GM Craig Conroy

[cross16]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

It doesn't really say much about their scouting, other than the fact they picked those picks at those draft positions. What were the players rankings? Ok, they draft well. It isn't actually saying what they say, that there is something telling about their picks?

 

It's an analytics take on it.  I think what the stars have done a nice job of doing is focussing on players with skill, talent and production and ignoring some of the traps of size and "potential". They take players who if they hit on will be stars, and if they miss can still carve out a depth role. 

 

Contrast that to the Flames and in particular the picks of Boltman, Kuznetsov and Stromgren. I think in all 3 of these cases they Flames took players for the wrong reasons. Botlman was always a hard one to see but Kuzentsov they took him for size and Stromgren size and straight line speed. The problem with both is neither had any history of production so your basically trying to develop skills that arn't really there and that lowers the ceiling. Even if the Flames were right on Stromgren/Kuzentsov I think you are looking at a bottom pairing dman and a bottom 6 forward. They took a gamble and in an area with a low probability of it paying off. 

 

That's essentially what he is saying. 

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

They also picked Heiskanen and passed on the future greatest Defenseman of all mother time.  It may go down as the biggest missed draft opportunity in Dallas Stars franchise history.

 

But ya, get lots of 1st and 2nd round picks and draft safe.  Take the obvious pick and don't outsmart yourself.

 

That is a very large hyperbole considering how good Heskinen also is. I love Makar too but that's not as egregious as you make it sound. 

[robrob74]

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

It's an analytics take on it.  I think what the stars have done a nice job of doing is focussing on players with skill, talent and production and ignoring some of the traps of size and "potential". They take players who if they hit on will be stars, and if they miss can still carve out a depth role. 

 

Contrast that to the Flames and in particular the picks of Boltman, Kuznetsov and Stromgren. I think in all 3 of these cases they Flames took players for the wrong reasons. Botlman was always a hard one to see but Kuzentsov they took him for size and Stromgren size and straight line speed. The problem with both is neither had any history of production so your basically trying to develop skills that arn't really there and that lowers the ceiling. Even if the Flames were right on Stromgren/Kuzentsov I think you are looking at a bottom pairing dman and a bottom 6 forward. They took a gamble and in an area with a low probability of it paying off. 

 

That's essentially what he is saying. 

 

That is a very large hyperbole considering how good Heskinen also is. I love Makar too but that's not as egregious as you make it sound. 

 

I think it's more that they didn't really describe the analytics that I noticed, from the post.

[sak22]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

They also picked Heiskanen and passed on the future greatest Defenseman of all mother time.  It may go down as the biggest missed draft opportunity in Dallas Stars franchise history.

 

But ya, get lots of 1st and 2nd round picks and draft safe.  Take the obvious pick and don't outsmart yourself.

I’d rather have there problem than Philly who took a consensus top 2 pick and while 3 elite players went after.

[cross16]

53 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think it's more that they didn't really describe the analytics that I noticed, from the post.

 

Yes you'd have to go to his site for that information. It's not high tech, it just takes into account their production (stats) in a certain league based on their age and proximity to draft year.

 

His site breaks it down better but I don't want to give away everything as it is a behind a paywall. Pretty affordable though. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I’d rather have there problem than Philly who took a consensus top 2 pick and while 3 elite players went after.

You also have petterson & Necas but those are more hindsight in that draft

[sak22]

Just now, robrob74 said:

You also have petterson & Necas but those are more hindsight in that draft

Petterson was part of the 3 elite afterwards I referred to, Necas is good but not in that class and I'd put him down the list behind guys drafted after him like Suzuki and Thomas.

[robrob74]

10 minutes ago, sak22 said:

Petterson was part of the 3 elite afterwards I referred to, Necas is good but not in that class and I'd put him down the list behind guys drafted after him like Suzuki and Thomas.

yup! But mostly pointing out the quality taken after they took Patrick that year that they missed out on. Still a big blow.

[robrob74]

Is Heiskanen that much worse than Makar? I think the difference is whether you want a specific kind of D. 

[Thebrewcrew]

 

[cross16]

Trying to recognize that personnel was a challenge but I coudln't find a lot of things I liked about the job Savard did this year. Conroy and Huska preached creativity and their offense was equally as boring was it was under Sutter from the forwards, maybe even more. PP lacked purpose. 

 

Most of the time i'm skeptical it's actual "mutual" but feel like that may be true in this case. Suspect you'll see him on Berube's staff in TO. 

[The_People1]

44 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Trying to recognize that personnel was a challenge but I coudln't find a lot of things I liked about the job Savard did this year. Conroy and Huska preached creativity and their offense was equally as boring was it was under Sutter from the forwards, maybe even more. PP lacked purpose. 

 

Most of the time i'm skeptical it's actual "mutual" but feel like that may be true in this case. Suspect you'll see him on Berube's staff in TO. 

 

Well he didn't really have much to work with.  I don't blame the average results on Savard.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well he didn't really have much to work with.  I don't blame the average results on Savard.

 

True, but I also would not say the results were average, they were below avg IMO. But this also isn't just about results it's about what I saw and the process that I didn't like. 

 

But as I said, recognize personnel was a challenge for sure. Not suggesting the Flames are better off without him but i'm also not exactly upset to see him go. 

[cross16]

Be interesting to see if Tanguay's name pops up. There were strong rumors he was coming in last season before Savard got announced but contract may have been an issue, as in Detroit wouldn't let him go. 1 year later perhaps that isn't an issue anymore. 

[jjgallow]

meh.

 

Wen Russian Goalie Coach?

 

 

[conundrumed]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

Be interesting to see if Tanguay's name pops up

Hey, he has a job! lol

You can have Patty Kane to help the PP though...;)

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Hey, he has a job! lol

You can have Patty Kane to help the PP though...;)

 

Kane is a Johnny Hockey type for creativity, but I don't think he has much gas left in the tank.

For the Flames, I don't see him as much of a fit now.

Yeah, I know you were joking.

[conundrumed]

19 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Kane is a Johnny Hockey type for creativity, but I don't think he has much gas left in the tank.

For the Flames, I don't see him as much of a fit now.

Yeah, I know you were joking.

His exit interview was pretty much, "I really appreciate the opportunity to prove I can still play in this league". Completely non-committal on plans for next year. I was relieved. He had a solid comeback, about a ppg.

The Wings are Larkin, Raymond and Seider's team though. Young guys like Kasper, Danielson, Edvinsson can join that core. Lots of solid young players to fill the gaps really well.

Need a G though. Gustavson is likely the target if Minny wants to get Wallstedt going. They have a yr left of almost $15mil paying Parise and Suter to not play for them.

Honestly, Kane can take DeBrincat with him, seeing as they're so tight. There's no question they can help you win. My problem is they help you lose nearly equally. Same goes for Ghostisbehere. The points look amazing, the reality in how they play are startlingly opposite of that. If they are plus-side players, it's the players around them protecting their irrelevancy in the other 2 zones.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

His exit interview was pretty much, "I really appreciate the opportunity to prove I can still play in this league". Completely non-committal on plans for next year. I was relieved. He had a solid comeback, about a ppg.

The Wings are Larkin, Raymond and Seider's team though. Young guys like Kasper, Danielson, Edvinsson can join that core. Lots of solid young players to fill the gaps really well.

Need a G though. Gustavson is likely the target if Minny wants to get Wallstedt going. They have a yr left of almost $15mil paying Parise and Suter to not play for them.

Honestly, Kane can take DeBrincat with him, seeing as they're so tight. There's no question they can help you win. My problem is they help you lose nearly equally. Same goes for Ghostisbehere. The points look amazing, the reality in how they play are startlingly opposite of that. If they are plus-side players, it's the players around them protecting their irrelevancy in the other 2 zones.

 

You obviously watch more than me.  In the few games I watched, Kane was at times useless but at times a game breaker.  Same with the Cat.  It was like they only wanted each other to be involved in the play.

 

Ghost, I thought, was back to being a difference maker.  Again, limited sample size.  I had felt we should have taken a run at him.  I guess Philly was right in their assessment (their fans called him out a ton).  Maybe he just peaked too early and never grew the other parts of his game. 

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

You obviously watch more than me.  In the few games I watched, Kane was at times useless but at times a game breaker.  Same with the Cat.  It was like they only wanted each other to be involved in the play.

 

Ghost, I thought, was back to being a difference maker.  Again, limited sample size.  I had felt we should have taken a run at him.  I guess Philly was right in their assessment (their fans called him out a ton).  Maybe he just peaked too early and never grew the other parts of his game. 

Ghost is great at driving offence. Great PP guy, all of it. His D is okay, but he gets out-muscled in a heartbeat. He's very good at what he does well. Like all similar players, it's hard to shelter them.

For opposing teams, are you throwing the puck in and going in hard on the forecheck on his side, Chiarot's, Edvinsson's, Maatta's? The choice is way too easy. If you're a meh defender, team's will put the pressure there.

Glad those guys had good years to earn contracts. Preferably elsewhere.

[cberg]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Ghost is great at driving offence. Great PP guy, all of it. His D is okay, but he gets out-muscled in a heartbeat. He's very good at what he does well. Like all similar players, it's hard to shelter them.

For opposing teams, are you throwing the puck in and going in hard on the forecheck on his side, Chiarot's, Edvinsson's, Maatta's? The choice is way too easy. If you're a meh defender, team's will put the pressure there.

Glad those guys had good years to earn contracts. Preferably elsewhere.

Yeah, so are Parekh, Eiserman and others going to end up being the same?

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, cberg said:

Yeah, so are Parekh, Eiserman and others going to end up being the same?

That's my principal concern. It's impossible to get a star player, so you overlook things trying, imho.

Then the detractors call a great hockey foundation player a "safe" pick.

Can't win when it's randomly both things at different doses. lol

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

That's my principal concern. It's impossible to get a star player, so you overlook things trying, imho.

Then the detractors call a great hockey foundation player a "safe" pick.

Can't win when it's randomly both things at different doses. lol

we need a top6, or top4. Zary is great, I hope he keeps it up. We need to draft every part of the lineup and i think the way you do and like the way you see the game, the depth in the lineup is what wins cups. And it is the youth that is drafted depth when the team is built that will win it. 
 

If we came out with that kind of depth in a decent but not necessarily great draft, then that's great!

[conundrumed]

10 hours ago, robrob74 said:

we need a top6, or top4. Zary is great, I hope he keeps it up. We need to draft every part of the lineup and i think the way you do and like the way you see the game, the depth in the lineup is what wins cups. And it is the youth that is drafted depth when the team is built that will win it. 
 

If we came out with that kind of depth in a decent but not necessarily great draft, then that's great!

I saw 1 of the too many draft sites had the Flames taking O'Reilly at 28. Most would call that a stretch, but that's something that I wouldn't be against. A lot of prognosticators guess he'd be a mid 6 C/W, but he is really just beginning to grow as an impact player imo. So I believe the ceiling guesses are pretty extraneous.

Solid 200' forwards tend to go into the "3rd liner" pile. Yet, how many O-star fwds just get lost because they can't play the other side of the puck? It's likely 50/50. NHL coaches are awfully unforgiving when you blow assignments.

They'll replace you with a 4th liner in a heartbeat. Sutter isn't the only one. lol

Then the worry becomes, "how will improving D play affect their O"?

Mercifully, people way smarter than me can figure that one out!