Can Matthew Tkachuk crack this year’s NHL roster?

The question above has been asked frequently since the Flames drafted Tkachuk sixth overall in June. In fact, since Sean Monahan scored 20 goals as a freshly drafted 18-year-old a few years ago, we’ve been asking this question annually about different Calgary prospects to varying degrees. But what about Tkachuk? Can he make this roster out of camp? And can he stay there all season long?

Comparing Tkachuk to Monahan is easy. Both were taken sixth overall, both are from the OHL, both seem physically ready enough to play at the highest level, and, like Monahan, Tkachuk will turn 19 in the early-isa stages of this season. Tkachuk certainly aware of the similarities and he told me as much on the draft floor a couple months ago.

“I’ve heard kind of the same thing with him is he had to work on his skating a little bit,” Tkachuk said. “He worked on that all summer and became a really good skater. I hope to do the same thing because I want to have a similar impact as he did and just have a really good impact on the team next year. I want to. I’m a big kid and it’s all about gaining more speed. If I do that, I’ll be ready.”

Let’s delve into what factors will determine whether or not this happens for Tkachuk or not.

Now vs. then

Calgary’s situation has changed slightly since Monahan cracked the roster in October 2013. If you think back to what the roster looked like then, you can understand how much easier it would have been for Monahan to earn a spot. Players like Johnny Gaudreau, Sam Bennett, Michael Frolik, and yes, Monahan weren’t on the roster three years ago making it much easier for a young forward to work his way in.

Even though the Flames are thinnest in the depth department on the wing, a competitive Tkachuk certainly wouldn’t be a guarantee to make the cut. Below is a quick look at what we might be looking at in terms of Calgary’s depth chart this season, courtesy Operation Sports Generators.

Screen Shot 2016-08-30 at 4.10.35 PM

The biggest question for me is where Tkachuk fits with this team’s depth chart. What I posted above is not necessarily a representation of how the Flames will structure their forward lines, but more a pure depth chart. For the team to keep Tkachuk this season, they’ll have to put him in a spot to succeed, which means tailored minutes and competition.

The fact Tkachuk is a natural left winger definitely helps his cause, because there just aren’t a lot of great options there. The biggest factor affecting him might be what the team decides to do with Bennett. If Calgary opts to continue using their 2014 first round pick down the middle, a spot for Tkachuk seems a whole lot more likely. If they revert back to using Bennett on the wing, all of a sudden Tkachuk’s job becomes more difficult.

Regardless, it’s fairly clear the task of cracking the NHL roster is going to be more difficult for Tkachuk than it was for Monahan in 2013. That said, if Tkachuk shows in training camp and the preseason the potential he can produce in the NHL, I think the opportunity will be there for him to displace someone.

Offseason progression

As Tkachuk said in the quote at the top, he knows he has to work on his skating. Many observers believe Tkachuk has the size and strength to play with men right now, but his ability to keep up is much more in question. Very much the same was said about Monahan coming out of his draft, too.

If you remember back to 2013, the Flames took three players in the first round for the first time in team history. What set Monahan apart from Emile Poirier and Morgan Klimchuk, though, was his commitment to conditioning at the level of an NHLer. Monahan knew he needed to work extremely hard on his skating and foot speed if he was going to crack an NHL roster and Calgary raved about how much better he looked in that regard upon arriving at training camp.

The challenge was laid down to Tkachuk in a very similar light and it sure does sound like he’s responded, at least in his own words. Tkachuk chatted with Sportsnet 590 in Toronto this week and says he’s still focused solely on making the Flames this fall.

“I haven’t had my mind on anything other than that,” Tkachuk said. “I think it would be unfair to myself to think otherwise. Realistically, that’s my goal and for some people it could be unrealistic but for myself I think it’s a realistic opportunity. That opportunity isn’t just given to me, its got to be earned. I felt like I’ve done everything I possibly could this summer to get myself healthy and get myself back in the best shape I could be.”

Of course, words like that sound great in late August, but the proof will be in the pudding in a few weeks. That said, it sounds like Tkachuk has taken this offseason very seriously, so I’m quite intrigued to see how that translates to training camp.

What’s best for the player

Even if Tkachuk looks like he can hang with the best in the world this season, Calgary will still have to weigh whether the NHL is best for his development. Sending a player back is rarely, if ever, damaging and if the circumstances aren’t ideal, maybe London is the best place for Tkachuk. Looking back at Sam Bennett’s rookie season can help us with this conversation.

Screen Shot 2016-08-30 at 5.28.41 PM

Bennett’s rookie season certainly had some ups and downs, with his four goal game and two 18 game goalless droughts serving as polar opposites. The question is, was the NHL unquestionably the right place for Bennett to be last year? I think the Flame made the right decision, but it’s also very much open for debate.

I’m well aware this is a hindsight conversation, which is always an easier perspective to draw an opinion from. I also know Calgary didn’t really have the option to return Bennett to the OHL after debuting him in the 2015 playoffs. But for the sake of this article, let’s just assume he was eligible to return to Kingston last season so I can sit in the devil’s advocate chair.

Had Bennett stayed in the OHL for his 19-year-old season last year, the Flames would have benefitted in a couple different ways. First, he’d likely have dominated the league, especially if his performance at the end of the 2014-2015 campaign was any indication; Bennett had 24 points in 11 regular season games after returning from shoulder surgery that year.

Second, it would have delayed Bennett’s second contract by a year. Now, Bennett doesn’t look to be in line for a huge bump in the same fashion as Monahan or Gaudreau, but he’s still going to get a decent raise. Knowing where Calgary’s cap is going, any delay in adding money to the cap can be looked at as a positive.

Even knowing all of that, though, I still think the Flames made the right choice. I’ve always been of the opinion if a player belongs in the NHL, he should be playing there, regardless of any of the other stuff. My stance isn’t going to change in Tkachuk’s case, but the junior hockey conversation is still a relevant one to have.

Conclusion

It’s too early to make a definitive judgment on this one because training camp hasn’t even started. However, I think we can at the very least come to a conclusion as to what the climate will be like for Tkachuk come September. It’s definitely going to be more difficult to crack this roster than it was when Monahan did so in 2013.

That said, the opportunity will be there if Tkachuk performs come camp and the exhibition schedule. Most importantly, it won’t be a bad thing if Calgary ends up with a tough decision on their hands. It’ll mean Tkachuk looks like another solid young addition to already impressive core, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

  • TheRealPoc

    Re: Bennett, the moment he remained in the lineup for the Ducks series – which, from a purely hockey-first perspective, was justified given his play and the other available roster options – I think that confirmed where he needed to play last season. At some point, the only way you learn how to play against grown men is by actually playing against grown men, and when you’ve exhausted your ability to accrue developmental value by dominating teenagers, it’s time to move on.

    That might not necessarily be the case for Tkachuk. It might be beneficial for him to play his D+1 year as “the man” in London, driving the bus without Marner (who’s basically in the same boat this year with the Leafs that Bennett was in last year; there’s nothing left for him to prove in the O), but that decision should ultimately remain focused on what’s best for his development as a player, rather than mitigating post-ELC extension risk. At some point, you know he’s gonna get paid, and it’s not like the expectation for Tkachuk is limited to the immediate 3-year window; clearly Tkachuk is in the long-term plans one way or another, so maximizing his output ceiling has to be the top priority above all else.

    Personally though, without getting overly gushy about intangibles & character, there’s something to be said about a kid who’s already this single-minded on making the jump at 18; you’ve gotta love gamers. Add that drive to his smarts for the game – he’s such a terrific playmaker down low, as was repeatedly demonstrated last year playing with Marner in London and with Matthews at the WJC – and oh man, am I ever hopeful that we’re talking about the 4th legitimate long-term top sixer for this core.

    Gaudreau/Monahan/Bennett/Tkachuk… RonPaulItsHappening.gif

      • FlamesFanOtherCity

        You would need to feed them good minutes, since all three are basically rookies (Bennett more at center).
        This lineup would imply that Frolik and Brouwer play on Monahan’s and Backlund’s line. I’m not convinced that Brouwer can play top 3 minutes. The other option of playing Frolik with Monahan hasn’t had a lot of traction.

        You could go with:
        Johnny-Monahan-Brouwer

        Ferland-Backlund-Frolik

        Tkachuk-Bennett-Shinkaruk

        Bouma-Stajan-Chiasson

        Ex. Vey, Bollig

        or

        Johnny-Monahan-Shinkaruk

        Ferland-Backlund-Frolik

        Tkachuk-Bennett-Brouwer

        Bouma-Stajan-Chiasson

        Ex. Vey, Bollig

        The one wildcard here is Pribyl. If he is NHL ready, he replaces Shinkaruk. If Tkachuk only stays 9 games, he is replaced by Shink.

        • everton fc

          I hope Tkachuk isn’t sent back to the “O”. And I agree – Tkachuk-Bennett-Shinkaruk would be quite a line, though perhaps Tkachuk plays the RW and Shinkaruk the LW?

          Shinkaruk is the player I am most excited about, come camp. Shinkaruk will be a better player than Pribyl. It’s a toss-up between Bouma and Ferland Backlund & Frolik’s LW. Bouma did well with Backlund. Something to consider.

          • FlamesFanOtherCity

            I understand that Pribyl played in a lesser league, but the guy has the tools to play in the NHL. Shinkaruk is a smaller size, and is strictly a goal scorer.

            Ferland has better offense than Bouma, even if he hasn’t completely figured it out. He was short-shifted last season when he played LW, so that may be the reason. Bouma had one good stretch playing with Backlund and Jones. I don’t think he can keep up with Frolik.

          • ClayBort

            My estimation all summer has been that Pribyl starts in the AHL for 30-40 games to get adjusted to smaller ice. I’ve never watched him play, but with what I read he might be one of those guys that only plays in the NHL if he’s in your top 6 or top 9, so maybe we see him get a taste towards the end of the year when injuries thin things out.

            I’m excited about Pribyl because he is more or less an unknown. I doubt he’s Panarin, but if he can be a quality complimentary player in the top 9, that is a major win considering he was free to acquire.

          • freethe flames

            I read recently on the Heat Website that Pribyl is just now getting onto the ice in very limited activity and is likely he will not be ready for the start of training camp making it even more likely he will play for the Heat once he heals completely.

        • jakethesnail

          I like your first lineup much better. Shinkaruk is not a first liner in my books yet. Better to go with veteran Brouwer to start the season, or Ferland on the RW.

          On the other hand, it would devastate Canuck fans if Shinkaruk was successful on the first line in his first season with the Flames!

  • Bean-counting cowboy

    Another thought… with an NHLE in the 50’s you’d think he’d be able to contribute. How much of that was inflated by his linemates? Even if his true NHLE was 40 and he put up 40 points, he is worthy for this team.

    On a sheltered line with Bennett, they could do some damage against weaker competition – 4th lines and 3rd defensive pairings.

    I’d like to see this:

    Gaudreau/Monahan/Shinkaruk

    Ferland/Backlund/Frolik

    Tkachuk/Bennett/Brouwer

    Bouma/Stajan/Chiasson

    Extras: Vey, Hathaway

    I like Ferland with Backlund and Frolik as he can crash and bang the other teams top competition plus put up some points with those two.

    I like Shinkaruk on the top line as he has the skill to “hang” with those two but also isn’t afraid to go to the net and get his nose dirty.

    I like Brouwer on the sheltered line with the kids as the vet presence who can score. There’s a lot of compete and “pain in the ass” in this line that could wreak some havoc!

    I don’t really love our fourth line but would hope they would keep the puck out of the net while the others rest. I see Backlund and Bennett lines as getting equal ice time. Kind of a line 2a and 2b

  • TheRealPoc

    I’m not sure Shinkaruk’s an obvious candidate to play on his off wing. A lot of the footage I’ve seen of him seems to display a real comfort with creating off the forehand from the left (watch how often he uses a mohawk stride during zone entries to open up lanes & options).

    Ferland’s a more traditional north-south winger who’s shown a desire to cut back towards the middle/slot on his forehand off the rush, and still has the kind of hands needed to make plays in tight & sustain a cycle – I think that’s your more likely top six off-wing project this year.

  • FireScorpion

    Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Tkachuk..with only 1 of them as high as 4th overall. You’d think we’d won a lottery or 2 ourselves.

    Jackpot each and every one of them

  • TheRealPoc

    Mangiapane would have to outplay Shinkaruk (and Tkachuk) so thoroughly in camp for that scenario to play out, I just don’t think it’s likely.

    More important to ascertain this year what you actually have with Shinkaruk, and I think that needs to happen in the show. Mangiapane eating up big minutes in Stockton seems like a no-brainer.

      • Stan

        With each player come concerns. With Tkachuk, it’s if his skating will allow him to keep up in the NHL. With Mangiapane, it’s about his size and durability.

        There is really no reason to rush either. If one is going to make the big league out of camp he is gonna have to earn his spot and show he belongs. Of the two, Tkachuk has the better chance and it’s not really even that close. Tkachuk is a blue chip prospect, Mangiapane is still great – but is unarguably a tier below.

        Not to mention the concerted effort BT/BB have shown to “get bigger”. Tkachuk helps accomplish that, Mangiapane does the opposite.

        • The Fall

          I hear you. But they’ve both put up stupid great totals. And like Pat says, sending a prospect down for a D+1 year is never detrimental.

          We all know first hand how size and durability are not correlated. Do we have to go through this point with every player under 6’…?!

          I honestly believe the Flames should not graduate teenagers to the NHL. That’s what the Oilers do. Sam did alright but he certainly didn’t excel

          And yes. The best player should make it. But I believe that it’s that Matt should be at a disadvantage because he is so much younger.

          • The Fall

            Well you are excusing his age in your post and exaggerating his goal total.

            ALSO – he got 20% of his goals in ONE GAME. It was awesome but its not like he was anywhere near consistent.

            I’d rather not see our rookies do good for their age; I’d rather just see them do good.

          • OKG

            How ridiculous a position (BTW the word you are searching for is “well” not “good”. Though of course we would also like our millionaire athletes “do good” as well.)

            Sam did do well. His 5v5 Primary Points Per 60 (1.43 was higher than Joe Thornton, Sam Reinhart, Patrick Sharp, Kyle Okposo, Leon Draisaitl). His all-situations P1/60 was also right in line with Ryan Nugent Hopkins, Ryan Kesler, and Nathan McKinnon. These are all first line forwards here.

            Why did Bennett apppear visibly “inconsistent”?

            1) An inconsistency in minutes in general (you can’t produce if you’re not on the ice)

            2) An excess of minutes on the wing in a north-south system, which is not his game

            3) An excess of minutes on the wing of one Markus Granlund.

            That third point is especially significant. Bennett’s 5v5 P/60 = 1.68 (970 minutes), while a respectable number skyrockets up to 1.89 if you remove the 178 minutes he had to spend on Granlund’s wing with Granlund botching just about everything. Granlund proved to be nothing more than an AHLer at the centre ice position. 1.89 points per 60 would have been right in line with Ryan Johansen, Kevin Hayes, Daniel Sedin, Corey Perry, Mark Stone, Filip Forsberg, Gabriel Landeskog, Patrice Bergeron, Jordan Eberle, and Nikita Kucherov. Again, all first liners. None of whom had to muck around on Markus Granlund’s wing. Bennett didn’t even need to play wing, given he’s a natural centreman and better at the position than Granlund. That is all on Bob Hartley.

            But all that is besides the point. Why should “for his age” not be used? Physical development and experience matter. Over the last ten seasons, when you talk about forwards who had:

            1) 1000-1200 minutes played;

            2) were Age 19;

            3) and had 34 to 42 points

            You end up with seven players. Sean Monahan, Nathan McKinnon, Sam Bennett, Martin Havlat, Jacob Voracek, Taylor Hall, and Nikolaj Ehlers.

            That’s damn good company to be in. three first line wingers, two first line centremen, and Ehlers, who was playing on a line with Scheifele and Wheeler which inflated his stats (not that he’s bad at hockey… kid had 2PPG in Junior as an 18YO). Oh and what exactly is “bad” about having a four goal game?

          • Styxx

            Nice informative comment 🙂

            I agree there is a tendency by many to undervalue Bennett’s performance because of how, how much, where and with whom he was used.

            Monahan was fortunate in his first year as he was the club’s first top pick of the rebuild, received 2nd and 1st line minutes right away plus power play time, and played with Top 6 linemates. Bennett had much poorer opportunity yet performed very well at a level equivalent to Monahan.

            Hopefully this year Bennett can be provided consistent opportunity to play centre, have good linemates with 3 balanced forward lines, and get additional PP time. If this happens he should realistically earn 45-55 points this season.

          • Greatsave

            You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

            Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he *was* ready, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

          • Greatsave

            You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

            Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he *was* ready, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

          • Greatsave

            You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

            Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

          • Greatsave

            You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

            Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

          • Greatsave

            You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

            Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

          • Stan

            There is a huge difference. Tkachuk put up huge totals in his rookie season in the OHL. Mangiapane didn’t even get drafted in his first year of eligibility – we took him as an overager AND then he went back and played one more year. of junior.

            You can’t compare them really. In my opinion, comparisons in this situation in general are hard to make. Each prospect develops differently. In my opinion, having Bennett up last year was the right decision. He almost scored at a 0.50 ppg pace and that was with wild inconsistency (two 18 game droughts IIRC). He definitely helped the team when he was on the ice from my viewing and I expect him to be a lot better this year because of that experience.

            Anyways, Tkachuk’s play in preseason will determine where he plays, nothing else. By all accounts he is trending positively as it sounds like he has worked hard to improve his skating and has also worked hard in the gym. Combine that with his NHL size frame and high level hockey sense and I think he has a real shot. Having a father that played in the NHL can’t hurt either.

        • Baalzamon

          With Mangiapane, it’s about his size and durability.

          Durability is not a concern. Mangiapane has never missed a game in his entire OHL career (exempting suspensions).

  • Styxx

    I am in the 70-80% confidence range that, barring injury or a poor showing in camp, Tkachuk will get his 9 game stint to start with the big club.

    I am also 70-80% confident that Tkachuk will be sent back down to the OHL for the remainder of the season, as Monahan was going to be except he scored several timely goals during his audition which really prevented his demotion.

    Regarding the main roster if I look at where I hope the Flames will be NEXT year at this time then that would help guide my decisions this year.

    2017-18
    Top 7: Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Backlund, Tkachuk, Brouwer, Frohlich
    Next 5: 2 of Scorer/Skill group (Poirier/Shinkaruk/Chiasson), 2 of Energy group (Ferland/Bouma/Hathaway), Jankowski
    Bubble 2: 2 of Pribyl/Klimchuk/Mangiapane/Carroll/Pollock/other

    In my thinking in one year Bollig, Stajan, Vey and whoever loses the Scorer and Energy positions above should be phased out (traded, waived, demoted, bought out) THIS year. At the same time more time would be given to develop the prospects so next year the Flames are finally fully re-tooled, ready to contend with no bad contracts, most positions set with trained experienced prospects and only 1 player over age 30 i.e Brouwer

  • Jumping Jack Flash

    This article show that there are roster spots to be won but I don’t feel like all players are going to have the same chance to lock down a roster spot. For instance, Tkachuk is going to be given more rope than a Mangi or Janko. IMO Mangi or Janko could have a Monohan type training camp and still not make the the big team. I think both players are going to be core players in Stockton.

    I am not sure how much rope Poirier’s is going to get to make the team. This could be his best chance to secure a spot. Shrink should to be in the top 6 to be effective. From what, I have seen from so far from Tkachuk, he has an ability to find another gear. Seems to have a rare ability to rise to the occasion, so I would not bet against him.

    • FireScorpion

      You’re such a boring predictable[…].

      Enjoy making history this year in the new rink. Laughingstock organization Oh and werent you 97Train? What happened ? Realized a guy that couldn’t make it 15 games without shattering his collarbone wasnt much of a train after all eh? Good call

      Mod: Just because you use an exclamation point, doesn’t mean that word is suddenly usable. Smarten up.

      • #97Train/McDavidCopperfield

        I know its easy to jump on Edmonton because of the last 10 years and that was previous management so get over it!
        I’m not sure what you’re gonna do when Edmonton finishes ahead of Calgary this year.
        This is not the same team that has been pushed around and has been easy to play against. The whole dynamics of this team has changed.
        Tell me again how much your team has improved by adding Troy Brouwer.
        Oh ya , now you are resorting to name calling because someone touched a nerve?

        Mod: Use your head and stop being a moron. If you can’t add anything more than barbs obviously intended to inflame some (or all) posters, you’re done here. I–and I’m sure everyone else here–am sick of your garbage. If you can’t add anything to the discourse on this site, it’s time for you to move on.

        • FireScorpion

          The Oilers will also be slower. Lucic, Maroon, Kassian, no Hall.. I dunno. Sure bigger and tougher but you’ll be at the draft party again.

          Calgary will finish higher. Again.

          Not so much how much we have improved by adding Brouwer, but how much we have improved by our goaltending situation. I like Brouwer though, bit much sure but that’s how it goes on Free Agent frenzy

          Mod: It’s not a pissing contest. Just stop.

        • FireScorpion

          Of course I’m not going to get over your last 10 years, why that will be impossible as the Edmonton Oilers set a historical playoff futility record this year in the new rink.

          Nobody 14 and younger has ever seen the Oilers in the playoffs . That’s funny .

  • MonsterPod

    I still have high hopes for Bennett, not that anyone here doesn’t.

    But Monny was a late birthday in his rookie season so he played as a 19 year old, for the most part.

    Bennett’s 19 year-old season was last year.

    Monny went 22-12-34
    Bennett was 18-18-36

    Pretty similar production, really. Bennett played more on the wing, unfortunately. Both were injured briefly.

    My point is that I bet if you ask him, Bennett would say it’s great that Monny is looking like a bona-fide #1, but he himself has not given up ambition to be that guy someday.

    NHL Central Scouting had Bennett ranked #1 in his draft year, even above Ekblad. We have not really seen what this kid can do yet.

    A #1C controversy is a good problem for us to have.

    GFG

  • #97Train/McDavidCopperfield

    And moderator… What is wrong with saying that Tkachuk should make THIS group of forwards. It is my opinion that the Flames are not super deep on the wing.
    If there is a chance for a first year player of Tkachuk’s ilk to make the team it is on the wing in Calgary.

    • piscera.infada

      Yeah, moderator here. You know this is about more than one comment you’ve made. Not only do you seem to derail any and all reasonable Flames discussion on the vast majority of boards you “post” on, you’re now starting to turn these boards into pissing contests, which are completely out of line with the purpose of the site. You want further evidence to this? Look at the thread immediately before this. You know that your “sensible arguments” are intended to inflame the passions of certain posters, and you know what the outcome will be.

      For the record, this also goes to @FireScorpion. Let it go, man.

      This is all I will say on the matter.

      • Stan

        Can we get a ban on train? Honestly, he brings literally ZERO to the table. He derails every comment thread with asinine comments about the Flames that have no basis in fact and are solely designed to piss people off. And if he is not doing that, he is making asinine comments about the oilers, but guess what? Literally nobody here wants to talk about that burning pile of trash that is somehow called a hockey club. If we did, we’d go to oilers nation.

        Enough is enough.

      • #97Train/McDavidCopperfield

        You have been here the whole time and I’m sure you can admit while sometimes I have been a pain in the butt, I have also engaged in good conversation and I think I have added to the discussion with lots of good comments. I’ll get back on track and try to conduct myself in a more appropriate fashion.
        There are others here that could do the same.?

  • #97Train/McDavidCopperfield

    Back to Tkachuk .. For the Flames it would be good if they could send him back for another year but do you keep him just because he may be better than other wingers or does that still slow his development ?

  • Greatsave

    You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

    Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he *was* ready, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

  • Greatsave

    You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

    Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

  • Greatsave

    You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

    Except MacKinnon, who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?

  • Greatsave

    @ OKG

    You’re right that in their 19-year-old seasons, all those 7 players scored between 34 and 42 points. Which, as I established in a previous thread, according to The Fall’s logic, means none of them were ready for the NHL at 19, because they couldn’t score 50 points.

    Except MacKinnon (happy birthday Nathan!), who actually scored 63 points as an 18-year-old, so he was “ready”, but then slumped as a sophomore to 38, so he became… unready?