Luke Misa; 2024 5th Rd Pick (150th oa)

[conundrumed]

Might as well add everyone. lol

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Might as well add everyone. lol

 

 

For the first time in over a decade (or arguably 2015), I literally don't see a single Flame pick not worth adding.  

 

They are all interesting.

 

Even Hunter Laing is interesting.

https://hunterlaing.com/

 

Misa with the year-over-year output double.  How we got him in the 5th round, I do not know.

[conundrumed]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

For the first time in over a decade (or arguably 2015), I literally don't see a single Flame pick not worth adding.  

 

They are all interesting.

 

Even Hunter Laing is interesting.

https://hunterlaing.com/

 

Misa with the year-over-year output double.  How we got him in the 5th round, I do not know.

A lot of club's scouts have some real tunnel vision of what the boundaries are for potential. It's very stern walls. It seems like these lessons are never learned. You look around at JG, Point, Kucherov, some younger skilled guys, DeBrincat a faller.

The value of size is real, which, you would assume, as the game only gets faster, old habits just keep dying hard.

Your new, young scouts are still under the guidance of your senior staff, so, training that remains.

They talk about larger players and talk about growth and potential in their game. If you're on the losing side of 6', somehow, your potential for growth is almost maxed out. It makes zero sense. But that's the sense I get too often.

[The_People1]

On 7/15/2024 at 9:40 AM, conundrumed said:

A lot of club's scouts have some real tunnel vision of what the boundaries are for potential. It's very stern walls. It seems like these lessons are never learned. You look around at JG, Point, Kucherov, some younger skilled guys, DeBrincat a faller.

The value of size is real, which, you would assume, as the game only gets faster, old habits just keep dying hard.

Your new, young scouts are still under the guidance of your senior staff, so, training that remains.

They talk about larger players and talk about growth and potential in their game. If you're on the losing side of 6', somehow, your potential for growth is almost maxed out. It makes zero sense. But that's the sense I get too often.

 

Well, I get it.  You can teach hockey.  Skating, passing, shooting, etc.  But you cannot teach size.

 

You're either 6'-3" or you are not and never can be.  That's it.

 

And when it comes to "small"... 5'-7" is probably too small.  Debrincat is 5'-8", Gaudreau is 5'-9".  Point is 5'-10", Kucherov is 5'-11".

 

Luke Misa at 5'-10"... same as Mangiapane.  Definitely on the small side but also definitely within reason to make it to the NHL.  From what I can see, the high IQ is there.  He's small but he's uses it well.  He's elusive, agile, shifty, etc.  If he was 6'-0" like Michael Misa, then he'd got in the top 10.

[travel_dude]

38 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well, I get it.  You can teach hockey.  Skating, passing, shooting, etc.  But you cannot teach size.

 

You're either 6'-3" or you are not and never can be.  That's it.

 

And when it comes to "small"... 5'-7" is probably too small.  Debrincat is 5'-8", Gaudreau is 5'-9".  Point is 5'-10", Kucherov is 5'-11".

 

Luke Misa at 5'-10"... same as Mangiapane.  Definitely on the small side but also definitely within reason to make it to the NHL.  From what I can see, the high IQ is there.  He's small but he's uses it well.  He's elusive, agile, shifty, etc.  If he was 6'-0" like Michael Misa, then he'd got in the top 10.

 

The size can be an issue.  Gaudreau was not like Marti STL.  Not thick.  Not tree trunks for legs.  

Gaudreau was quick to get in and out of zones and tight spaces, so his size was not as much an issue.

When it was playoffs and the game slowed down and was hit and hurt, he was not quite as effective.

Never been past 2nd round so no way to tell what he would be in a final.

Point is beefy.

Kuch is quick but not shy.

 

No matter if you are 6'1 or less, you will get hit hard.

If you are not thick you will get hurt as much or more being taller. 

[jjgallow]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

The size can be an issue.  Gaudreau was not like Marti STL.  Not thick.  Not tree trunks for legs.  

Gaudreau was quick to get in and out of zones and tight spaces, so his size was not as much an issue.

When it was playoffs and the game slowed down and was hit and hurt, he was not quite as effective.

Never been past 2nd round so no way to tell what he would be in a final.

Point is beefy.

Kuch is quick but not shy.

 

No matter if you are 6'1 or less, you will get hit hard.

If you are not thick you will get hurt as much or more being taller. 

 

Even Gaudreau though, clearly a good draft pick.

 

Should we have kept him for playoff ambitions?   Prolly not.   But we coulda got a mint in a trade ( at the right times ).

 

So like....in a draft, as far as I'm concerned it's an acceptable gamble in anything after the first round.   And imho Misa was... Probably large enough to take a risk on even in the 1st round.    He's not Gaudreau small.   

 

Looking forward to how he develops.

[travel_dude]

9 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Even Gaudreau though, clearly a good draft pick.

 

Should we have kept him for playoff ambitions?   Prolly not.   But we coulda got a mint in a trade ( at the right times ).

 

So like....in a draft, as far as I'm concerned it's an acceptable gamble in anything after the first round.   And imho Misa was... Probably large enough to take a risk on even in the 1st round.    He's not Gaudreau small.   

 

Looking forward to how he develops.

 

Gaudreau was wirery.  Say it with me...Wirery....It's fun.

Not often do you sell off a franchise player when they are set to be the franchise leader in almost all categories.

Could have got a tone for Iggy or Kipper at the right time.  Or Doug Gilmore....Ooops messed that one up...Thanks Riseborough.

COL should trade Makar now while he is worth a ton.  After all, he is signing with CGY as a FA.

 

There are some exceptions to the Gaudreau rule.  Phillips was too small for the style he played. 

Had he followed Gaudreau style, he might have lasted.  Maybe not a NHL bust but he's got to do something different.

Stanky is small in height, but built for the game.  He did get plastered in the playoffs, but he was an acceptable risk for a late first.

Better choice, given his stats, than say Bougault.  A bust.  

I still chuckle when I hear EDM analysts talk about that pick.  Traded down to avoid a goalie that they needed.

Picked up a defenseman that can barely score in college.  Hello Boltman.

[The_People1]

19 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Even Gaudreau though, clearly a good draft pick.

 

Should we have kept him for playoff ambitions?   Prolly not.   But we coulda got a mint in a trade ( at the right times ).

 

So like....in a draft, as far as I'm concerned it's an acceptable gamble in anything after the first round.   And imho Misa was... Probably large enough to take a risk on even in the 1st round.    He's not Gaudreau small.   

 

Looking forward to how he develops.

 

Sometimes, there's a core group of players who get you into the playoffs and then there's a secondary core of players who carry the team through the playoffs.  Very few players can do both.  Players like Gaudreau get us into the playoffs.  And that's it... and that's okay.  Just have to plan around that and have that second group of playoff-type players to take the team the rest of the way.

 

Misa is exciting because it looks like he can at the very least, put up the regular season points.

[jjgallow]

9 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sometimes, there's a core group of players who get you into the playoffs and then there's a secondary core of players who carry the team through the playoffs.  Very few players can do both.  Players like Gaudreau get us into the playoffs.  And that's it... and that's okay.  Just have to plan around that and have that second group of playoff-type players to take the team the rest of the way.

 

Misa is exciting because it looks like he can at the very least, put up the regular season points.

 

I agree that some players stop at getting you into the playoffs.

 

However, imho the ones who get you through the playoffs are the same ones that get you into them.

 

And they are usually expensive, so you can't afford to have a secondary team.

 

I'm not putting any such limitations in Misa though,way too early for that.   Gaudreau, it did become clear early in his career.

[conundrumed]

8 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sometimes, there's a core group of players who get you into the playoffs and then there's a secondary core of players who carry the team through the playoffs.  Very few players can do both.  Players like Gaudreau get us into the playoffs.  And that's it... and that's okay.  Just have to plan around that and have that second group of playoff-type players to take the team the rest of the way.

 

Misa is exciting because it looks like he can at the very least, put up the regular season points.

Just to add, your stars get blanketed in the playoffs. It gets way harder for them because the opponent's goal is to give them zero space. If your depth guys can really press the other team's depth guys, they'll need to adjust. It's really a chess match, trying to even get a hair of an advantage.

I really think the whole, "not a playoff performer" is a misnomer. You have to credit the coaching strategy that gives up very little to the star players.

I've always been over-the-top in love with bottom of the roster guys. If you have 4C in the Draper's and Yelle's, they can shift a 0-0 game vs the other team's top 6. That buys you a pretty big advantage for your top 6.

4th line players are so underrated for me.

 

What I love in Misa's interview, is we drafted 4 OHL guys that are really familiar/friends with each other. Now, they share a bond that is the Flames. I think that is important. Parekh, Battaglia, Mews and Misa. Now there's a camaraderie and secondary support there. I think that's important.

[robrob74]

On 7/18/2024 at 5:25 PM, jjgallow said:

 

I agree that some players stop at getting you into the playoffs.

 

However, imho the ones who get you through the playoffs are the same ones that get you into them.

 

And they are usually expensive, so you can't afford to have a secondary team.

 

I'm not putting any such limitations in Misa though,way too early for that.   Gaudreau, it did become clear early in his career.

 

On 7/18/2024 at 5:11 PM, The_People1 said:

 

Sometimes, there's a core group of players who get you into the playoffs and then there's a secondary core of players who carry the team through the playoffs.  Very few players can do both.  Players like Gaudreau get us into the playoffs.  And that's it... and that's okay.  Just have to plan around that and have that second group of playoff-type players to take the team the rest of the way.

 

Misa is exciting because it looks like he can at the very least, put up the regular season points.

I think Gaudreau did get decent playoff points. He had a 0.785714285714286ppg average. 33 points in 42 playoff games. Maybe I'm calculating wrong but that's still decent.

 

 Sure, he wasn't dragging the team into the conference finals, but I think the problem was, once you stop Gaudreau, you stop the Flames. Speaks more to the depth of the team than the player. If the Flames put him with a guy like Bennett who can play off him and be a big enough presence, I think they needed something like that. The problems were Monahan is easy to stop. They didn't add Lindholm until later. But they failed to create a 2nd line, maybe they should have tried Bennett and Tkachuk as a pair since they were kind of pairing... but I think it was more about depth than anything. 

[jjgallow]

5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think Gaudreau did get decent playoff points. He had a 0.785714285714286ppg average. 33 points in 42 playoff games. Maybe I'm calculating wrong but that's still decent.

 

 Sure, he wasn't dragging the team into the conference finals, but I think the problem was, once you stop Gaudreau, you stop the Flames. Speaks more to the depth of the team than the player. If the Flames put him with a guy like Bennett who can play off him and be a big enough presence, I think they needed something like that. The problems were Monahan is easy to stop. They didn't add Lindholm until later. But they failed to create a 2nd line, maybe they should have tried Bennett and Tkachuk as a pair since they were kind of pairing... but I think it was more about depth than anything. 

 

there were times when i thought ...maybe he really could carry them in the playoffs.  but it seemed like he got all his points in easier earlier games and when he was really needed he was not there (the nail biters).

 

He got those 14 points in his last season with us, but yeah we didn't make it very far and his goals, which was his big achievement that year breaking 40, weren't there.

 

Admittedly, it's a small sample size, too small to really condemn him.     But then, as our top scorer, if he was really geared towards playoffs that sample size wouldn't be so small.

[Heartbreaker]

On 7/20/2024 at 3:19 PM, jjgallow said:

there were times when i thought ...maybe he really could carry them in the playoffs.  but it seemed like he got all his points in easier earlier games and when he was really needed he was not there (the nail biters).

 

I don't know, Man... I vaguely recall him scoring a pretty big goal in the playoffs. I think the whole city was something like this:

 

 

Love.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I don't know, Man... I vaguely recall him scoring a pretty big goal in the playoffs. I think the whole city was something like this:

 

 

Love.

 

He was definitely a fan favourite.   Numbers don't lie though.   Maybe there's a javascript solution but we never made it out of the 1st round with him as the highest paid player.

Since we're not on topic:

 

https://www.si.com/onsi/breakaway/news-feed-page/posts/calgary-flames-jonathan-huberdeau-named-nhl-worst-contract

[Heartbreaker]

24 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

He was definitely a fan favourite.   Numbers don't lie though.   Maybe there's a javascript solution but we never made it out of the 1st round with him as the highest paid player.

Since we're not on topic:

 

https://www.si.com/onsi/breakaway/news-feed-page/posts/calgary-flames-jonathan-huberdeau-named-nhl-worst-contract

 

I mean, there could be a JS solution, but I got in trouble for sharing code last time... at least nobody behaved boorishly.

 

In any case, there are two major issues with the above statement.

 

1. That goal did get them out of the first round
2. He wasn't the highest paid player

You are definitely right about him being a fan favourite, and also that numbers don't lie. So, at least that!

 

Love.

[robrob74]

Problem wasn't Johnny Gaudreau wasn't a performer, problem was he was the only difference maker we had and if you only have one, all you gotta do is stop one, much like the Iginla years, while we had decent depth around him, we never built around him properly. 

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I mean, there could be a JS solution, but I got in trouble for sharing code last time... at least nobody behaved boorishly.

 

In any case, there are two major issues with the above statement.

 

1. That goal did get them out of the first round
2. He wasn't the highest paid player

You are definitely right about him being a fan favourite, and also that numbers don't lie. So, at least that!

 

Love.

 

if you check your JS operators you will see that also means I'm right about him never getting us out of the first round as our highest paid player 

[Heartbreaker]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

if you check your JS operators you will see that also means I'm right about him never getting us out of the first round as our highest paid player 

 

const quotedComment === 'fair play'

 

Love.