Prospect Info: Flames prospect rankings: #10 RUN-OFF POLL

[Flames Fanatic]

Again, I have no problem with them gifting Kylington minutes. And it's a weird case. Yes it goes against my meritocracy philosophy, but he proved he is a special talent and that's why he was fed minutes... BECAUSE HE IS A SPECIAL TALENT. And by all indications it was a smart move to feed him minutes. Klimchuk is not. Like I said before if Klimmer wanted more minutes he should have gone to the ECHL.

But sure... It's Huska's fault Klimchuk only put up nine points. None of that had to do with skill. Gotcha. Huska is just like me and we both want Him to fail... It has nothing to do with skill level.

Yes because Hartley wanted Ortio to fail, Byron to sit in the pressbox, etc. etc. Your hypocrisy is showing.

But sure, continue to say its Klimchuks fault 100%, I'm sure that's exactly what it is...

Not every prospect in their first year of pro is an AHL Allstar.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Yes because Hartley wanted Ortio to fail, Byron to sit in the pressbox, etc. etc. Your hypocrisy is showing.

But sure, continue to say its Klimchuks fault 100%, I'm sure that's exactly what it is...

Not every prospect in their first year of pro is an AHL Allstar.

You keep just saying I contradict myself instead of putting anything in value. I'm not even sure what you are arguing at this point except that basically 'Klimchuk should be gifted minutes' 'Klimchuk is too good for the ECHL even though it worked for Kulak' or 'the only reason Klimchuk put up a measly 9 points is because of Huska'

Those are all brutal arguments man. I've answered every question you have. You're just a Morgan Klimchuk apologist. You guys are unnecessarily hyping a player that hasn't done anything to indicate he will be a great pro. You are doing exactly what you hate with Eetu, but you are basing it on draft status. People cling to him only because he was a first round pick.

If Klimmer was a 4th round pick and Kulak was a first, this wouldn't even be a poll. No one would be taking about Klimchuk because he would be irrelevant. Despite what a few posters that cling onto the glimmer of hope that this kid is the stud they built him up in their mind to be. I've never been impressed with Klimchuk. I've been mocked on this site for over 2 years for my opinions of him. And frankly, I'm not surprised Klimchuk struggled and I don't see how Huska can take blame for not playing him more. He didn't earn it. No ifs and or butts.

If a player on the fourth line had 9 points in the NHL that's just not good production. That applies to the AHL too. I mean good fourth line production is 20-25 points. Not nine. Nine is bad even for a fourth liner. Maybe if he's a great defensive player. Is he great? I do not think so.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Nearly every argument that has been provided against Klimchuk has been disproven, or explained as to why it would be that way, I'm not sure what we are still going on about.

I have no problem with people having Kulak over Klimchuk, as they are close for me too, but the sheer volume of ignorance/misinformation regarding Klimchuk's game is laughable.

- "Klimchuk is a poor/bad/below average skater" - No he's not. When comparing him to Kulak you are really comparing two different styles of skating - Kulak the longer, smoother stride, Klimchuk the shorter, choppier stride. Contrary to popular belief, a player does not have to have a long, smooth stride to be a good skater, in fact, some skating coaches are beginning to teach the Morgan Klimchuk style of skating, the shorter, choppier strides, similar to Duchene as the best way to skate functionally for hockey.

- "Klimchuk was the 20th best player on the Heat" - if this really needs to be argued, then there is no hope for you.

- "If the only thing you can say about a player is he is good defensively, that's a problem" - No, it's the furthest thing from a problem, especially when the player in question has shown the ability to put up offensive numbers.

- "His production was poor" - Yes, it was, but it was his first ****ing year in pro, I'm sure there have been plenty of others who have struggled offensively their first year pro, his usage was a head scratcher, and he played on an offensively staved team, on which the only players who put up any sort of great numbers were all AHL vets. I can see how that worries some, but there were plenty of things going against him last year.

You cannot compare to players of different positions, ages, styles, etc. Pointing to the lines they played on as a "quantifiable" argument, because that certainly is not quantifiable.