2021 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Murray played a bigger part in those last two cups.

Fleury didn't play the finals in either.

The first cup, yeah he was enough to get the wins.

 

So, no not 4 of the last 10

 

All good points, except...it actually Is 4 of the last 10 and I don't think Pittsburgh would have won either of those cups without MAF, the two goalie thing is real, even leading up to the playoffs.

 

4 of the last 6, to be more precise, and Jake Allen was essentially a first rounder but doesn't get included for technical truths, just as MAF does get included.

 

I'm not saying this is a requirement to win a cup.  I am saying it helps, that at very Least, it gives you significantly greater odds than following the crowd and drafting a non-goalie (especially a forward).  

 

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

All good points, except...it actually Is 4 of the last 10 and I don't think Pittsburgh would have won either of those cups without MAF, the two goalie thing is real, even leading up to the playoffs.

 

4 of the last 6, to be more precise, and Jake Allen was essentially a first rounder but doesn't get included for technical truths, just as MAF does get included.

 

I'm not saying this is a requirement to win a cup.  I am saying it helps, that at very Least, it gives you significantly greater odds than following the crowd and drafting a non-goalie (especially a forward).  

 

 

Come on, stop changing what you are saying. 

 

"MAF.   Put another way 4 out of the last 10 cups were won by goalies drafted in the first round.  Which, when you run the numbers, and how rare first round goalies are....is Astronomically high."  

 

MAF played 2 games in the first of the B2B wins.  In the 2nd win, he played until he went 1-2 against Ottawa.  Never saw another game.  He got a cup ring and contributed to the win, but so did everyone on the team.  He was not the guy that won the final 4 games.  That is the hardest part.

[jjgallow]

20 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Come on, stop changing what you are saying. 

 

"MAF.   Put another way 4 out of the last 10 cups were won by goalies drafted in the first round.  Which, when you run the numbers, and how rare first round goalies are....is Astronomically high."  

 

MAF played 2 games in the first of the B2B wins.  In the 2nd win, he played until he went 1-2 against Ottawa.  Never saw another game.  He got a cup ring and contributed to the win, but so did everyone on the team.  He was not the guy that won the final 4 games.  That is the hardest part.

 

this isn't golf, it's a real sport.

[tmac70]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

this isn't golf, it's a real sport.

Not sure I agree with the golf comment. Teams sports are reliant on many to provide the outcome require....golf its you and you alone. plus if you don't play well you don't get paid, big differance 

[Heartbreaker]

23 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Not sure I agree with the golf comment. Teams sports are reliant on many to provide the outcome require....golf its you and you alone. plus if you don't play well you don't get paid, big differance 

 

That's exactly right, and where I think that @jjgallow has lost the plot on his argument is that there are a lot of other players on those teams. Tampa has Kucherov, Stamkos, and Hedman. Pittsburgh has Crosby and Malkin, for chrissakes.

I am not going to disagree that it might be worthwhile to take a goalie in the first round (the last time the Flames tried that, it was Brent Krahn - see this fun list of NHL players that only played one game), but I absolutely disagree that any of those teams won the cup on the back of a hot goaltender. I suppose an argument could be made that the Penguins did, but that goaltender was Matt Murray.

Love.

[Heartbreaker]

Duplicate post...

Love.

[cross16]

On 1/17/2022 at 5:57 PM, The_People1 said:

 

Only saving grace is we drafted a RHS RW...

 

But it's crazy how many teams passed on Wallstedt.  Teams just don't want to draft goalies because of short term mindset.  So, I mean, if we had a re-draft then i'm pretty sure we would pass on him again.  BT wants to win now.

 

 

I'm sure for some GMs that's a part of it but overall I honestly don't think that is the reason. I think it has more to do with the fact that I actually think organizations are just realizing that no one really understand goalie evaluation/projection and they are not prepared to use such a high valued pick on such a volatile asset. Those picks are too valuable and there are also no more means than every to acquire starting caliber goalies. Maybe not "special" or Vezina caliber goalies but I'm also in agreement you don't need that to win. 

 

I mean he took a smallish RW set to go to Harvard so if he wants to win now he probably should have gone in a different direction. 

[The_People1]

51 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I'm sure for some GMs that's a part of it but overall I honestly don't think that is the reason. I think it has more to do with the fact that I actually think organizations are just realizing that no one really understand goalie evaluation/projection and they are not prepared to use such a high valued pick on such a volatile asset. Those picks are too valuable and there are also no more means than every to acquire starting caliber goalies. Maybe not "special" or Vezina caliber goalies but I'm also in agreement you don't need that to win. 

 

I mean he took a smallish RW set to go to Harvard so if he wants to win now he probably should have gone in a different direction. 

 

You could be right that maybe no one in the Flames organization knows how to evaluate goalies so they simply passed on that opportunity to pick Wallstedt and Cossa.  They got burnt on Mcdonald/Demko.  Missed on Parsons in the 2nd round.  Gillies was a total fail as a 3rd rounder.  Meanwhile, Markstrom was a UFA signing without using picks.  Rittich was signed from Europe for free.  Vladar who looks really good costed only a 3rd round pick.  And then, somehow the Flames may have fluked on Wolf in round 7 (jury is still out until he plays in the NHL of course).

 

The other thing is, Goalies usually need to develop until 22/23/24 years old before they can be full time starters.  This generally exceeds the reign of a GM so they don't spend the pick on a G late into their tenures with teams.  BT may have taken Wallstedt or Cossa if it was year 1 or 2 with the Flames.

 

Yet every now and then, the talent is so obvious that it's a no brainer.  Vasilevski, Samsonov, Askarov, Knight,... and dare I say now, Wallstedt and Cossa.  Yes, sometimes they turn into Brent Krahn and Leland Irving but I mean, recent consensus "first round G" evaluations have been good.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

Duplicate post...

Love.

I agree:)

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Not sure I agree with the golf comment. Teams sports are reliant on many to provide the outcome require....golf its you and you alone. plus if you don't play well you don't get paid, big differance 

 

2 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

That's exactly right, and where I think that @jjgallow has lost the plot on his argument is that there are a lot of other players on those teams. Tampa has Kucherov, Stamkos, and Hedman. Pittsburgh has Crosby and Malkin, for chrissakes.

I am not going to disagree that it might be worthwhile to take a goalie in the first round (the last time the Flames tried that, it was Brent Krahn - see this fun list of NHL players that only played one game), but I absolutely disagree that any of those teams won the cup on the back of a hot goaltender. I suppose an argument could be made that the Penguins did, but that goaltender was Matt Murray.

Love.

 

While I'm not immune to sometime losing a plot, this one is pretty straightforward.

 

The question asked to me was "how many have won cups"

 

I answer.

 

Answer not liked.   Arguement is "well those goalies didn't win it solely on their own."

 

Arguement is not relative to the game of hockey.

 

And that's that.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I'm sure for some GMs that's a part of it but overall I honestly don't think that is the reason. I think it has more to do with the fact that I actually think organizations are just realizing that no one really understand goalie evaluation/projection and they are not prepared to use such a high valued pick on such a volatile asset. Those picks are too valuable and there are also no more means than every to acquire starting caliber goalies. Maybe not "special" or Vezina caliber goalies but I'm also in agreement you don't need that to win. 

 

I mean he took a smallish RW set to go to Harvard so if he wants to win now he probably should have gone in a different direction. 

 

Mark it in the calendar, we completely agree.    But the key part for me is that nobody understood.   That doesn't make the projection wrong, it doesn't even make the projection more risky.  It was a lack of understanding.  And not necessarily by the scouts, but those who filter the scouts.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Not sure I agree with the golf comment. Teams sports are reliant on many to provide the outcome require....golf its you and you alone. plus if you don't play well you don't get paid, big differance 

 

Sure.  True.   

 

But if you look at goaltender playoff performance, there is a distinct advantage to goalies who did not get overplayed in the regular season.  

 

If a team has two great goalies, and one takes the bulk of the load over the regular season, getting the team a favorable seed, it is not uncommon for the other goalie to get hot later in the season/playoffs.  Hot goalies are typically rested goalies.   We are the prime example of that with the 2004 playoff hero Kipper versus the 2003 unknown Kipper.

 

So it cannot be separated that easily.   The numbers are still the numbers, 4 out of 10 in the playoffs.

 

Even if you make it 3/10, or even 2/10, your chances of winning a cup are still higher when you're willing to draft a goalie in the first round.   Because if you apply the same level of scrutiny to forwards/D, 2/10 is astronomically high.  We've ran these numbers before and the hold, and they should not be a surprise.

[jjgallow]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Come on, stop changing what you are saying. 

 

"MAF.   Put another way 4 out of the last 10 cups were won by goalies drafted in the first round.  Which, when you run the numbers, and how rare first round goalies are....is Astronomically high."  

 

MAF played 2 games in the first of the B2B wins.  In the 2nd win, he played until he went 1-2 against Ottawa.  Never saw another game.  He got a cup ring and contributed to the win, but so did everyone on the team.  He was not the guy that won the final 4 games.  That is the hardest part.

 

 

To save us all spending way too much time here is a birds-eye view.

https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-goaltender-records/stanley-cups/goalie-most-stanley-cups-won-career

 

1980's?   This holds true because of one guy - first rounder Grant Fuhr.

                 

1990's?  Holds true again  with first rounders like Brodeur and Barasso.

              It would be as solid as the 1980's if it wasn't for Patrick Roy going in the 3rd round.
              But, he was the best draft-elligible goalie of his time stats wise.
                  https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/qmjhl/stats/1983-1984?age=u19
               So I wonder where he would go with how we draft now.

 

2000's?   Holds true again with Brodeur, MAF.         Hasek does screw this trend up a bit, but we are in the era where nobody knew how to draft from the Eastern block, let alone goalies.  Nobody knew he would even ever touch ground in NA.

 

2010's...  Holds true as MAF becomes a thing, Vasilevskiy, and as discussed.

 

2020's  is Entirely first rounders so far.

 

 

Stanley cups are rare and we have limited data points.  But that's 4+ decades in a row of teams that prioritise Goalie drafting winning more cups.   IMHO that trend will continue and accelerate as scouting improves.

 

 

[cross16]

14 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

You could be right that maybe no one in the Flames organization knows how to evaluate goalies so they simply passed on that opportunity to pick Wallstedt and Cossa.  They got burnt on Mcdonald/Demko.  Missed on Parsons in the 2nd round.  Gillies was a total fail as a 3rd rounder.  Meanwhile, Markstrom was a UFA signing without using picks.  Rittich was signed from Europe for free.  Vladar who looks really good costed only a 3rd round pick.  And then, somehow the Flames may have fluked on Wolf in round 7 (jury is still out until he plays in the NHL of course).

 

The other thing is, Goalies usually need to develop until 22/23/24 years old before they can be full time starters.  This generally exceeds the reign of a GM so they don't spend the pick on a G late into their tenures with teams.  BT may have taken Wallstedt or Cossa if it was year 1 or 2 with the Flames.

 

Yet every now and then, the talent is so obvious that it's a no brainer.  Vasilevski, Samsonov, Askarov, Knight,... and dare I say now, Wallstedt and Cossa.  Yes, sometimes they turn into Brent Krahn and Leland Irving but I mean, recent consensus "first round G" evaluations have been good.

 

I don't think this is a Flame issue, it's a league issue. Who has it figured out?

 

I don't know about the last statement. I mean out of your list Samsonov sure hasn't been very good so far, neither has Knight. It's early for sure but I don't agree that recent consensus has been good, it's still a pretty big mixed bag. 

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

To save us all spending way too much time here is a birds-eye view.

https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-goaltender-records/stanley-cups/goalie-most-stanley-cups-won-career

 

1980's?   This holds true because of one guy - first rounder Grant Fuhr.

                 

1990's?  Holds true again  with first rounders like Brodeur and Barasso.

              It would be as solid as the 1980's if it wasn't for Patrick Roy going in the 3rd round.
              But, he was the best draft-elligible goalie of his time stats wise.
                  https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/qmjhl/stats/1983-1984?age=u19
               So I wonder where he would go with how we draft now.

 

2000's?   Holds true again with Brodeur, MAF.         Hasek does screw this trend up a bit, but we are in the era where nobody knew how to draft from the Eastern block, let alone goalies.  Nobody knew he would even ever touch ground in NA.

 

2010's...  Holds true as MAF becomes a thing, Vasilevskiy, and as discussed.

 

2020's  is Entirely first rounders so far.

 

 

Stanley cups are rare and we have limited data points.  But that's 4+ decades in a row of teams that prioritise Goalie drafting winning more cups.   IMHO that trend will continue and accelerate as scouting improves.

 

 

 

My Gord, you are so right.  Curtis McElhinney helped win two cups.  Easily as important as MAF's contribution to the 15/16 PITTS cup.

 

Hint: Don't ever let details get in the way of your narrative.  MAF won the cup twice recently.  He's a 1st rounder.  Nothing else is important.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think this is a Flame issue, it's a league issue. Who has it figured out?

 

I don't know about the last statement. I mean out of your list Samsonov sure hasn't been very good so far, neither has Knight. It's early for sure but I don't agree that recent consensus has been good, it's still a pretty big mixed bag. 

 

I would say Pittsburgh.

 

I would agree it's a league issue.   On the flip side how many non-goalie first rounders lead their teams to championships?

 

I also think the Flames have a pronounced case of the issue. 

[jjgallow]

57 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

My Gord, you are so right.  Curtis McElhinney helped win two cups.  Easily as important as MAF's contribution to the 15/16 PITTS cup.

 

Hint: Don't ever let details get in the way of your narrative.  MAF won the cup twice recently.  He's a 1st rounder.  Nothing else is important.

 

Goalies who escape the Flames development system and survive are basically like first rounders.

[robrob74]

14 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

While I'm not immune to sometime losing a plot, this one is pretty straightforward.

 

The question asked to me was "how many have won cups"

 

I answer.

 

Answer not liked.   Arguement is "well those goalies didn't win it solely on their own."

 

Arguement is not relative to the game of hockey.

 

And that's that.

i kind of liken it to, 

 

a #1C doesn’t win you a cup, but it sure helps. 
 

a #1D or a true top pair doesn’t win you a cup alone, but it sure helps. 
 

a #1G doesn’t win a cup, but it sure helps. We know what it is like when a goalie can’t make the 1st save/shot. 
 

#1 goalies aren’t always drafted in the first round, I find it hard to draft one in the first round, but if I had the opportunity to draft Price in the first round, I do it.

 

my biggest wish is that BT had a better plan. Sure he thought he had some of the makings of a plan, but what about not drafting D in 2 years? D are almost as voodoo as goalies. All players are very voodoo, so you gotta draft and do your best scouting. 
 

scouting has improved but is it ideal so far? I think it can still improve and get better. We have decent hits in some drafts. Problem is we haven’t hit in an elite player.

[jjgallow]

17 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

i kind of liken it to, 

 

a #1C doesn’t win you a cup, but it sure helps. 
 

a #1D or a true top pair doesn’t win you a cup alone, but it sure helps. 
 

a #1G doesn’t win a cup, but it sure helps. We know what it is like when a goalie can’t make the 1st save/shot. 
 

#1 goalies aren’t always drafted in the first round, I find it hard to draft one in the first round, but if I had the opportunity to draft Price in the first round, I do it.

 

my biggest wish is that BT had a better plan. Sure he thought he had some of the makings of a plan, but what about not drafting D in 2 years? D are almost as voodoo as goalies. All players are very voodoo, so you gotta draft and do your best scouting. 
 

scouting has improved but is it ideal so far? I think it can still improve and get better. We have decent hits in some drafts. Problem is we haven’t hit in an elite player.

 

I must admit we have had some big wins late in the draft, round 5+.

When we draft in the top 10, we keep it simple, and I also support this.

 

Anything outside of the top 10, and outside of the final rounds, still needs a lot of work.

[sak22]

31 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

scouting has improved but is it ideal so far? I think it can still improve and get better. We have decent hits in some drafts. Problem is we haven’t hit in an elite player.

As far as elite players go in drafts since BT has taken, the only ones IMO that have been outside of the first round are Point in '14, Aho and Kaprisov in '15 (Aho had no shot at and Kaprisov went right before our pick), Fox in '16, I don't know if I'd put anybody outside of the first from '17, '18 or '19 as elite at the moment, still way too early to tell.  So we've done better than most at finding an elite player past the first round.  The other elites Matthews, McDavid, Eichel, and Makar we had no chance at.

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, sak22 said:

As far as elite players go in drafts since BT has taken, the only ones IMO that have been outside of the first round are Point in '14, Aho and Kaprisov in '15 (Aho had no shot at and Kaprisov went right before our pick), Fox in '16, I don't know if I'd put anybody outside of the first from '17, '18 or '19 as elite at the moment, still way too early to tell.  So we've done better than most at finding an elite player past the first round.  The other elites Matthews, McDavid, Eichel, and Makar we had no chance at.

 

 

I agree, they have done well in the later rounds. Mangiapane and Gaudreau are great finds. I'd like to see us add another playmaker for Mangiapane. I guess I over exaggerated on the elite players. We've found good. I think the misses have hurt the team, and like some say, it's not all on BT.

 

Fox holding out for NYR hurt. 

 

I'd just like some slight improvements. Maybe we needed to hire Sutter 2 seasons ago? The team looks totally different. I hope they can maintain the play and that some of the prospects can rise up and continue to do well.