Nolan Patrick

[Crzydrvr]

29 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think Toews is more dynamic and has more overall skill than Patrick. 

 

Definitely agreed with there. Toews was a beast offensively all the way through minor hockey, the defense came after he hit the NCAA and needed a way to get big minutes with a very talented North Dakota squad. He went 1st overall in the WHL draft despite insisting that he was going to the NCAA throughout his bantam year. That's how good he was. He also entered the NHL as a pretty dynamic scorer (that rookie season goal where he deked out an entire line is exactly what I'm talking about).

 

Patrick strikes me as a safe player, which isn't a bad thing, but I don't think he has the puck skills or vision to dominate the game the way the best of the best tend to do. Still have him #1 after a few months and some inactivity though (posting the list here because too lazy to make a separate thread).

 

---

 

1. [1] C Nolan Patrick, Brandon, WHL

2. [2] RD Timothy Liljegren, Rogle BK, SHL/J20

3. [5] C Nico Hischier, Halifax, QMJHL

4. [4] C/RW Gabriel Vilardi, Windsor, OHL

5. [14] C Elias Pettersson, Timra IK, AllSvenskan

6. [NR] LD Miro Heiskanen, HIFK, Liiga

7. [17] C Casey Middlestadt, Green Bay, USHL (Eden Prairie High, Minn-HS)

8. [11] C Lias Andersson, HV71, SHL

9. [6] LW Eeli Tolvanen, Sioux City, USHL

10. [8] RW Klim Kostin, Dynamo Moskva, KHL (Dynamo Balashikha, VHL)

11. [3] LW Maxime Comtois, Victoriaville, QMJHL

12. [NR] C Martin Necas, HC Kometa Brno, Czech Extraliga

13. [15] RD Cal Foote, Kelowna, WHL

14. [18] LD Nicolas Hague, Mississauga, OHL

15. [34] LD Robin Salo, Sport, Liiga

16. [12] RW Owen Tippett, Mississauga, OHL

17. [25] C Michael Rasmussen, Tri-City, WHL

18. [16] RW Kailer Yamamoto, Spokane, WHL

19. [10] LW Kristian Vesalainen, Frolunda, SHL (HPK, Liiga)

20. [NR] C Ryan Poehling, St. Cloud State (NCAA)

21. [7] LD Urho Vaakanainen, JYP, Liiga

22. [22] RW Nikita Popugayev, Moose Jaw, WHL

23. [9] C Scott Reedy, USA-U18s, USNTDP

24. [32] LD Juuso Valimaki, Tri-City, WHL

25. [19] C Marcus Davidsson, Djurgardens IF, SHL

26. [29] F Shane Bowers, Waterloo, USHL

27. [48] RD Artyom Minulin, Swift Current, WHL

28. [NR] C Cody Glass, Portland, WHL

29. [38] C Nick Suzuki, Owen Sound, OHL

30. [21] LW Matthew Strome, Hamilton, OHL

 

1. [1] G Daniil Tarasov, Russia U18s, MHL

2. [5] G Jake Oettinger, Boston University, NCAA

3. [2] G Michael DiPietro, Windsor, OHL

4. [4] G Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen, HPK U20, Finland U20

5. [NR] G Keith Petruzzelli, Muskegon, USHL

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am not sure that I believe in the idea of a generational player given the way sports channels seem to define them. Reporters trying to sell the game to generate excitement conflate generational with excellent. Maybe they believe that generation is the same as "every five years". To me, a generational player is one so exceptional that they literally come along once in a generation. Perhaps that means Maurice Richard and Wayne Gretzky. I will wait to see what McDavid actually does before passing judgement. When reporters add in Lafleur, Orr, Lemieux, Modano, McKinnon etc. etc., the phrase loses all meaning. 

 

What I like about Toews is his stoic determination. 

 

Totally agree....On Toews, and "generational" players.   the term seems to be a bit of an evolution from "Great One", and "Next One", which can really only be used so many times before it gets confusing.

 

When I watch Nolan Patrick play, I see a lot of hockey sense, great timing, and Execution.   

 

I do not know if "special" is even necessarily required, because at the end of the day most of those special skills Don't translate to the same degree in the NHL.

 

Crosby did things that were "special" in junior, which serve no purpose in the NHL:

 

 

 

Is this what makes him generational?  I would say it's what makes him marketable, and what labelled him the "Next One"...but these moves never won him no cups.

 

Special is a good marker of a great player, but "special" is also a red flag.   A red flag for skills that cannot be translated to the NHL level.

 

There is another breed...call it the "boring" breed, which ... Just...Executes well.   They may have some special skills, but they don't rely on them at the NHL level.   You can't just split the defense regularly and score whenever you want in this league.

 

Iginla comes to mind.   Monahan too.  These are guys who may not have ranked as high as they should have in the draft, and displayed no "special" skills, but when they stepped into the NHL, Everything translated.   That Basic, hockey execution that you can't defend against...at any level.  The kind that leaves confused scouting reports like "good worker", or "offensive potential", leaves them under-rated in the draft, and then they follow it up with an almost Flawless transition from Junior to the NHL.

 

The biggest comparison that comes to mind, right now, is the Best Player in the NHL imho:

 

Mark Scheifele.                         (Special skills:   "Hard Worker.  Hockey Sense".  Big RH shot)

 

Except, Patrick is potentially better.  Perhaps, a cross between Scheifele and Lindros.

 

Or, I might be Totally wrong, lol...Patrick can clarify that when he returns to the lineup healthy

 

 

 

[Crzydrvr]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Totally agree....On Toews, and "generational" players.   the term seems to be a bit of an evolution from "Great One", and "Next One", which can really only be used so many times before it gets confusing.

 

When I watch Nolan Patrick play, I see a lot of hockey sense, great timing, and Execution.   

 

I do not know if "special" is even necessarily required, because at the end of the day most of those special skills Don't translate to the same degree in the NHL.

 

Crosby did things that were "special" in junior, which serve no purpose in the NHL:

 

 

 

Is this what makes him generational?  I would say it's what makes him marketable, and what labelled him the "Next One"...but these moves never won him no cups.

 

Special is a good marker of a great player, but "special" is also a red flag.   A red flag for skills that cannot be translated to the NHL level.

 

There is another breed...call it the "boring" breed, which ... Just...Executes well.   They may have some special skills, but they don't rely on them at the NHL level.   You can't just split the defense regularly and score whenever you want in this league.

 

Iginla comes to mind.   Monahan too.  These are guys who may not have ranked as high as they should have in the draft, and displayed no "special" skills, but when they stepped into the NHL, Everything translated.   That Basic, hockey execution that you can't defend against...at any level.  The kind that leaves confused scouting reports like "good worker", or "offensive potential", leaves them under-rated in the draft, and then they follow it up with an almost Flawless transition from Junior to the NHL.

 

The biggest comparison that comes to mind, right now, is the Best Player in the NHL imho:

 

Mark Scheifele.                         (Special skills:   "Hard Worker.  Hockey Sense".  Big RH shot)

 

Except, Patrick is potentially better.  Perhaps, a cross between Scheifele and Lindros.

 

Or, I might be Totally wrong, lol...Patrick can clarify that when he returns to the lineup healthy

 

There's two breeds of elite talents. There is the kind that just are as you described, technically flawless players. Those are the guys that have the hockey sense to make the right play all the time. They might not look dazzling and can get predictable (especially if you match two of the same up against each other, because then they both do the exact same things and the other knows it), but they don't need to, because they're machines and just effective. Guys like Sam Reinhart, Aleksander Barkov, Monahan, Patrice Bergeron all find themselves leaning towards this category to various extents.

 

Then there's the type that are electrifying and make plays happen. The kind of player that can bring players out of their seat and create plays out of what seems to be nothing. They make the game harder sometimes and aren't as efficient, but that's offset by their ability to adapt of the fly and ability to change the flow of play almost at will. Guys like Tyler Seguin, Gaudreau, Jonathan Drouin, Patrick Kane all fit into this category in some way or another.

 

There's no "better" or "worse". Both have their limitations. But the truly elite of the elite talents tend to be equally elite at both, because that allows them to adapt on the fly depending on the situation so that they can produce regardless of who they come up against. Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux/Crosby/Lindros/McDavid etc. have all shown at various points in their career that they can't be pigeonholed into either category, even if they might spend more time leaning one way or another.

 

They actually do need to show some level of ridiculous off the charts skill, not because they necessarily need it in the NHL on a day to day basis but to show that if by some rare instance they might actually need a jolt of outside-the-box moves, they have it in their arsenal. If you haven't shown to possess both at the level of such talents as a junior player, the odds that you develop said imagination and creativity and puck skills at higher levels is extremely unlikely at best.

 

Mark Scheifele is a great player, but he isn't generational. A less capable Eric Lindros is not generational. A less capable Crosby is not generational. In order to be a generational prospect or a generational player, you'd have to stand out amongst your peers not just in your draft year, but across many years.

 

Let's say the average elite young talent has 100 points to spread between "Smarts" and "Creativity". A guy like Scheifele might have his set at 60 points in "Smarts" and 40 in "Creativity" with room for improvement. A guy like Patrick might start off at a 70-30 split, again with room for development. A Kane probably enters the NHL with 25 points in "smarts" and 75 in "creativity", not that he's dumb, but he isn't a highly efficient and accurate player, or a two-way guy (especially at the start of his career where he was a one-dimensional player, although very good at said dimension). A guy like Crosby, a legitimate "best of the best", probably enters the NHL with 150 points instead of 100. His breakdown is thus closer to a 75-75 or 80-70 split.

 

It's not that Patrick can't be a generational player, but unlike a McDavid he doesn't have that extra stat boost. Thus, it's harder to project his peak to be that of a 100-point player and consensus "best in the world" type talent. There's just more room he NEEDS to grow in order to reach those heights, and player development rarely if ever fully materializes a player's ceiling.

 

And the reason I think Patrick doesn't have that stat boost is because thus far in his junior career he has yet to show anything that suggests he's heads and shoulders above the rest of his peers. Internationally, in the playoffs, whatever the case may be, his production reflects an elite prospect but not a player who is truly exceptional. The eye tests show a guy who is very smart and uses his body well, but he's not a player who sees things other players don't and he doesn't demonstrate the kind of puck skills and creativity that suggest a player with franchise-level upside. So unless it's very well and deliberately hidden (and after 3 seasons you'd expect him to show it even if by accident at some point) we can't place that level of skill on him.

 

We can only evaluate a player by what he shows. If Nolan doesn't show something to that level, then we can't assume he grows into it. I'm not really interested in fallacies and "what-ifs", only what is being shown on a consistent basis.

 

You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that, however, so I will acknowledge that it's not entirely impossible for him to be or turn out to be as good as McDavid. I just don't think it's realistic or all that likely.

[jjgallow]

 

That...was an Amazing post, Crzydrvr....   too impressed with it to even argue.   Out of sheer stubbornness I'll hold my position until Patrick's season gets underway here, but loved the read.      Especially your description of the "Two Types of Elite"...such a great way to break it down.

 

[Flyerfan52]

On 11/15/2016 at 5:55 PM, Cowtownguy said:

I am not sure that I believe in the idea of a generational player given the way sports channels seem to define them. Reporters trying to sell the game to generate excitement conflate generational with excellent. Maybe they believe that generation is the same as "every five years". To me, a generational player is one so exceptional that they literally come along once in a generation. Perhaps that means Maurice Richard and Wayne Gretzky. I will wait to see what McDavid actually does before passing judgement. When reporters add in Lafleur, Orr, Lemieux, Modano, McKinnon etc. etc., the phrase loses all meaning. 

 

What I like about Toews is his stoic determination. 

Heck, sometimes it feels like the media is trying to sell 1 (or sometimes more) generational players a year. I'll concede that many years ago there were indeed 2 (Maurice Richard & Gordie Howe) playing @ the same time but those were over lapping careers.

 

As to the 1s called generational since Gretz I haven't seen 1 yet. Eric Lindros maybe could have been 1 if he'd played smarter so as not to leave himself open to concussions but he didn't. Sorry Eric.

 

As to Toews, again not generational but his determination to win @ all levels (see his international play to go with the SCs) makes him the best of those playing today. No flash nor individual awards but his record speaks for itself.

[Cowtownguy]

3 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

As to Toews, again not generational but his determination to win @ all levels (see his international play to go with the SCs) makes him the best of those playing today. No flash nor individual awards but his record speaks for itself.

I am a big Toews fan. I was really impressed in 2007 or so when he scored the three goals in OT. He did so with three different moves too. I mean, imagine how hard it would be to have the weight of the nation on your back and the coach keeps going back to you. The pressure must have been immense. I was also fortunate to be able to watch him in his first few years on WGN or whatever, and I found myself stuck to the TV because he and Kane were so good right from the start.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Heck, sometimes it feels like the media is trying to sell 1 (or sometimes more) generational players a year. I'll concede that many years ago there were indeed 2 (Maurice Richard & Gordie Howe) playing @ the same time but those were over lapping careers.

 

As to the 1s called generational since Gretz I haven't seen 1 yet. Eric Lindros maybe could have been 1 if he'd played smarter so as not to leave himself open to concussions but he didn't. Sorry Eric.

 

As to Toews, again not generational but his determination to win @ all levels (see his international play to go with the SCs) makes him the best of those playing today. No flash nor individual awards but his record speaks for itself.

 

Lemieux?

[DirtyDeeds]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Lemieux?

I would toss in Bobby Orr too.

 

On a side note if so many pundits are saying Carey Price is the best player in the NHL then why are there no Generational Goaltenders?

[JTech780]

On 15/11/2016 at 5:10 PM, Crzydrvr said:

 

Definitely agreed with there. Toews was a beast offensively all the way through minor hockey, the defense came after he hit the NCAA and needed a way to get big minutes with a very talented North Dakota squad. He went 1st overall in the WHL draft despite insisting that he was going to the NCAA throughout his bantam year. That's how good he was. He also entered the NHL as a pretty dynamic scorer (that rookie season goal where he deked out an entire line is exactly what I'm talking about).

 

Patrick strikes me as a safe player, which isn't a bad thing, but I don't think he has the puck skills or vision to dominate the game the way the best of the best tend to do. Still have him #1 after a few months and some inactivity though (posting the list here because too lazy to make a separate thread).

 

---

 

1. [1] C Nolan Patrick, Brandon, WHL

2. [2] RD Timothy Liljegren, Rogle BK, SHL/J20

3. [5] C Nico Hischier, Halifax, QMJHL

4. [4] C/RW Gabriel Vilardi, Windsor, OHL

5. [14] C Elias Pettersson, Timra IK, AllSvenskan

6. [NR] LD Miro Heiskanen, HIFK, Liiga

7. [17] C Casey Middlestadt, Green Bay, USHL (Eden Prairie High, Minn-HS)

8. [11] C Lias Andersson, HV71, SHL

9. [6] LW Eeli Tolvanen, Sioux City, USHL

10. [8] RW Klim Kostin, Dynamo Moskva, KHL (Dynamo Balashikha, VHL)

11. [3] LW Maxime Comtois, Victoriaville, QMJHL

12. [NR] C Martin Necas, HC Kometa Brno, Czech Extraliga

13. [15] RD Cal Foote, Kelowna, WHL

14. [18] LD Nicolas Hague, Mississauga, OHL

15. [34] LD Robin Salo, Sport, Liiga

16. [12] RW Owen Tippett, Mississauga, OHL

17. [25] C Michael Rasmussen, Tri-City, WHL

18. [16] RW Kailer Yamamoto, Spokane, WHL

19. [10] LW Kristian Vesalainen, Frolunda, SHL (HPK, Liiga)

20. [NR] C Ryan Poehling, St. Cloud State (NCAA)

21. [7] LD Urho Vaakanainen, JYP, Liiga

22. [22] RW Nikita Popugayev, Moose Jaw, WHL

23. [9] C Scott Reedy, USA-U18s, USNTDP

24. [32] LD Juuso Valimaki, Tri-City, WHL

25. [19] C Marcus Davidsson, Djurgardens IF, SHL

26. [29] F Shane Bowers, Waterloo, USHL

27. [48] RD Artyom Minulin, Swift Current, WHL

28. [NR] C Cody Glass, Portland, WHL

29. [38] C Nick Suzuki, Owen Sound, OHL

30. [21] LW Matthew Strome, Hamilton, OHL

 

1. [1] G Daniil Tarasov, Russia U18s, MHL

2. [5] G Jake Oettinger, Boston University, NCAA

3. [2] G Michael DiPietro, Windsor, OHL

4. [4] G Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen, HPK U20, Finland U20

5. [NR] G Keith Petruzzelli, Muskegon, USHL

 

I like your list and I always look forward to your draft lists, you do a fantastic job. One guy that I am a huge fan of and would have higher is Kailer Yamamoto. To me this kid is a right hand shooting Gaudreau. I know Clayton Keller was drawing a lot of Gaudreau comparisons last year, I think Yamamoto can be better. Of course size is a massive concern, but this kid is dynamic and just loaded with skill. Someone is going to get a steal with this kid.

[Flyerfan52]

11 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I would toss in Bobby Orr too.

 

On a side note if so many pundits are saying Carey Price is the best player in the NHL then why are there no Generational Goaltenders?

No to Mario. Gretz was still playing so was the player of his generation.

If we break it down by position I agree with Orr.

For goalies I'd call Ron Hextall generational as his aggressive style, coming out of the net to be a 3rd D & scoring directly into empty nets (all goalie credited goals before were off a player or own team goals) made him emulated by most of the later best goalies (like Marty Brodeur).

[jjgallow]

12 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

No to Mario. Gretz was still playing so was the player of his generation.

If we break it down by position I agree with Orr.

For goalies I'd call Ron Hextall generational as his aggressive style, coming out of the net to be a 3rd D & scoring directly into empty nets (all goalie credited goals before were off a player or own team goals) made him emulated by most of the later best goalies (like Marty Brodeur).

 Hmm.

 

Don't follow you on Mario, but agree with Orr.   Hextall I never would have thought of generational, but he was definitely his own breed.   Not sure there ever has been one but if so,  maybe Patrick Roy?

[conundrumed]

On 11/17/2016 at 11:52 AM, JTech780 said:

 

I like your list and I always look forward to your draft lists, you do a fantastic job. One guy that I am a huge fan of and would have higher is Kailer Yamamoto. To me this kid is a right hand shooting Gaudreau. I know Clayton Keller was drawing a lot of Gaudreau comparisons last year, I think Yamamoto can be better. Of course size is a massive concern, but this kid is dynamic and just loaded with skill. Someone is going to get a steal with this kid.

Popugayev is one of the giant Russians I like a lot. He's got the size of Carroll and Smith but way better hands and vision.

 

[robrob74]

On 2016-11-15 at 3:55 PM, Cowtownguy said:

I am not sure that I believe in the idea of a generational player given the way sports channels seem to define them. Reporters trying to sell the game to generate excitement conflate generational with excellent. Maybe they believe that generation is the same as "every five years". To me, a generational player is one so exceptional that they literally come along once in a generation. Perhaps that means Maurice Richard and Wayne Gretzky. I will wait to see what McDavid actually does before passing judgement. When reporters add in Lafleur, Orr, Lemieux, Modano, McKinnon etc. etc., the phrase loses all meaning. 

 

What I like about Toews is his stoic determination. 

 

Lemieux was just as good as Gretzky. He just got injury prone and still came back to win scoring titles in almost half the games. 

 

Orr maybe, but again, injuries derailed his numbers. 

 

I agree on the rest though. 

[robrob74]

I am going to take a fuss that we draft about 10th or 11th overall this year, maybe 12th. So let's look at that area too? I don't see us making the playoffs, but I see us improving. 

 

I like tge last 3 games. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

I am going to take a fuss that we draft about 10th or 11th overall this year, maybe 12th. So let's look at that area too? I don't see us making the playoffs, but I see us improving. 

 

I like tge last 3 games. 

 

I liked the game against Chicago (which we lost still)...the last two games we won, I didn't put too much stock into for varying reasons.

 

We've been unusually healthy, and still performed poorly.   Those two games, we had unusually good goaltending, but not from our #1, and I don't believe it's sustainable from our backup.

 

We're back to the NHL norm, having at least one catastrophic injury (Gaudreau).   And there's nothing stopping us from having two of those, especially as we pick up our intensity.

 

I just don't see the strength or the depth.     I expect us to be in the draft lottery, and potetially a favourite in it.

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I liked the game against Chicago (which we lost still)...the last two games we won, I didn't put too much stock into for varying reasons.

 

We've been unusually healthy, and still performed poorly.   Those two games, we had unusually good goaltending, but not from our #1, and I don't believe it's sustainable from our backup.

 

We're back to the NHL norm, having at least one catastrophic injury (Gaudreau).   And there's nothing stopping us from having two of those, especially as we pick up our intensity.

 

I just don't see the strength or the depth.     I expect us to be in the draft lottery, and potetially a favourite in it.

 

I think we could go that way as well.

 

Elliott will get his game back, as long as the team plays the way they have been. We are four points out of a wildcard, yet other teams have game(s) in hand on us. 

All I want to see is the team playing the way they have been lately. Maybe I was too generous and they will pick 8th instead? 

[robrob74]

JJ, Calgary has always had pride and at the end of the season have always played themselves into worse drafting positions. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

51 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

JJ, Calgary has always had pride and at the end of the season have always played themselves into worse drafting positions. 

I dont think it has anything to do with pride. Im assuming the flames will get rolling( as ive said before) it wont be good enough to make the playoffs but we will find ourselves in the 12-15 range, I said this a little while ago in a different thread.

 

In the past I think the team has just struggled out the gate and got playing good in the second half when teams dont take them seriously.

This year I think its just the nature of all the changes, the flames were close to a win and have a good chance to come away from this road trip with lots of points if they continue to play that way, so either we squeak into the playoffs or we barely miss.

[Flyerfan52]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

Lemieux was just as good as Gretzky. He just got injury prone and still came back to win scoring titles in almost half the games. 

 

Orr maybe, but again, injuries derailed his numbers. 

 

I agree on the rest though. 

Eric Lindros brought the full package but had injuries as well. He was touted by Gretz, M Lemieux & Jagr as "The Next One" (probably 1st of a long line bearing that moniker) but those injuries to the head held him back. He could have been the best but wasn't.

Orr changed the defensive game (underrated on D imo) so I give him a pass if talking positional players of a generation.

 

BTW, it was less injuries than cancer that held Mario back. Just a FYI.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Eric Lindros brought the full package but had injuries as well. He was touted by Gretz, M Lemieux & Jagr as "The Next One" (probably 1st of a long line bearing that moniker) but those injuries to the head held him back. He could have been the best but wasn't.

Orr changed the defensive game (underrated on D imo) so I give him a pass if talking positional players of a generation.

 

BTW, it was less injuries than cancer that held Mario back. Just a FYI.

Lindros didn't come close to touching Lemieux.

Your Flyers colours are showing.

The Pens don't win 2 Cups without him.

To say he wasn't a generational player is laughable. The Penguins were Lemieux. No LWer ever was Lemieux nor has been since.

That's generational talent.

[Flyerfan52]

11 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Lindros didn't come close to touching Lemieux.

Your Flyers colours are showing.

The Pens don't win 2 Cups without him.

To say he wasn't a generational player is laughable. The Penguins were Lemieux. No LWer ever was Lemieux nor has been since.

That's generational talent.

Funny that Lemieux was a center. Any thing else to enlighten us about?

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Funny that Lemieux was a center. Any thing else to enlighten us about?

Only how he pwned everyone off of the left wall.

Hurt feelings? lol,

Lemieux-Frances-Jagr.

How'd that work out for Lindros?

[robrob74]

5 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Eric Lindros brought the full package but had injuries as well. He was touted by Gretz, M Lemieux & Jagr as "The Next One" (probably 1st of a long line bearing that moniker) but those injuries to the head held him back. He could have been the best but wasn't.

Orr changed the defensive game (underrated on D imo) so I give him a pass if talking positional players of a generation.

 

BTW, it was less injuries than cancer that held Mario back. Just a FYI.

 

 

He also had back problems, spasms etc. 

[robrob74]

Lemieux had more than just cancer. 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I dont think it has anything to do with pride. Im assuming the flames will get rolling( as ive said before) it wont be good enough to make the playoffs but we will find ourselves in the 12-15 range, I said this a little while ago in a different thread.

 

In the past I think the team has just struggled out the gate and got playing good in the second half when teams dont take them seriously.

This year I think its just the nature of all the changes, the flames were close to a win and have a good chance to come away from this road trip with lots of points if they continue to play that way, so either we squeak into the playoffs or we barely miss.

 

What I am saying is that Flames teams have always shown pride at the end of the year trying to win whereas some other teams seem to go in tank mode. So even if we are way out, we will try to win at the end, as much as possible.

 

I was responding to JJ thinking we would be a lotto team.

i too in other threads have said, and maybe even this thread, that we'd be drafting 10-12th overall.