2021 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The player the Flames select in this draft, instantly becomes their best prospect. That's the beauty of this draft. They will get an exciting player, which is a nice little reward after this dreadful season.

 

One thing I've found in watching the draft for several years, someone always falls, relative to public opinion.

Last year it was Perfetti going 10th. Many thought he was going 4th. If the Flames pick 10th or 11th I wouldn't be shocked if a Guenther or Eklund is there when the Flames pick. I could see Hughes falling a bit, but realistically I can't see NJ or VAN passing on him, pushing a player I personally like better down the board. 

This isn't as good an example, but Tkachuk at 6th. I remember heading into the 2016 draft that it wasn't really even worth talking about Tkachuk because everyone figured he was going 4th to EDM. 

 

Yup true.  Especially in this draft where many prospect were not available for scouting and the ones that played more may have seen their stock get inflated.  Maybe 2 or 3 prospects we thought should be ranked 20th get taken in spot #5 or #6... bumping guys back for us.  And well, maybe we are targeting someone ranked 20th.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The player the Flames select in this draft, instantly becomes their best prospect. That's the beauty of this draft. They will get an exciting player, which is a nice little reward after this dreadful season.

 

 

I don't know that I agree with this statement.  The latter part, yes.  If we get a lotto pick, then yes he would likely be their best prospect.

 

[Thebrewcrew]

25 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't know that I agree with this statement.  The latter part, yes.  If we get a lotto pick, then yes he would likely be their best prospect.

 

In terms of upside, this player should be their "best" prospect in regards to potential. The Flames will likely be picking 10-15 spots higher than when they picked Zary/Pelletier, so it makes sense.

 

Most NHL ready prospect? Probably, not, but this player should have the highest ceiling of any player in the Flames system. At least that should be the hope for a player picked in the 10-13 range.

[jjgallow]

41 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

I don't know that I agree with this statement.  The latter part, yes.  If we get a lotto pick, then yes he would likely be their best prospect.

 

With or without factoring in the concussion?....

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

With or without factoring in the concussion?....

 

I was thinking about Pelletier.

Maybe I'm off base, but I have to think he's our top prospect right now and could be better than what we draft.

I don't know though.

So hard to project futures for players not in the top 5.

We win the lotto, then different story.

[cross16]

It depends on where the Flames wind up and who they get, but I would not agree that whomever they take is going to auto be their number 1 prospect.

 

I would rank Zary ahead of several players I could see them taking at 10-12 if they wind up there. IMO he was a better draft eligible prospect than the likes of Lysell, McTavish and probably even Sillinger. 

 

Really depends on how the board falls and where they wind up picking. 

[jjgallow]

11 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was thinking about Pelletier.

Maybe I'm off base, but I have to think he's our top prospect right now and could be better than what we draft.

I don't know though.

So hard to project futures for players not in the top 5.

We win the lotto, then different story.

 

I do agree with you that he is a candidate for being our top prospect right now, but not that this is a good thing, it's actually of great concern.   And I don't think he stacks up well with anyone in the top 20 of the coming draft which is defense and goalie heavy.

 

For comparisons, Ryan Francis has significantly better PPG and GPG in the QMJHL, is a RHS, is a year younger, has a much bigger frame for transition into the NHL  (Pelletier's frame and height is quite limiting to translate professionally), and, well, I'm not super excited about Ryan Francis either but if I was going to get excited about either of those two it would be him.

 

Neither one of them have cracked top 3 in the QMJHL and as over-agers they kind of need to be for us to be having any kind of excitement.   I'm not saying they won't become good NHLers but they are both short of that wow factor and the lines are very thin.      Worst of all, it does look a little bit like Pelletier has plateaued from last year.

 

If he doesn't come out of his plateau next year, he enters a category of junior players who were never drafted, never will be drafted, and will likely never be signed by any team.    That is literally the line he is sitting on right now.

 

But is he one of our top prospects?

 

Yes.

 

And that is why I made the Bedard thread.

[jjgallow]

On 5/12/2021 at 2:25 AM, rocketdoctor said:

Isn't Cossa playing behind a stacked Oil Kings team?

 

So there lies the question.

 

Chicken or egg.    There's some gamble involved but what I can say is that his team is no more stacked than Dustin Wolf's team who we're all excited about.

 

But, Cassa is literally out-performing Wolf while being 2 years younger.    That is a big deal, and both teams are stacked so can be factored out.

 

I like a number of things, including how much Cassa has improved year over year.  This is really important for bigger goaltenders.

 

So, personally, I'm a big believer in Save percentage.   I believe that for the most part, save percentage is save percentage.

 

When we acquired Markstrom, I lost my mind and pointed out that his save percentage has historically not been very great and no better than the goalies we already had.      People argued that no, this is because he played for the Canucks, who were a very good team and this is why his save percentage was low.

 

ok........

 

Needless to say I really do believe that while being on a good team can help your GAA, it's not necessarily going to do much for your save percentage to any signficant degree.               Meanwhile, if you really are that good of a goalie, you will MAKE your team look stacked.   They can take risks they normally wouldn't.   They can go on the offensive.

 

So which is it?    I would argue that if you look at the stats, Cassa has a LOT of shots against.   And not a lot of goals against.

 

I think more credit likely goes to him, than his team.   And when you look at how they win most of their games, it has a lot to do with his saves.

[travel_dude]

I know you do more than look at numbers, but honestly it seems sometimes that's all you do.

You ever watch Pelletier outside the WJC?

How about watching either Wolf or Cossa play games?

 

I get it, you don't like the players' size.

But size does not guarantee success.

Cossa has all of 52 junior games to his credit.

I remember a big goalie drafted with better numbers for 3 season in the NCAA.

Didn't make it... 

[The_People1]

43 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

So there lies the question.

 

Chicken or egg.    There's some gamble involved but what I can say is that his team is no more stacked than Dustin Wolf's team who we're all excited about.

 

But, Cassa is literally out-performing Wolf while being 2 years younger.    That is a big deal, and both teams are stacked so can be factored out.

 

I like a number of things, including how much Cassa has improved year over year.  This is really important for bigger goaltenders.

 

So, personally, I'm a big believer in Save percentage.   I believe that for the most part, save percentage is save percentage.

 

When we acquired Markstrom, I lost my mind and pointed out that his save percentage has historically not been very great and no better than the goalies we already had.      People argued that no, this is because he played for the Canucks, who were a very good team and this is why his save percentage was low.

 

ok........

 

Needless to say I really do believe that while being on a good team can help your GAA, it's not necessarily going to do much for your save percentage to any signficant degree.               Meanwhile, if you really are that good of a goalie, you will MAKE your team look stacked.   They can take risks they normally wouldn't.   They can go on the offensive.

 

So which is it?    I would argue that if you look at the stats, Cassa has a LOT of shots against.   And not a lot of goals against.

 

I think more credit likely goes to him, than his team.   And when you look at how they win most of their games, it has a lot to do with his saves.

 

Cossa should be a very good prospect.

 

Compared to Wallstedt, I see Wallstedt is quicker and more agile and thus, more highlight reel saves.  Cossa is more boring but he's 6'-6" and understands how to play big and take up space.  My main knock on Cossa is he's too skinny and needs to bulk up.  He seems to get up too slowly after going down to make a save.  He doesn't bounce back to his feet and reset immediately like Wallstedt does.  That said, I think more muscles in his legs will help take care of that and generally help him move around the crease quicker.  Building muscles is he easiest thing to develop so the Flames can't possibly screw that up.

 

Based on highlights alone, I would actually say Cossa has better vision and awareness.  He looks around more and surveys his surroundings better.  Wallstedt sorta has tunnel vision only focusing on the shooter.  But Wallstedt is a good rebound controller.

 

Anyways, the gap is not as big as the rankings suggest.  It's highly possible Cossa develops into a starter while Wallstedt only becomes a back-up.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Cossa should be a very good prospect.

 

Compared to Wallstedt, I see Wallstedt is quicker and more agile and thus, more highlight reel saves.  Cossa is more boring but he's 6'-6" and understands how to play big and take up space.  My main knock on Cossa is he's too skinny and needs to bulk up.  He seems to get up too slowly after going down to make a save.  He doesn't bounce back to his feet and reset immediately like Wallstedt does.  That said, I think more muscles in his legs will help take care of that and generally help him move around the crease quicker.  Building muscles is he easiest thing to develop so the Flames can't possibly screw that up.

 

Based on highlights alone, I would actually say Cossa has better vision and awareness.  He looks around more and surveys his surroundings better.  Wallstedt sorta has tunnel vision only focusing on the shooter.  But Wallstedt is a good rebound controller.

 

Anyways, the gap is not as big as the rankings suggest.  It's highly possible Cossa develops into a starter while Wallstedt only becomes a back-up.

 

 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

 

 

[rocketdoctor]

Thanks for your input.  I tend to stay out of prospect and draft threads because being in the UK stats is all I really have to go on.

 

I do follow the WHL scores and tables and my concern that you often to see a goalie highly touted but he is on a team that makes his stats look so much better.  So yeah chicken and egg stuff.  Wolf included in that by the way.  Seen it too many times before.

 

Always cautious of taking a goalie too early.  Now who was that Kid we took out of Brandon.......

[travel_dude]

One thing I didn't take into consideration, Arizona lost it's draft pick.

If we pass them, I don't think that changes our ranking.

 

[The_People1]

26 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

One thing I didn't take into consideration, Arizona lost it's draft pick.

If we pass them, I don't think that changes our ranking.

 

 

Yups.  We will likely pass them.  I'm hoping we drop one game against the Canucks so we don't also pass Chicago.

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:

Thanks for your input.  I tend to stay out of prospect and draft threads because being in the UK stats is all I really have to go on.

 

I do follow the WHL scores and tables and my concern that you often to see a goalie highly touted but he is on a team that makes his stats look so much better.  So yeah chicken and egg stuff.  Wolf included in that by the way.  Seen it too many times before.

 

Always cautious of taking a goalie too early.  Now who was that Kid we took out of Brandon.......

 

Generally speaking yes.  That's why you see so few goalies taken in the first round.  Goalies are a gamble.

 

For me, the lack of strength in this draft plus our goaltending depth is why I feel we should go with a goalie this draft.  If Wolf doesnt pan out and Markstrom declines due to age, then we are scrambling to add goalies via UFA or trade.  It's hard to get a good one that way.

 

Cossa and Wallstedt do not look as good as Askarov last year and both have reasons they will bust.  Still, we should.  I don't think we are in range to draft Wallstedt so it's Cossa.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yups.  We will likely pass them.  I'm hoping we drop one game against the Canucks so we don't also pass Chicago.

 

I'm hoping that VAN goes on a winning streak so they can feel good.

Would rather them pass us than us battling CHI for a worse pick.

 

What bothers me more about winning now is that it sets up some belief that we are close and this season was somehow an outlier.

That's the wrong thing that should happen.

If injuries are the reason, then shut them down.

Take an honest look at the player performances and decide if you expect them to continue that way or return to normal.

 

 

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Cossa and Wallstedt do not look as good as Askarov last year and both have reasons they will bust.  Still, we should.  I don't think we are in range to draft Wallstedt so it's Cossa.

 

That is the crux of the argument against taking them with your only 1st round pick.

Honestly, we have bigger needs in the next 5 years than a goalie.

We should be filling up on RW, RHS's, RD, C's....

 

[The_People1]

47 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That is the crux of the argument against taking them with your only 1st round pick.

Honestly, we have bigger needs in the next 5 years than a goalie.

We should be filling up on RW, RHS's, RD, C's....

 

 

But exactly the argument I'm trying to make.  Name the RW, RHS's, RD, C's at pick #10/11/12.  It's not there.  Take a goalie now so we don't need to take one in the next two years where the drafts are stacked with better RHS options.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

But exactly the argument I'm trying to make.  Name the RW, RHS's, RD, C's at pick #10/11/12.  It's not there.  Take a goalie now so we don't need to take one in the next two years where the drafts are stacked with better RHS options.

 

Lysell, Stankoven (shoirt but built like Debrincat), Lucius, McTavish (C), Bolduc (C), Svechkov (C), Sillinger....

BPA is hard to quantify if you have a lower rated goalie vs a high ranked forward or D.

So, if you are comfortable with picking from a small list of goalies (bust probability higher) than a number of players with lower bust potential, have at it.

 

You want to pick Cossa at 10, I get it.

Waiting till next year to load up on RHS prospects is a pretty risky strategy.

Only have 1x1st next year, right?

 

[cross16]

This whole the Flames overdraft LWs things is pretty overblown. Under Treliving Flames have drafted 27 forwards:

 

14 Centers 4 of which were RS 

5 RWs

8 LWs

 

1 Step further..

12 Dmen

4 RS

 

This is very in line with the breakdown at the NHL level. So while sure you can make the argument the Flames don't prioritize it (which I think is weak personally because it depends on how the board falls) this idea they don't value RS is false. RWs and in particular RS RW is he shallowest position in hockey. I understand the counter argument is if it's shallow then overdraft it but in order to consider that strategy you have to weight that you overall ability to find players in the draft is going to go down. So at the end of he day do you want assets and players out of the draft or do you just want RS?

 

Further more in considering this year's draft the LW depth of the Flames:

 

Gaudreau is 1 year away from UFA

Tkachuk is 1 year away from needing a 9 Mill Qualifying offer.

Mang just as productive on either wing

Dube comfortable on both wings but yet to establish himself as a top 6

Lucic aging and up in 2 years

 

After that:

Pelletier

Emillio Petterson

end of list

 

IMO the Flames need the best available player/Asset (whatever term you want to use) to add to their stable because all positions are of need. 

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

That is the crux of the argument against taking them with your only 1st round pick.

Honestly, we have bigger needs in the next 5 years than a goalie.

We should be filling up on RW, RHS's, RD, C's....

 

 

Why do you think this

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Why do you think this

 

I think it's important to look at what you have in the pipeline and take a step back before you use a 1st on a goalie who might go 2nd round in other drafts.

Our pipeline for forwards is shallow.

Have to hope that Phillips or Ruzicka or MEP make it from the current pro stock.

Zary, Pelletier, Francis from the junior players.

 

That's a 1-3 year timeline with not much else beyond that.

I would also be more inclined to go after a D-man this year. than a goalie 

That's even worse shape.

Sure, we may have a few that surprise us, but at this point no foxes.

Maybe Kinnvall, but I think he is less of an all-round guy, more an offensive guy.

 

I don't think we are talking about a Valilevskiy level goalie available here.

Maybe not even a Spencer Knight.

Maybe a Koskinen.

[bosn111]

I am not a great judge of up and coming talent for the most part. I just don’t really follow juniors as much as others. 
 

If this draft is as shallow as many are projecting, and the ideas around best goalie available at Flames draft spot being a usual 2nd or third round pick, I would seriously look at trading down, likely multiple times, to gain more ammo this year or next. If there are really only 3-5 likely game breakers, why settle for an 8-12 pick in a weak draft when you can drop down 2 or 3 times, grab someone in the mid 20s and then pick up 2 or 3 more 2nd / 3rd round picks.

 

The other option would be to trade up. Use extra picks we have and bigger names (Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk) to move up in the draft.

 

 I would prefer trading down and think it is more likely, but if we could move into top 3, it could be worth it. From what I am reading on here, 8-12 range is just not that great this year.

[jjgallow]

44 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think it's important to look at what you have in the pipeline and take a step back before you use a 1st on a goalie who might go 2nd round in other drafts.

Our pipeline for forwards is shallow.

Have to hope that Phillips or Ruzicka or MEP make it from the current pro stock.

Zary, Pelletier, Francis from the junior players.

 

That's a 1-3 year timeline with not much else beyond that.

I would also be more inclined to go after a D-man this year. than a goalie 

That's even worse shape.

Sure, we may have a few that surprise us, but at this point no foxes.

Maybe Kinnvall, but I think he is less of an all-round guy, more an offensive guy.

 

I don't think we are talking about a Valilevskiy level goalie available here.

Maybe not even a Spencer Knight.

Maybe a Koskinen.

 

Well when you said our D situation is in even worse shape,  we have lots of common ground there.

 

I would not be disappointed about drafting a D.  Particularly rhs, but really any D.

 

I mean to be blunt, our F,D,G pipeline is bleak all around.  Not much different than  a blank slate.  Given that, I think you ideally build it from the net out.

 

We already know we're going  to get great forwards in 2022-2023.    But not so sure about D and G.

 

That's why I actually see this draft as an opportunity.    And if we got a D, I would not be disappointed.   Forwards....I would be.