Prospect Info: Cale Fleury

[azcanuck]

Needs more time honing his game but should be a viable D man in the near future. As is,similar to Folin with upside to improve overall seeing just a kid.

god I hope he's better then that scrub Folin. He's my least favorite d on the team. A real stiff out there.

 

[Runner77]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

 

[Goldenhands]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

At this point, I think his take is accurate, but with some more PP minutes in Laval this year, his confidence could grow up offensively, so we will see how it goes... I think he adjusted pretty well to the Pro in his first year and thats what you want to see from a kid, next step will be to impact the game more on the offensive side and improve a bit in his own end...

 

[Miller Time]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

He exceeded expectations in his first year pro... So either he was undervalued, or his work ethic drove faster than expected progression. If the latter, then perhaps he has it in him to go even further beyond expectations.

Progression & improvement are so unpredictable that these kind of prospect write-ups & projections can be hilarious down the road.

At one point, early in their NHL careers, Dion Phaneuf was a set to be perennial Norris winning HOFer to be, and Brent Burns was looking more likely to end up a middle-6 W at best...

(NOT equating Fleury to either, just first analogous comparison that I thought of)

 

[Runner77]

Good point that these projections are fraught with uncertainty and risk. Who knows for certain that Fleury can't be a top 4D? He does have some intriguing attributes.

Now, is it realistic for him to spend 2-3 years in the AHL? It would sure be a positive for him if he's brought along slowly under the watchful eye of Bouchard.

Marc Dumont called Bouchard the most important person in the org. -- just what Fleury needs.

 

[Adam Michaels]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

We'll see where things go for him. But he has NHL written all over him. Last year, he was progressing the more the year went. He is a very interesting prospect.

At this moment, although Brook has the higher ceiling, Fleury is ahead of him in readiness for the NHL.

 

[montreal]

At this moment, although Brook has the higher ceiling, Fleury is ahead of him in readiness for the NHL.

we'll see as last year at camp I thought Brook looked better. Fleury's defensive issues unless he was paired with someone that can cover for him would likely be a major issue in the NHL. Brook has a better defensive game so he wouldn't get exposed as much.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Our organizational strength at RD is a mirage. Brook is holding the whole thing together. If you removed Brook, then all of a sudden we have a bunch of pretty mediocre prospects and some elder statesmen. This is why I would have been happy with Seider if he were available to us. If things break badly for us in this department we could have an enormous hole at that position.

 

[frapp10]

Our organizational strength at RD is a mirage. Brook is holding the whole thing together. If you removed Brook, then all of a sudden we have a bunch of pretty mediocre prospects and some elder statesmen. This is why I would have been happy with Seider if he were available to us. If things break badly for us in this department we could have an enormous hole at that position.

Juulsen, brook, fleury really ain’t that bad though for depth. After that there’s literally nothing

 

[Habs Halifax]

Our organizational strength at RD is a mirage. Brook is holding the whole thing together. If you removed Brook, then all of a sudden we have a bunch of pretty mediocre prospects and some elder statesmen. This is why I would have been happy with Seider if he were available to us. If things break badly for us in this department we could have an enormous hole at that position.

Depends on how long Weber can maintain his level of play. I think we get two more years of the same (age 34 and 35) and then it's anybodies guess what kind of game he has at 36/37 where his contract is designed for him to retire at after his age 37 season. 2-4 years with Weber IMO. If we get very good quality after 4 more years from now, that would be a huge bonus but not banking on it.

Do we trade or keep Petry after 2 years? That will depend on Brook, Juulsen, and Fleury's development. But yeah, if we look at youth depth only, the LD side is arguably much stronger. Definitely more options on the LD side.

Mete, Romanov, Struble, Harris, Kulak, Norlinder, Leskinen, Fairbrother
vs
Brook, Juulsen, Fleury

I suspect we draft a few RD's in the next few drafts.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Juulsen, brook, fleury really ain’t that bad though for depth. After that there’s literally nothing

Juulsen and Fleury are nothing until they show otherwise. Brook might actually be something worth writing home about. But if he flops we've got a bunch of old dudes and some also ran prospects.

Depends on how long Weber can maintain his level of play. I think we get two more years of the same (age 34 and 35) and then it's anybodies guess what kind of game he has at 36/37 where his contract is designed for him to retire at after his age 37 season. 2-4 years with Weber IMO. If we get very good quality after 4 more years from now, that would be a huge bonus but not banking on it.

Do we trade or keep Petry after 2 years? That will depend on Brook, Juulsen, and Fleury's development. But yeah, if we look at youth depth only, the LD side is arguably much stronger. Definitely more options on the LD side.

Mete, Romanov, Struble, Harris, Kulak, Norlinder, Leskinen, Fairbrother
vs
Brook, Juulsen, Fleury

I suspect we draft a few RD's in the next few drafts.

I think we should be looking seriously at getting rid of Petry as his value is likely as high as it will ever get, but unfortunately, unless Brook can have a Kotkaniemi-like emergence this year, MB will have no choice but to keep him.

Weber's best days are behind him. He may continue to be a good player, but these are the sunset years and we should be realistic about them. Players don't play forever, even though they would if they could.

 

[Hins77]

Our organizational strength at RD is a mirage. Brook is holding the whole thing together. If you removed Brook, then all of a sudden we have a bunch of pretty mediocre prospects and some elder statesmen. This is why I would have been happy with Seider if he were available to us. If things break badly for us in this department we could have an enormous hole at that position.

Presently. Our right side is jam pack. Brook/juulsen/fleury are ready soon and i dont think that Petry and weber will retire next year so. We will have to use one of those player in a trade for improve another place like LD or reach a guy a la josh anderson (we miss physicality in wing imo)

 

[NotProkofievian]

Presently. Our right side is jam pack. Brook/juulsen/fleury are ready soon and i dont think that Petry and weber will retire next year so. We will have to use one of those player in a trade for improve another place like LD or reach a guy a la josh anderson (we miss physicality in wing imo)

If we're smart, and I don't contend we are, we will trade old guys for futures while they still have value. And this log jam does not represent a great deal of quality. It could very easily turn into nothing. Brook is the only reason why this is not a pressing issue at the moment.

Juulsen and Fleury are really quite irrelevant to the project. They're warm bodies at the moment and foreseeable future.

 

[Vachon23]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

I agree with this take ! I think Fleury can be a really solid bottom guy but I don’t think he will be a top 4 on a solid team

 

[Mrb1p]

So Fleury is projected to be an NHLer 2-3 years from now, according to an estimate from the above piece?

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

I’m picking or keeping Mattias Norlinder and Jayden Struble ahead of Fleury due to them being younger and their projectable abilities making them more likely top-four candidates.

Sounds like a great depth guy from these takes. Wondering if he can be more.

Hes not unlike Juulsen. Both are really, really toolsy but they need a lot of work to make it happen. Theyre just taking the safe route here, its highly unlikely anyone ever becomes a top pair D, so why would a 3rd rounder do it?

Its lazy and lacks balls but what ever. Fleury still has that top 4 upside. His offensive play in the AHL, as a rookie, is indicative of that. Thats my take.

 

[Mrb1p]

If we're smart, and I don't contend we are, we will trade old guys for futures while they still have value. And this log jam does not represent a great deal of quality. It could very easily turn into nothing. Brook is the only reason why this is not a pressing issue at the moment.

Juulsen and Fleury are really quite irrelevant to the project. They're warm bodies at the moment and foreseeable future.

I disagree on Cale and Noah. They have basic qualities that make NHL players and the work they need is easily coachable. If the Habs are smart, they trade one right now and groom the other for the 2nd pair or the 3rd pair, or they try both.

This team has left the development of players to the players and its the main reason why they have no success. Its time to force someone into a spot.

Actually they did it with Mete and now we have a top 4 D.

 

[montreal]

Our organizational strength at RD is a mirage. Brook is holding the whole thing together. If you removed Brook, then all of a sudden we have a bunch of pretty mediocre prospects and some elder statesmen. This is why I would have been happy with Seider if he were available to us. If things break badly for us in this department we could have an enormous hole at that position.

Both Romanov and Harris spent the bulk of last year at RD, that of course causes problems at LD if Mete, Struble, Fairbrother, Norlinder, don't progress.

 

[JuJu Mobb]

I'm pleasantly surprised with this pick.

If Fleury, Brook and Romanov pan out, our defense will look pretty good in the future.

 

[Vachon23]

I agree with this take ! I think Fleury can be a really solid bottom guy but I don’t think he will be a top 4 on a solid team

I said nothing interesting there...

 

[Archijerej]

This take was quite sobering:

Fleury lacks dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line and while he is growing into an effective transition piece for the Laval Rocket, he doesn’t project as a top puck-mover at the NHL level. Considering those factors, it’s likely that if he carves a role on Montreal’s blue line, it’s on the bottom pair.

It's as cliche as it could get. I don't know in what world the author lives, but apparently, in his world, NHL first and second pairings are populated exclusively by "top puck-movers" and players displaying "dynamic qualities at the offensive blue line".

 

[montreal]

I'm pleasantly surprised with this pick.

If Fleury, Brook and Romanov pan out, our defense will look pretty good in the future.

With Primeau, Brook, Romanov, Struble, Harris, Fleury, Norlinder, Fairbrother, plus Mete, Juulsen, maybe Dichow, the future looks very bright on the backend. Of course not all will pan out but if 3 or 4 end up anywhere near their ceiling over say several years since they are at different stages of their development, that would be huge for our future.

The big question will be out of that group, can any be top pairing/top 10 starters in the NHL? Brook, Romanov, whoever, it's so hard to draft that legit top line/pairing/starter. Timmins has found a few in Price, Subban, McDonagh, Pac, etc... but we'll have to wait and see if he's found any from this group or not. It will be so important to our future if he has, if not then we are going to have problems once again.

 

[1909]

With Primeau, Brook, Romanov, Struble, Harris, Fleury, Norlinder, Fairbrother, plus Mete, Juulsen, maybe Dichow, the future looks very bright on the backend. Of course not all will pan out but if 3 or 4 end up anywhere near their ceiling over say several years since they are at different stages of their development, that would be huge for our future.

The big question will be out of that group, can any be top pairing/top 10 starters in the NHL? Brook, Romanov, whoever, it's so hard to draft that legit top line/pairing/starter. Timmins has found a few in Price, Subban, McDonagh, Pac, etc... but we'll have to wait and see if he's found any from this group or not. It will be so important to our future if he has, if not then we are going to have problems once again.

Dichow ? Isn't he a goaltender ?

 

[Redux91]

Making a serious case for a bottom pairing/#7 role, and i couldnt be prouder of him

This time last year was a big mistery as to whether he would play 1 more year in the WHL or loop hole into the AHL

With all the josh brook love (and its warranted), it was looking like he would become a forgotten prospect

but ever since he was drafted with that gigantic -61 stat, the smarter critics always kept saying "no this guys special", and it really shows in his play

I hope he keeps an eye on Shea Weber this year

 

[Mrb1p]

Dichow ? Isn't he a goaltender ?

Yes and Primeau too..

 

[Tyson]

Making a serious case for a bottom pairing/#7 role, and i couldnt be prouder of him

This time last year was a big mistery as to whether he would play 1 more year in the WHL or loop hole into the AHL

With all the josh brook love (and its warranted), it was looking like he would become a forgotten prospect

but ever since he was drafted with that gigantic -61 stat, the smarter critics always kept saying "no this guys special", and it really shows in his play

I hope he keeps an eye on Shea Weber this year

Charlie Lindgren said that Fleury was a special talent and doubled down when he was questioned on the statement. He fell to 87th overall because he was on such a horrible team.
He is still only 20 and another year under Bouchard would help him immensely.