2021 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[cross16]

I have zero concerns about the Flames in the draft and have full faith they'll have a great draft. Their amateur group is top notch IMO and has been for years.

[JTech780]

I am a bigger fan of trading back when you are outside of the top 10 than trying to trade into the top 10. This draft is no exception. I just don't see enough elite talent in this top 10 that would warrant paying the price to move up. 

 

I also think there is going to be plenty of good player available outside the top 10 that I would rather trade back, pick up some lottery tickets for the 2nd or 3rd round and take my chances on finding some hidden gems in those rounds.

 

With the lack of games and scouting I think there is bound to be a few hits in the 2nd or 3rd rounds that should have gone much higher.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

I don't know that size is any different, though I felt Hickey looks smaller.  Weight upon draft day maybe, not now.

Also, just a really small sample this season.

 

What does closer to Makar do for you?  

Here's a description about Makar:

 

Many have called Cale Makar one of the purest talents to ever crop up out of the AJHL. He reads and executes plays quickly, making good things happen for his teammates every time he is out on the ice. Stickhandling and puck possession play is superb. Makes high percentage decisions that help his team move the puck up-ice. High-end hockey IQ and understands his own game very well, allowing him to stay coachable and play to his strengths in any situation. Makar's potential is that of a traditional franchise defender that can do it all. [EP 2017]

 

And for Ceuleman:

The star of Ceuleman’s game is his shot and the ability to activate off the point to fire it.,

 

a scouting report:

However, fans should hesitate before they label Ceulemans as the next-coming of Makar, who was a generational talent that the AJHL had never seen before and won’t see again for some time. Ceulemans isn’t as sound defensively as his counterpart, and his struggles have been magnified by the fact that the AJHL is not known as a great development league, further deepening the divide between the two. He also can be too aggressive on the offense, and though his vision is top-notch, his decision-making isn’t always the best, and it can create turnovers.

But that doesn’t mean that Ceulemans isn’t talented. Although his defensive game isn’t strong, his offensive awareness is excellent. He is the best when he is carrying the puck, able to drive the play and deliver quick, crisp passes in order to create scoring opportunities. That skillset makes him a top power-play quarterback. He also has a physical side to his game and can provide pressure on opponents to force them off the puck. So, while he likely won’t be the next Makar, Ceulemans is without a doubt a top talent at the 2021 NHL Draft.

 

Look, I'm not trying to suggest he isn't a good choice, just he's not a slam dunk.  While safe is not always the best approach, especially in a poor competition year, swings for the fences are quite risky at this point in our prospect pool.  More like a kiddie pool.

 

Well like many here I know lots about Cale and have a for some time.    I have put very little faith in scouting reports this year, I mean I have always been more of a numbers guy but this year in particular scouts are at an even greater disadvantage.    

 

Now factor in the fact that as good as that scouting report sounds for Cale, they all got him wrong.   He should have gone first overall in 2017 and there should not have been nobody close.   The fact that this isn't clear in his scouting reports shows how far the scouts still got it wrong.
At least with Cale they didn't go on and on about defence which most scouts know can't really be evaluated well at this age.
Ceuleman's report is suspect.   Why does the scout go on and on about defence?   Does the scout think this is an appropriate or relevant thing to be focusing on for a 17 year old kid?   He was +11 at the world juniors and as far as I'm concerned that's all we really know about his defence at this time.
Then the audacity to point the finger at the quality of the league when this kid is on a team that produced possibly the greatest D of a generation, that gets me.    Do people really pay for scouts to go tell us the player is in the AJHL?  lol thanks for that observation mr scout.

 

Simply put, I agree actually with a lot of what you're saying here, except one thing, swinging for the fences.  There might be some elevated risk but note that much.

 

Ceulemans is as legit as any other prospect on this list and he's proved that on the world stage.    I still think he's a clear top 10 or top 5.   Sure he's not Cale Makar.   But he's a comparable and Makar could be the best defenceman of a generation so we don't sneeze at that.

 

p.s....  I was tired last night, just looked again, I was comparing the wrong year on Hickey.   It wasn't half production.   Comparing year-on-year, Hickey was like 15% production.     Not close.  It was simply a weird draft choice.

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

Ceulemans is as legit as any other prospect on this list and he's proved that on the world stage.    I still think he's a clear top 10 or top 5.

 

I will always take a dimmer view on tourneys than other production.

At least with McTavish, Bedard and Wright, they have junior numbers to fall back on, not just AJHL.

 

But, on the other hand Button loves him:

 

Ceulemans’ upside is incredibly high, which prompted Craig Button to claim before the AJHL season began, “I have no doubt he’s a top-10 player — none whatsoever in my mind — in the draft. And I don’t care if he plays another game. I’ve had the benefit of watching him play for a number of years, and I think he’s that good.”

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I have zero concerns about the Flames in the draft and have full faith they'll have a great draft. Their amateur group is top notch IMO and has been for years.

 

Overall, they have done a good job in some of the later rounds.  I struggle sometimes with their 2nd and 3rd rounders.  Some really good, others not so much.  

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I will always take a dimmer view on tourneys than other production.

At least with McTavish, Bedard and Wright, they have junior numbers to fall back on, not just AJHL.

 

You've put McTavish in some lavish company there, caught my eye.   McTavish looks good.   But does not look remarkable.   When comparing his previous junior numbers year for year.   Nothing that can be compared to Bedard or Wright, I'm assuming that wasn't the intention.

 

If a player performs worse in a tourney or just the same, I don't pay particularly close attention to it as the sample size is too small.

 

If a player dominates in a tournament, moreso than regular season, it's a hint to me that we might have something special.  There is a certain breed out there that has another gear just for playoff hockey and this is what you want lots of on your team.  Bennett had this.  Claude Lemieux was the gold standard of it.

Unless of course they get drafted by Edmonton. 

In essence, they tend to be players with gifts.

 

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

But, on the other hand Button loves him:

 

Ceulemans’ upside is incredibly high, which prompted Craig Button to claim before the AJHL season began, “I have no doubt he’s a top-10 player — none whatsoever in my mind — in the draft. And I don’t care if he plays another game. I’ve had the benefit of watching him play for a number of years, and I think he’s that good.”

 

So here's the weird thing, Button gave Ceulemans a super low ranking.   22nd overall.   Button can be a weird cat.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

You've put McTavish in some lavish company there, caught my eye.   McTavish looks good.   But does not look remarkable.   When comparing his previous junior numbers year for year.   Nothing that can be compared to Bedard or Wright, I'm assuming that wasn't the intention.

 

If a player performs worse in a tourney or just the same, I don't pay particularly close attention to it as the sample size is too small.

 

If a player dominates in a tournament, moreso than regular season, it's a hint to me that we might have something special.  There is a certain breed out there that has another gear just for playoff hockey and this is what you want lots of on your team.  Bennett had this.  Claude Lemieux was the gold standard of it.

Unless of course they get drafted by Edmonton. 

In essence, they tend to be players with gifts.

 

 

So here's the weird thing, Button gave Ceulemans a super low ranking.   22nd overall.   Button can be a weird cat.

 

I don't pretend to know what would be the best targets this year.

I admit that.

I just look at different aspects of what certain players do.

Admit, I used to think Button had good views.

Right now, he seems to be completely sold on every player he likes.

 

Puljujarvi and Laine are the ones that come to mind in doing well pre-draft.

Laine was a player I expected more of since being drafted, but his offense is not the problem.

Maybe it's just player attitude that brought them to where they are.

Probably the most difficult thing to evaluate in a non-normal draft year.

 

I'll let the experts rank the players, and will likely be happy no matter who we get in round 1.

Right up to Cossa, in which case I will lose it.  🙂 

 

[The_People1]

13 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Unless there's been an update, Johnson didn't make top 12 on Button's list:

https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-defencemen-dominate-top-of-nhl-draft-prospect-rankings-1.1638404

 

Granted, the team most likely to follow Button is the Flames.    We were discussing earlier that he's likely shy of US College players atm.

 

And my own weirdness, I think Ceulemans could be severely under-rated.   RHS D that absolutely dominated  the under 18 WJ, based on that performance I'd say he's top 5.   But AJHL players very rarely are ranked high.    

 

It's a weird draft.  But that doesn't make it a bad draft.

 

Well on the bright side, picking anywhere in the top 15 let's us get a great player in this draft.  This draft doesn't have a consensus #1... I would argue Lafrenierre, Byfield, and Stutzle would go 1, 2, and 3 in this draft if they were here before Power/Berniers/etc.  But that second tier extends out to the top 15-ish like last year's draft did.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't pretend to know what would be the best targets this year.

I admit that.

I just look at different aspects of what certain players do.

Admit, I used to think Button had good views.

Right now, he seems to be completely sold on every player he likes.

 

Puljujarvi and Laine are the ones that come to mind in doing well pre-draft.

Laine was a player I expected more of since being drafted, but his offense is not the problem.

Maybe it's just player attitude that brought them to where they are.

Probably the most difficult thing to evaluate in a non-normal draft year.

 

I'll let the experts rank the players, and will likely be happy no matter who we get in round 1.

Right up to Cossa, in which case I will lose it.  🙂 

 

 

In some ways I would kind of like to see you lose it lol.   I do admire the positivity.     Drafting Cossa that high, I would have mixed feellings as well lol but only because of BPA.    Acquiring a 2nd first rounder in the lower half and drafting him, this I would have no issues with.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

In some ways I would kind of like to see you lose it lol.   I do admire the positivity.     Drafting Cossa that high, I would have mixed feellings as well lol but only because of BPA.    Acquiring a 2nd first rounder in the lower half and drafting him, this I would have no issues with.

 

How many 2nd did we pick up as a result of trading down last draft?

Unfortunately, I have too much confidence in our scouts, so I probably said good things about Kanzig.

I was PO'd about trading Hammy and Fox.

Ferland not as much, but it still bothered me.

The return was okay, though I had heard a lot of negatives about Hanifin.

 

So, if all we get for bumping down to say 24th and drafting Cossa is a 3rd, then I'm not happy.

Getting two x 3rds and still getting Zary was fine with me.

Considering who was left, it was a decent risk.

 

If we go from 12th to 24th and we get a goalie, not so much.

I think I mentioned this elsewhere, but I think there is usually one good goalie available in the 1st round, while the gems come in later rounds.

So, if Wallstedt is gone, I'm not sure I like the boobie prize.

If we had multiple 1st rounders, then it's just passing up another prospect for a goalie is a bit less of an issue.

Less.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well on the bright side, picking anywhere in the top 15 let's us get a great player in this draft.  This draft doesn't have a consensus #1... I would argue Lafrenierre, Byfield, and Stutzle would go 1, 2, and 3 in this draft if they were here before Power/Berniers/etc.  But that second tier extends out to the top 15-ish like last year's draft did.

 

I agree with you on Lafrenierre, and I agree with you that our 13th pick is just fine in this draft.    With a footnote that Lafrenierre has a high chance of disappointing.

 

I will note, I think Berniers, Johnson, Guenther stack up very favorably to Byfield and Stutzle.   To the point that I would have taken them, and quite honestly several of this year's defencemen, ahead of them.     I will concede that last year had that one big name to go first overall.

 

I do think that without Covid we would have that one big name this year too.  The problem is we don't know who they are as there is too much static.

 

If you have the first overall pick, I think you'd rather have it in 2020, I'd agree.    But anything under that, and certainly at the 13 overall position, I would actually Prefer this year.   With a stipulation that you have to be twice as good at your scouting this year.

 

So in 2020 we would have gotten Anton Lundell or Seth Jarvis with this pick.   While I believe these are great picks, I think the players we are discussing here are better picks.  Just, harder to read.

 

[jjgallow]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

How many 2nd did we pick up as a result of trading down last draft?

Unfortunately, I have too much confidence in our scouts, so I probably said good things about Kanzig.

I was PO'd about trading Hammy and Fox.

Ferland not as much, but it still bothered me.

The return was okay, though I had heard a lot of negatives about Hanifin.

 

So, if all we get for bumping down to say 24th and drafting Cossa is a 3rd, then I'm not happy.

Getting two x 3rds and still getting Zary was fine with me.

Considering who was left, it was a decent risk.

 

If we go from 12th to 24th and we get a goalie, not so much.

I think I mentioned this elsewhere, but I think there is usually one good goalie available in the 1st round, while the gems come in later rounds.

So, if Wallstedt is gone, I'm not sure I like the boobie prize.

If we had multiple 1st rounders, then it's just passing up another prospect for a goalie is a bit less of an issue.

Less.

 

I am glad you were PO'd lol.   I remember you being PO'd too.   Then management explained themselves.     For all my criticisms of their hockey decisions I'll never fault them on talking.     Some great talkers higher up.

 

I would not be happy with bumping down, and I still think we may regret last year's bump downs.   Too early to say, admittedly.    I get it....at the same time I wish We had bumped up 4 spots.

 

Any kind of bump down this year and I would almost surely be choked.

 

Acquiring another first rounder, I'd spend that on Cossa yes, because I do believe he is for real.  And I think we are desperate in that position.  

It's not necessarily because I love drafting first round goalies as a habit.

There is that very very small chance that he drops into the 2nd round too.   The more picks we have in that range the better because we know there will be surprises this year.

 

 

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree with you on Lafrenierre, and I agree with you that our 13th pick is just fine in this draft.    With a footnote that Lafrenierre has a high chance of disappointing.

 

I will note, I think Berniers, Johnson, Guenther stack up very favorably to Byfield and Stutzle.   To the point that I would have taken them, and quite honestly several of this year's defencemen, ahead of them.     I will concede that last year had that one big name to go first overall.

 

I do think that without Covid we would have that one big name this year too.  The problem is we don't know who they are as there is too much static.

 

If you have the first overall pick, I think you'd rather have it in 2020, I'd agree.    But anything under that, and certainly at the 13 overall position, I would actually Prefer this year.   With a stipulation that you have to be twice as good at your scouting this year.

 

So in 2020 we would have gotten Anton Lundell or Seth Jarvis with this pick.   While I believe these are great picks, I think the players we are discussing here are better picks.  Just, harder to read.

 

 

I'm not really sure what to make of Laffy.

Stutzle seems to me to be the top guy in the top 3, so maybe that's just early returns.

Byfield may end up the best of the 3, but he wasn't even a big contributor in the WJC, not that that makes much difference, just interesting.

Laffy could still be a "generational" talent, but it's going to take some time.

 

I would prefer if we just won the next three lottos.

Pick the best or 2nd best this year and the next two years it's not even close.

 

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

I would not be happy with bumping down, and I still think we may regret last year's bump downs.   Too early to say, admittedly.    I get it....at the same time I wish We had bumped up 4 spots.

 

I'm assuming they didn't like Schneider.

Foerster looks like a good pick, but that was the 2nd trade down.

It seemed like Zary was the only one not taken they wanted.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'm assuming they didn't like Schneider.

Foerster looks like a good pick, but that was the 2nd trade down.

It seemed like Zary was the only one not taken they wanted.

more they didn’t have a preference and felt whomever they got was good enough.

[travel_dude]

21 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

more they didn’t have a preference and felt whomever they got was good enough.

 

I think they had several targets and could tell by the selections where their guys would drop to.

Schneider was easily BPA, so I suspect they had zero interst in him.

You do, you don't just trade it away for a 3rd.

[MP5029]

15 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'm not really sure what to make of Laffy.

Stutzle seems to me to be the top guy in the top 3, so maybe that's just early returns.

Byfield may end up the best of the 3, but he wasn't even a big contributor in the WJC, not that that makes much difference, just interesting.

Laffy could still be a "generational" talent, but it's going to take some time.

 

I would prefer if we just won the next three lottos.

Pick the best or 2nd best this year and the next two years it's not even close.

 

Exactly 100% agree! 

[The_People1]

On 5/28/2021 at 4:17 PM, jjgallow said:

 

I agree with you on Lafrenierre, and I agree with you that our 13th pick is just fine in this draft.    With a footnote that Lafrenierre has a high chance of disappointing.

 

I will note, I think Berniers, Johnson, Guenther stack up very favorably to Byfield and Stutzle.   To the point that I would have taken them, and quite honestly several of this year's defencemen, ahead of them.     I will concede that last year had that one big name to go first overall.

 

I do think that without Covid we would have that one big name this year too.  The problem is we don't know who they are as there is too much static.

 

If you have the first overall pick, I think you'd rather have it in 2020, I'd agree.    But anything under that, and certainly at the 13 overall position, I would actually Prefer this year.   With a stipulation that you have to be twice as good at your scouting this year.

 

So in 2020 we would have gotten Anton Lundell or Seth Jarvis with this pick.   While I believe these are great picks, I think the players we are discussing here are better picks.  Just, harder to read.

 

 

Berniers, Johnson, and Guenther don't stack up.  I think these are great players who belong in a conversation with Lucas Raymond, Marco Rossi, Alexander Holtz, Jack Quinn, etc.  Don't get me wrong, they are 1st line talent... and you can make a case that this tier of talent extends much further this season than it did last season.  If we are comparing Sillinger, McTavish, Lucius, etc to Seth Jarvis, Anton Lundell, Dylan Holloway, etc then I would prefer this year's crop.  Yes, very hard to read.

 

This draft could be looking wild.  Tankathon has Wallstedt dropping to 13th.  That would be nice!

http://www.tankathon.com/nhl/mock_draft

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Berniers, Johnson, and Guenther don't stack up.  I think these are great players who belong in a conversation with Lucas Raymond, Marco Rossi, Alexander Holtz, Jack Quinn, etc.  Don't get me wrong, they are 1st line talent... and you can make a case that this tier of talent extends much further this season than it did last season.  If we are comparing Sillinger, McTavish, Lucius, etc to Seth Jarvis, Anton Lundell, Dylan Holloway, etc then I would prefer this year's crop.  Yes, very hard to read.

 

This draft could be looking wild.  Tankathon has Wallstedt dropping to 13th.  That would be nice!

http://www.tankathon.com/nhl/mock_draft

 

Unbelievably hard to read but therein lies opportunity.

 

Tankathon may not be far off on that.   I do believe teams will forego the top 4 D and top G in favor of forwards because ...well...

 

here's the truth of it, GMs know their tenure is short, and they know forwards develop faster.

 

There are a lot of teams that don't always draft in the best interest of their organization, but rather in the best interest of their GM's immediate career.

 

So I do think something good will drop to us.   My concern, unfortunately, is that we are one of those teams.

[travel_dude]

13 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Unbelievably hard to read but therein lies opportunity.

 

Tankathon may not be far off on that.   I do believe teams will forego the top 4 D and top G in favor of forwards because ...well...

 

here's the truth of it, GMs know their tenure is short, and they know forwards develop faster.

 

There are a lot of teams that don't always draft in the best interest of their organization, but rather in the best interest of their GM's immediate career.

 

So I do think something good will drop to us.   My concern, unfortunately, is that we are one of those teams.

 

I think it's less that GM's do it to save their jobs as thrying to fit a window they believe they have.

EDM, on one hand, has an open wndow for their team, but really it's starting to close.

You can only keep some players motivated if you are getting better now.

The top players consist of a handful of players, but nobody close to becomming a top player.

Young D that will get Bear treatment and fail from the defensive side of the game.

Over-valued forwards that will have a hard time taking the next step.

Kenny wants to win now as does Katz.

 

If a good player drops to us, we will pick him.

I don't have that same concern.

How we rate what is available is my real concern.

 

Lotto comin up on Wednesday.

 

[jjgallow]

Excited to win that lotto

[The_People1]

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

So I do think something good will drop to us.   My concern, unfortunately, is that we are one of those teams.

 

Trues.  BT's first contract was 5-years long I remember.  That gave him time to plan.

 

He's now entering the 2nd year of a 3-year extension.  Does he panic and try to win now knowing he'll be fired if the Flames don't make the playoffs next season?

[travel_dude]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Trues.  BT's first contract was 5-years long I remember.  That gave him time to plan.

 

He's now entering the 2nd year of a 3-year extension.  Does he panic and try to win now knowing he'll be fired if the Flames don't make the playoffs next season?

 

Unlikely that this year's draft impacts the team in the next two years.

And he would have that fight with Sutter if he chose to keep them after camp.

There's little to none players that are NHL ready.

At best, in year 2 a few might, but those are tops in the draft.

 

If we win the lotto, we get the best pick anyway.

[jjgallow]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Trues.  BT's first contract was 5-years long I remember.  That gave him time to plan.

 

He's now entering the 2nd year of a 3-year extension.  Does he panic and try to win now knowing he'll be fired if the Flames don't make the playoffs next season?

 

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Unlikely that this year's draft impacts the team in the next two years.

And he would have that fight with Sutter if he chose to keep them after camp.

There's little to none players that are NHL ready.

At best, in year 2 a few might, but those are tops in the draft.

 

If we win the lotto, we get the best pick anyway.

 

I suppose there is always more of a chess game going on behind the scenes, talk of short term extensions etc.

 

IMHO more often than not the GM is incentivized to care about speed of development more than he should at the draft.

 

So one of thee things could happen:

 

1.  Total panic and he trades the pick for a short term boost.    Means we still miss the playoffs but also lose at next year's draft.
               Advantage of this is we'll likely to get a more thorough house-cleaning when it backfires.

 

2.   Acquires a fast developing forward rather than long term BPA.   A lot of GMs will do this imho, despite the forward not being near the calibre of available D/G.

 

3.   Goes long term and drafts BPA which is going to be one of the top 4-6 D or 1 G, unless the draft actually goes in order which almost never happens.

 

 

You know I have to say, when you look at all available D in the first round (or G for that matter), with the way I personally evaluate these players, they All compare with defenceman in the top 10 in most drafts including last year's.    I would even take Ceulemans, Lambos, and Chayka over Drysdale or Jake Sanderson.  I really would.    I say that, of course, knowing that we won't have to with a pick as high as ours.  I admit this year of course has more risk.    

 

I'm high on Cossa too, I just...don't have the confidence to know how to rank him but he sure looks good.

 

Literally the only first-round D I'm not entirely sure about are Chayka and Mailloux.     Both of these guys also have amazingly high ceilings for this late in the draft but it's Really hard to get a read on them with the leagues they are in.

[travel_dude]

27 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

So one of thee things could happen:

 

1.  Total panic and he trades the pick for a short term boost.    Means we still miss the playoffs but also lose at next year's draft.
               Advantage of this is we'll likely to get a more thorough house-cleaning when it backfires.

 

2.   Acquires a fast developing forward rather than long term BPA.   A lot of GMs will do this imho, despite the forward not being near the calibre of available D/G.

 

3.   Goes long term and drafts BPA which is going to be one of the top 4-6 D or 1 G, unless the draft actually goes in order which almost never happens.

 

 

#1 - possible.

#2 - hasn't really been the MO in the last number of years.  Bennett was likely the last one we did rush, and that's debatable whether it was all on the GM.

#3 - anyone's guess who will be BPA by the time we draft.

 

I guess I don't share the same concern as you regarding the draft.  In the remote chance we trade the 1st, it's not going to be for a Kadri.