I also don't think that I am going too far out on a limb here to make this prediction... He will remember the crosscheck from McDavid last night, and he will get even, and it will happen as soon as he gets the right opportunity next season... MickeyD better keep his head up... I found it odd that the ref gave a 10 minute penalty to Tkachuk just for standing up to a player. It's almost like a memo was sent out to protect McDavid from possible aggressors. Makes sense to protect the stars of the league by penalizing goons, except that Tkachuk isn't a goon. He's potentially a franchise level player as much as McDavid is. Maybe not the same points projections. The problem with that type of stance is that it's not used for all the stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 56 minutes ago, travel_dude said: I found it odd that the ref gave a 10 minute penalty to Tkachuk just for standing up to a player. I rewound the hit on Draisaitl by Tkachuk and froze it on initial contact, it was shoulder to shoulder and happened right after Draisaitl released the puck... It was a legit check, but Draisaitl stood him up and got the better of Tkachuck ... The problem with how the refs bungled that one is that McDavid was the aggressor... The Flames should have been the ones that came out of that with a powerplay... 1 hour ago, travel_dude said: It's almost like a memo was sent out to protect McDavid from possible aggressors. Makes sense to protect the stars of the league by penalizing goons, except that Tkachuk isn't a goon. He's potentially a franchise level player as much as McDavid is. Maybe not the same points projections. The problem with that type of stance is that it's not used for all the stars. McDavid was taking a lot of hacks and whacks, but I notice that a lot of calls have been going his way lately ever since the outcry of injustice, some from media, and who knows what the Oilers might have said to the league... If there was a "memo" to do a better job of protecting the stars, it sure looks like they forgot to put Gaudreau's name on it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Carty said: I rewound the hit on Draisaitl by Tkachuk and froze it on initial contact, it was shoulder to shoulder and happened right after Draisaitl released the puck... It was a legit check, but Draisaitl stood him up and got the better of Tkachuck ... The problem with how the refs bungled that one is that McDavid was the aggressor... The Flames should have been the ones that came out of that with a powerplay... McDavid was taking a lot of hacks and whacks, but I notice that a lot of calls have been going his way lately ever since the outcry of injustice, some from media, and who knows what the Oilers might have said to the league... If there was a "memo" to do a better job of protecting the stars, it sure looks like they forgot to put Gaudreau's name on it... The memo came out after Johnny was hacked into tomorrow. The media didn't like the fact that a player like Kadri was allowed to check McDavid. The league chose to start enforcing the "McDavid Rule". They circled the name of all the star players in the league that were playing. Johnny just happened to be injured. When he came back, the refs would first look at the nameplate, then look at their list, then decide to call or not. That is why it seems to take a few hits before JH gets a call go his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 14 hours ago, travel_dude said: The memo came out after Johnny was hacked into tomorrow. The media didn't like the fact that a player like Kadri was allowed to check McDavid. The league chose to start enforcing the "McDavid Rule". They circled the name of all the star players in the league that were playing. Johnny just happened to be injured. When he came back, the refs would first look at the nameplate, then look at their list, then decide to call or not. That is why it seems to take a few hits before JH gets a call go his way. I guess Laine hasn't made the star list yet. He doesn't remember the hit but his coach, teammates & I (if my opinion matters) saw a clean hit. Under the supposed "McDavid Rule" McCabe would have been gone for 10 & a video review. Blame the refs is a losers game. Every team's fans see the same hit differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Flyerfan52 said: I guess Laine hasn't made the star list yet. He doesn't remember the hit but his coach, teammates & I (if my opinion matters) saw a clean hit. Under the supposed "McDavid Rule" McCabe would have been gone for 10 & a video review. Blame the refs is a losers game. Every team's fans see the same hit differently. Ya know I was being funny. The refs made no difference in the Flames being embarrassed by the Oilers. Most nights you see McDavid get his share of calls drawn and called missed. Sometimes the calls are one-sided. Sometimes even. I prefer just to see consistency. If the standard of a hack or a hook is X, then call every time you see X. If you warn players that you will pick one from the scrum, fine. I would rather that they call the plays the same in October as they do in April/May. Wishful thinking I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.