Zirakzigil Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Backlund was ok but by that performance he doesn't make the team. He showed to have some good soft hands and made a couple nice plays but he wasn't getting down and dirty trying to create offense. He was playing too much like Huselius, except that he would come back to help out defensively. He was good at stripping the other team of the puck but there were just too many chances where he should have powered towards the net or just shot instead of making a useless pass(Wilson to Backlund to Wilson to Backlund come to mind...) I think that its more of its his first game and he doesnt want to look like a puck hog. Hes got so much skill so little arrogance that the preseason will be a better judge of him in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslinger Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Those games were hard to watch. The ice looked really bad and it looked like some of the more skilled players were struggling with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 What I hope this prospect tourney did, was show the doubting Fans, Flame fans included, that the prospect pool is nowhere near as bad as most suggest. I'm not saying its one of the better ones in the NHL. IMO, its right in the middle , 10-15 range, but i've heard for so many years "oh the Flames can't draft" or "our prospects are so bare" etc etc etc. I hope this trounament proved that while yeah, the Flames don't have a ton of high end skilled players, they are full of just solid hockey players. Thats how you rebuild a prospect pool. There is alot of depth in the Flames prospect pool and now more offence is being added. Case in point, last night. I'll admit I ddin't see the Edmonton game but I thought Calgary's depth was much better yesterday. Outside of the top line for the Canucks (Hodgson, Grabner) they had trouble maintaing any kind of offensive pressure. While the Flames were rolling multiple lines that were generating pressure and offesnive chances. It kept Vancouver from ever holding the momemtum for very long, and thus making it difficult to come back. This is a solid NHL prospect pool, and I hope more and more people start to realize that. Sutter has done an outstanding job rebuilding it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslinger Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 ^ True. What I really liked was that many of the Flames best players were 18 & 19 year olds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 ^ True. What I really liked was that many of the Flames best players were 18 & 19 year olds. Yeah i didn't even mention that. They were the youngest in the tournament by almost a full year if I remember hearing correctly. I believe this is Sutter's drafting philosophy that many overlooked. When you have a bare prospect pool, you draft solid non flashy hockey players that give you depth.Ala, Boyd, Prust, Sutter, Pardy, Pelech,Armstrong, Watt etc. Then as your depth grows you take the Backlund, Niemez, Brodie, Wahl type players to offset the grinders. Throw in the odd reach in later rounds, Per Johnson, Adam Cracknell, and the depth is there. Now I know the Oilers team didn't include names like Brodziak, Ganger, Cogliano, Gilbert etc, but again I'm not saying the Flames are the best, just they are much better than the fans beleive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murray1 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 What I hope this prospect tourney did, was show the doubting Fans, Flame fans included, that the prospect pool is nowhere near as bad as most suggest. I'm not saying its one of the better ones in the NHL. IMO, its right in the middle , 10-15 range, but i've heard for so many years "oh the Flames can't draft" or "our prospects are so bare" etc etc etc. I hope this trounament proved that while yeah, the Flames don't have a ton of high end skilled players, they are full of just solid hockey players. Thats how you rebuild a prospect pool. There is alot of depth in the Flames prospect pool and now more offence is being added. Case in point, last night. I'll admit I ddin't see the Edmonton game but I thought Calgary's depth was much better yesterday. Outside of the top line for the Canucks (Hodgson, Grabner) they had trouble maintaing any kind of offensive pressure. While the Flames were rolling multiple lines that were generating pressure and offesnive chances. It kept Vancouver from ever holding the momemtum for very long, and thus making it difficult to come back. This is a solid NHL prospect pool, and I hope more and more people start to realize that. Sutter has done an outstanding job rebuilding it. Well from this tournament I saw no top line quality prospects. I don't think I have heard people complaining about the teams prospects further down the line but top 6 is a weakness for us. Our two brightest futures are in Backlund and Nemisz. Ryder used to be up there but if that tournament showed anythign of his play he won't be top line material and might have trouble holding onto second line. Backlund when older will definitely be 2nd line material and is our only good top 6 prospect imo. Nemisz looks good in front of the net but his play every where else was less then desirable(he is young though and he can change that). Really we got lucky we won the first game, and had we of not had the beset goaltending of the three clubs we could have easily went 1-1 or even 0-2. As you said yourself cross, other then when against vancouvers top prospects line we looked good. Well, that to me says that we just have better all around grinder 3/4th line quality players. Which is definitely true. It is our top lines that hurt us. How many points did our top line put up this tourney? Not as much as our 2nd or 3rd lines, and that is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Those games were hard to watch. The ice looked really bad and it looked like some of the more skilled players were struggling with it. From what they are saying on the Fan960 its just getting worse. Im going to reserve my judgment for our top prospects (Backlund, etc) for the preseason games and main camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Well from this tournament I saw no top line quality prospects. I don't think I have heard people complaining about the teams prospects further down the line but top 6 is a weakness for us. Our two brightest futures are in Backlund and Nemisz. Ryder used to be up there but if that tournament showed anythign of his play he won't be top line material and might have trouble holding onto second line. Backlund when older will definitely be 2nd line material and is our only good top 6 prospect imo. Nemisz looks good in front of the net but his play every where else was less then desirable(he is young though and he can change that). Really we got lucky we won the first game, and had we of not had the beset goaltending of the three clubs we could have easily went 1-1 or even 0-2. As you said yourself cross, other then when against vancouvers top prospects line we looked good. Well, that to me says that we just have better all around grinder 3/4th line quality players. Which is definitely true. It is our top lines that hurt us. How many points did our top line put up this tourney? Not as much as our 2nd or 3rd lines, and that is a problem. I disagree about both Backlund and Neimez but thats a whole other argument. I see top line potential in both. However, thats not my point. I full admit that the top 6 needs work. Thats why I only rank the Flames in the 10-15 range. If they had a couple more top line talent they would be a top 10 team. However, this whole "we have no prospects things" doens't fly with me and it is a common theme on many Flames boards, not just this one, or the "Sutter can't draft" thing is also common. The Flames are deep everywhere except their top 6. They have some, but have depth on the blueline and depth in goal, and great depth in their forward ranks. There are alot of solid NHLers in the Flames prospect pool right now. They may not be top 3 worthy, but there is depth everywhere else and that bodes very well for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murray1 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 I disagree about both Backlund and Neimez but thats a whole other argument. I see top line potential in both. However, thats not my point. I full admit that the top 6 needs work. Thats why I only rank the Flames in the 10-15 range. If they had a couple more top line talent they would be a top 10 team. However, this whole "we have no prospects things" doens't fly with me and it is a common theme on many Flames boards, not just this one, or the "Sutter can't draft" thing is also common. The Flames are deep everywhere except their top 6. They have some, but have depth on the blueline and depth in goal, and great depth in their forward ranks. There are alot of solid NHLers in the Flames prospect pool right now. They may not be top 3 worthy, but there is depth everywhere else and that bodes very well for the future. Yes, that is true we do have very good depth players. Most people that say otherwise are just talking out their Gary Bettman anyways so I usually just ignore them and haven't noticed it that much I know this wasn't the best tournament to base things off of but I was kind of disappointed in our defense. Negrin and Brodie stood out, Pelech had a big hit, Aulie had a penalty or something and that is all I remember from them. Lots of times they seemed lost. A lot of that would be the new players etc so I know its not a fair judge but overall other then Brodie and Negrin I didn't see much for possible NHLers without quite a bit of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Yes, that is true we do have very good depth players. Most people that say otherwise are just talking out their Gary Bettman anyways so I usually just ignore them and haven't noticed it that much I know this wasn't the best tournament to base things off of but I was kind of disappointed in our defense. Negrin and Brodie stood out, Pelech had a big hit, Aulie had a penalty or something and that is all I remember from them. Lots of times they seemed lost. A lot of that would be the new players etc so I know its not a fair judge but overall other then Brodie and Negrin I didn't see much for possible NHLers without quite a bit of work. Keep in mind most of them are under 20. They have a good 4 to 5 years before the age that most dmen break into the NHL. I think Pelech is definetly an NHLer, but outside of that I woudl agree with the assesment. However, because dmen often need a lot of work, and its one of the hardest to improve on , i'm not worried. I've already seen Pelech, Aulie and Baldwin's game improve from the first time I saw them. Its a big comfort thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murray1 Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 I've already seen Pelech, Aulie and Baldwin's game improve from the first time I saw them. Its a big comfort thing. I don't get to see very much of this stuff. Only the few things that are available online. I have heard good things about Pelech though, he is also a big guy for his age and it will take time to grow into body I am sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IggytoTanguay Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 So does this mean we win the tournament? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 So does this mean we win the tournament? Well, we're the only ones able to say we went 2 for 2... so... yes? We win a trophy made of .. win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 I don't get to see very much of this stuff. Only the few things that are available online. I have heard good things about Pelech though, he is also a big guy for his age and it will take time to grow into body I am sure. Ryan Mcgill, coach of QC Flames, is very high on Pelech. Says the sky is basically the limit for him. I was sceptacle when we drafted him, but I like him that more I watch him. I see a cross between Regher and Sarich. NOt quite as smart as Regher, but faster than Sarich while having the same mean streak as Sarich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens-1 Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 I've heard a lot about Pelech but i haven't seen enough to give an opinion about him. But it's nice to hear that those guys improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.