Nolan Patrick

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

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. 

fair enough I understand what youre saying.

 

I dont see its possible for this team to be a lotto team, one with how bad say arizona is and two this calgary team isent that bad.

[robrob74]

34 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

fair enough I understand what youre saying.

 

I dont see its possible for this team to be a lotto team, one with how bad say arizona is and two this calgary team isent that bad.

 

Same, that's why I said to JJ that I think we are drafting around 10th to 12th overall. 

 

I like the way they played the last few games, but it is easy to get up for the good teams. One of the ways we made the playoffs two seasons ago was we beat the lower teams most nights and stole a few from higher ups. So now I wanna see if we can get up for the games where it's harder to motivate for. 

[jjgallow]

17 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.

 

It is interesting, Gretz once said (long before the cancer), that Lemieux had the ability to break all his records, but "nobody would ever break his records of they continued to smoke".    Lemieux's smoking habit was kept far from the media, especially once the cancer set in.    Was it within Lemieux's control to break all of Gretzky's records?  Maybe.   Except goals per season.  I don't think anyone had that ability, not even Brett Hull.

 

FF, I am Totally with you on Lindros.   But I'm likely the only one (basically, that is the case for most of my opinions lol).   Lindros really did have it all.   He got some bad advice with regards to his role as a fighter, and his physicality imho.  You probably don't agree.  But let's just say if Lindros were entering the league now, he'd be developed very differently and probably have a much longer career.    Obviously, keeping his head up too.  

 

We''re not aligned on Lemieux, very hard to see Mario as not generational.  But I do understand, at least.

[Flyerfan52]

56 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It is interesting, Gretz once said (long before the cancer), that Lemieux had the ability to break all his records, but "nobody would ever break his records of they continued to smoke".    Lemieux's smoking habit was kept far from the media, especially once the cancer set in.    Was it within Lemieux's control to break all of Gretzky's records?  Maybe.   Except goals per season.  I don't think anyone had that ability, not even Brett Hull.

 

FF, I am Totally with you on Lindros.   But I'm likely the only one (basically, that is the case for most of my opinions lol).   Lindros really did have it all.   He got some bad advice with regards to his role as a fighter, and his physicality imho.  You probably don't agree.  But let's just say if Lindros were entering the league now, he'd be developed very differently and probably have a much longer career.    Obviously, keeping his head up too.  

 

We''re not aligned on Lemieux, very hard to see Mario as not generational.  But I do understand, at least.

Lemieux had the ability but could have means nothing if it didn't happen. Like pro-rated stats used by some the thing is he didn't break the records any more than player X scoring Y goals had he maintained his early pace or played 82 games.

I could have been better than Gretz had I been born with his skills+ but I wasn't. People can play pretend but in the end it's just "If Under Certain Circumstances This Had Happened" which means fantasy while I prefer to live in the real world.

 

With today's concussion protocol Lindros would have had a longer career. Scary to think what he could do in today's league with what he brought. But he played in a much different era & history can't be reversed to suit our wishes.

[DirtyDeeds]

12 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Lemieux had the ability but could have means nothing if it didn't happen. Like pro-rated stats used by some the thing is he didn't break the records any more than player X scoring Y goals had he maintained his early pace or played 82 games.

I could have been better than Gretz had I been born with his skills+ but I wasn't. People can play pretend but in the end it's just "If Under Certain Circumstances This Had Happened" which means fantasy while I prefer to live in the real world.

 

With today's concussion protocol Lindros would have had a longer career. Scary to think what he could do in today's league with what he brought. But he played in a much different era & history can't be reversed to suit our wishes.

What I find interesting in this discussion is the fact that now, a lot of people are ready to anoint the "Generational title",  long before it has been earned or even if it will not be earned. This is true more so today with so called expert bloggers anointing the next generational player before he has played any games in the league.

 

My thoughts are they are not generational players until they have earned it over many many years of play. For those that fall short due to injuries or age/skill limits there is still a few titles that are suitable for them like:

Elite Player

Franchise Player

Elite Franchise Player

1st ballot Hall of Famer

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

What I find interesting in this discussion is the fact that now, a lot of people are ready to anoint the "Generational title",  long before it has been earned or even if it will not be earned. This is true more so today with so called expert bloggers anointing the next generational player before he has played any games in the league.

 

My thoughts are they are not generational players until they have earned it over many many years of play. For those that fall short due to injuries or age/skill limits there is still a few titles that are suitable for them like:

Elite Player

Franchise Player

Elite Franchise Player

1st ballot Hall of Famer

 

 

 

 

I think this is a fair set of categories.  Even saying a player is a generational talent is presumptory.  It implies that a player coming out of a junior league will be able to show this talent in the big league.  1/2 a season or even one full season does not prove it.  Guys like Iggy have shown it over many years and still are not generational.    

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Lemieux had the ability but could have means nothing if it didn't happen. Like pro-rated stats used by some the thing is he didn't break the records any more than player X scoring Y goals had he maintained his early pace or played 82 games.

I could have been better than Gretz had I been born with his skills+ but I wasn't. People can play pretend but in the end it's just "If Under Certain Circumstances This Had Happened" which means fantasy while I prefer to live in the real world.

 

With today's concussion protocol Lindros would have had a longer career. Scary to think what he could do in today's league with what he brought. But he played in a much different era & history can't be reversed to suit our wishes.

 

I agree with that....and I understand why Lemieux doesn't make it for you based off of that.

 

But on the other hand, the dude DID win two cups, as single-handedly as possible.  He also set a Heck of a lot of records and had an Almost-complete career.   How many cups do you need to win to be generational, or "the next one"?  

 

I have no idea.   But the Way that he won those cups combined with all his other accomplishments...does it for me.

 

Yes, if he stayed healthy (and he's the one who chose to smoke), we wouldn't have to debate this and he'd probably have as many cups as Gretzky.  I'll give you that, he did Not equal or surpass Gretzky.

[robrob74]

Also. The guy had 100point seasons only playing a fraction of the games! 

[jjgallow]

Finally...

 

http://www.tsn.ca/wheat-kings-patrick-ready-to-return-1.646708

[jjgallow]

 

And we're back.  Very strong start.

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nolan-patrick-makes-whl-return/c-285669080

 

http://whl.ca/players/26760/game_by_game

 

Now we finally get to see where he's at when he's healthy

[jjgallow]

 

8 points and 4 goals in his first 4 games back.

 

That is on pace, Goal-wise, to continue a Connor McDavid debate, imho.   Points wise, it is a tad shy.   But that is more dependant on the teams they play on.

 

Not much point in getting into that until we've at least seen 10 games.

 

But coincidentally, the Flames are entering a slump at the worst possible (or best possible) time...we are One loss away from projecting as a lottery team.  One can dream.

[JTech780]

Even if we dropped and got the 1st overall pick, I don't think Patrick would be my pick. I don't see him as much different than Monahan.

 

My pick would be Hischier. I really like the skill and more importantly I like that he plays with pace and intensity.

 

[cross16]

i get what you are saying Jtech but I will disagree. Patrick has the "flair" to his game Monahan lacks, plus he is a better skater imo. The gap isn't massive but it's there. 

 

I dont like this draft class but Patrick is easily the best player in it. For me it's not close to whoever you want to rank number 2. 

[jjgallow]

 

And....it's official.... (with loss to Leafs)...

 

Count the games in hand, and the Flames project to be a lottery team.   Not with great odds, but odds nonetheless, of getting NP.

 

So this thread, by the bare minimum...becomes just a little relevant to the Flames.

 

And, NP goes scoreless.  Can't win em all, lol.

[AlbertaBoy12]

9 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

And....it's official.... (with loss to Leafs)...

 

Count the games in hand, and the Flames project to be a lottery team.   Not with great odds, but odds nonetheless, of getting NP.

 

So this thread, by the bare minimum...becomes just a little relevant to the Flames.

 

And, NP goes scoreless.  Can't win em all, lol.

I think its a little premature to be saying we will project to be a lottery team. I get what the stats say, but i really doubt we are a bottom 5 team, but if this keeps up who knows.

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

And....it's official.... (with loss to Leafs)...

 

Count the games in hand, and the Flames project to be a lottery team.   Not with great odds, but odds nonetheless, of getting NP.

 

So this thread, by the bare minimum...becomes just a little relevant to the Flames.

 

And, NP goes scoreless.  Can't win em all, lol.

 

Lotto team, as in one of the 14 teams to not make the playoffs?  Sure, that is a reasonable projection.  COL and ARI have the basement locked up, so add in LV to that.  

 

When NP gets B2B hatties like Matt Phillips, then I will be impressed. 

 

 

[jjgallow]

14 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Lotto team, as in one of the 14 teams to not make the playoffs?  Sure, that is a reasonable projection.  COL and ARI have the basement locked up, so add in LV to that.  

 

When NP gets B2B hatties like Matt Phillips, then I will be impressed. 

 

Yeah, that's all I mean at this point.  Like, just missing the playoffs.  Although, I suppose if you look after the Habs game, they are running at 1 "point per game", which would put them at 80 points for the year.   That would have squeezed them into the top/bottom 10 last year, just barely.  A bit unfair to project after their last couple games, though.

[The_People1]

I hate to look at the reverse standings right now since the Flames are right there in the playoff mix but man, we are 4 points from 3rd last in the NHL.  If we miss the playoffs then i really do hope we slide into the 4th lotto odds.  Heck, even Arizona is going on a bit of a run. They may catch up to the pack by season's end.  Only Colorado has clinched a bottom 3 pick along with Vegas.  It sounds like the top 5 this year could be as good as last year's.  After that it falls off pretty fast.

[cross16]

50 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

I hate to look at the reverse standings right now since the Flames are right there in the playoff mix but man, we are 4 points from 3rd last in the NHL.  If we miss the playoffs then i really do hope we slide into the 4th lotto odds.  Heck, even Arizona is going on a bit of a run. They may catch up to the pack by season's end.  Only Colorado has clinched a bottom 3 pick along with Vegas.  It sounds like the top 5 this year could be as good as last year's.  After that it falls off pretty fast.

 

Might be just me but I think this draft is a really big step back from last year. Last year's top 5/6 was really rare and crazy for top end talent. Outside of Nolan Patrick and maybe Hieschier I dont' think there is the game changing talent like there was last year.

 

Good top 5, but last year's was crazy. 

[jjgallow]

On 27/01/2017 at 3:40 PM, cross16 said:

 

Might be just me but I think this draft is a really big step back from last year. Last year's top 5/6 was really rare and crazy for top end talent. Outside of Nolan Patrick and maybe Hieschier I dont' think there is the game changing talent like there was last year.

 

Good top 5, but last year's was crazy. 

 

I agree, but I think, like you say, that speaks more to last year as an anomally.   We've had a few surprises, I think both McDavid and Matthews were hyped so much it seemed like there was no way they could live up to the expectations.  Instead, looking back, it appears they were almost under-rated.

 

Then there were all the other surprises, like Laine.   

 

This year doesn't have as many , but I do think Nolan Patrick is At Least right up there, and some others are shaping up nicely as well.

 

Basically, last year had a better top 10, and a better top 5.    Heck, we got a franchise player at 6.   It literally had a rare DEPTH of Franchise Players in the top 10 or more.

 

But Top 3?   I would say 2017's top 3 stacks up nicely to last year's (if they too can live up the hype).

 

The trick is how to get in that top 3.    At this point I feel it would require a massive trade (unlikely), or winning the lottery (we can always dream).

[AlbertaBoy12]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree, but I think, like you say, that speaks more to last year as an anomally.   We've had a few surprises, I think both McDavid and Matthews were hyped so much it seemed like there was no way they could live up to the expectations.  Instead, looking back, it appears they were almost under-rated.

 

Then there were all the other surprises, like Laine.   

 

This year doesn't have as many , but I do think Nolan Patrick is At Least right up there, and some others are shaping up nicely as well.

 

Basically, last year had a better top 10, and a better top 5.    Heck, we got a franchise player at 6.   It literally had a rare DEPTH of Franchise Players in the top 10 or more.

 

But Top 3?   I would say 2017's top 3 stacks up nicely to last year's (if they too can live up the hype).

 

The trick is how to get in that top 3.    At this point I feel it would require a massive trade (unlikely), or winning the lottery (we can always dream).

Laine wasent a suprise alot of scouts said he had the best shot since ovechkin and was probably going to score more then matthews in his first year.

 

I dont think there is a comparison between last years top 3 and this years top 3, it really depends how you rate player I guess though. hirscher doesnt measure up to laine in my opinion and I guess it depends which player you considered number 3 in last years draft to draw a comparison.

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Laine wasent a suprise alot of scouts said he had the best shot since ovechkin and was probably going to score more then matthews in his first year.

 

I'd have to disagree with that.  Obviously he wasn't an unknown, he was picked 2nd overall.   But, nobody saw him going for the records he's going for now.   He's surpassed the most hyped up hype.  And good on him.  Yes, some saw him scoring more goals than Matthews.  But again, nobody really expected Matthews to do what he's done either.

 

5 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I dont think there is a comparison between last years top 3 and this years top 3, it really depends how you rate player I guess though. hirscher doesnt measure up to laine in my opinion and I guess it depends which player you considered number 3 in last years draft to draw a comparison.

 

It very much depends on how you rank them, yes.   There will be a lot more disagreement this year imho.   I would personally describe Hirscher as more of a wildcard than Laine, definitely, and yes I would take Laine over him.  But I think they're closer than people realize.   I would also take Patrick over Matthews, even now.   Maybe that's just me, but I would.    

 

Liljegren, I consider as good or better than anyone else in last year's draft after Matthews and Laine.

 

Basically, I see Patrick and Lijlegren making up for Laine's superiority over Hirscher.   Of course, it is all very subjective.

 

After those three, I think things get more blury.   Whereas last year, things were very clear.  And exceptional.   But if you get in the top 3 this year I feel the difference is negligible.

[cross16]

Personally for me this top 5 is a step back from last year. If I were to rank them.

 

1. Matthews

2. Laine

3. Patrick

4. Pulljujariv

5. Tkachuk

6. Heischer

7. Lilejegren

8. Dubois

9. Nylander

10. Tippet

 

Just how I see it. The top 5 though is at a point where you still at least will get a big of a 'reward" if the Flames were to crater this year. Even grabbing someone like Owen Tippet would be a huge boost to the franchise as he's a potential top line RW with size. Getting into the top 3 though is only going to be through luck. Between how bad Arizona and Colorado are and with Vegas being gifted top 3 odds I can't see the Flames being in the bottom 3. So you likely are finishing 5th or 6th and hoping for lottery odds. Not a very good plan. 

 

 

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

Not a very good plan. 

 

Never a plan to finish bottom 3.     Call it a draft dream.  And as far as dreams go, the lottery is more than sufficient.

 

But yeah, our odds would be small.   P.S....I like the majority of your list.   Chychrun?

[cross16]

16 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Never a plan to finish bottom 3.     Call it a draft dream.  And as far as dreams go, the lottery is more than sufficient.

 

But yeah, our odds would be small.   P.S....I like the majority of your list.   Chychrun?

 

I only went to 10. Chychrun would have been 11.