Discussion in 'Nashville Predators' started by Jonesey, Feb 25, 2019.
It's so funny it hurts
So much for liking Minnesota more and that extra freedom lol. I said it from the start, I really think there were reasons other than his game that had Poile letting him go.
I think one normally holds out hope still for a 22/23-year old player that things will eventually "click" and they'll start to understand how to play an NHL-style game. With his draft pedigree and skill, people will still give benefit of the doubt, still think they can be the ones to "fix" him.
I think the Preds had already seen enough of him, had him around long enough to get a good psych profile on him, and are projecting that he's not likely to ever "get it". He's fun to watch. But as a player in his situation gets a little older, 24, 25... and they still aren't learning to play the game, they'll lose that benefit of the doubt. Suddenly the poor decisions in the neutral zone and not using linemates well enough become perceived as faults that a player will not grow out of. Then the 20 goals or 40 points they can manage despite those faults doesn't look so attractive anymore. Talent and draft pedigree only get you so far. Teams will eventually go looking for the Next Thing, a player who can produce AND play a smarter game.
I'm an optimist with young players, and as just an armchair viewer always held out hope that they'd get him to overcome his weaknesses. I haven't been around him to know his personality or have any opinion of whether that might be less likely than hoped for --- but the Preds' evaluators have. I can definitely see that playing into things, and it wouldn't bode well for Fiala's future in the league if that's how things play out with him.
Fiala reminds me of Colin Wilson. Great tools; no toolbox. One of those guys who will show flashes of greatness but can't seem to pull it together for more than a few games at a time.
I could see this scenario as well. Although, Fiala's not built to be a complementary bottom-6'er as he doesn't have the size or the physicality. He also doesn't have the playoff history Wilson does.
I was one of those that thought that Wilson would eventually be a top 6 center, every year until I realized he is what he is.
I'll take your place as the Fiala version of this. I just can't help but love his upside.
Both at the same time here. I honestly thought Wilson would win the Calder in his debut. This was one of the first indications that led me to eventually realize that when it comes to doing my own prospect scouting, I am utterly hopeless.
I believed Jon Blum was going to be the next Hamhuis and that Ryan Ellis was too small and slow for the NHL.
I saw Blum in the AHL. I knew what he was.
Whats wrong with Granlund?
He was really really good in Wilds.
One of our infamous posters said Craig Smith would be out of the NHL within a year and didn't even have enough talent to stay in the AHL.
I remember years ago arguing at length that Paul Postma (Thrashers) was going to be a superstar. Yeeeaahhhhhh.....I haven't gotten any NHL scouting offers yet.
Haha I remember Flames fans calling Weber a poor mans Phaneuf and Wild fans comparing Brodin to Josi
Yeah wild fans had high high hopes for Brodin
Fiala with a goal and assist tonight to give him a four game point streak with 3G-2A over that span.
Pens fan here. Though it's still early in Galchenyuk's tenure as a Penguin, he hasn't exactly produced in the games he's played in. Would Nashville perhaps be interested in a swap of Granlund and Galchenyuk if both continue to struggle on their teams?
I don't have a strong sense of what Galchenyuk is capable of as a player. Mostly I have hearsay. My general impression is... no thanks.
My rationale is basically these are two expiring-contract players who are struggling to find chemistry on their current teams - that part of things may argue positively for a change-of-scenery swap - so the "upside" may balance. But I'm not sure the downside does. Because as much as Granlund has done relatively little here, he at least doesn't seem to cause any particular problems either. He's not as good defensively (statistically) as maybe the average eye-test suggests, but he also doesn't seem to be making any waves or generating strife. In fact, if I was going to have a player struggling and going through a hard time on the team, I guess I'd generally appreciate that he did it in as low-key a fashion as possible, which Granlund is basically doing. So his downside is pretty well known and manageable for us. Whereas I have no idea what Galchenyuk's downside is - it's fear of the unknown.
Galchenyuk sort of evokes a Fear of Fiala to me. I don't have any support for that. But just a hazy sense that maybe he's more of an individualistic style of player who won't necessarily mesh easily in a new situation?
Probably if I reach the point of giving up on Granlund, I'd think of trading him for futures instead of in a change-of-scenery hail mary?
I'm totally open to being convinced otherwise. That is just my initial impression from the peanut gallery.
Funny I thought Granlund was one of our best players last night.
I didn't watch last night, but he could have been hands-down our best player in 1 game and it wouldn't substantially change the discussion about him. He has been mostly-invisible since we got him. BUT. I think our default stance is that we still need to wait a little longer and try a few other things before we do anything beyond chatting casually about it. Trying him with Johansen is definitely one of those things. If he did play that well last night, I'd love to see them stick with that for a nice long stretch and see what happens. It might be the answer we've been looking for!
At this point I think I'd rather keep the guy who is familiar with the team.
I know it's not that simple and if for example Granlund has indicated that he isn't going to stay and Galchenyuk on the other hand would show interest in resigning if things work out, then it's a whole new story.
Wonder what's up?
I wonder how much the guy has slept lately. Maintenance day hopefully.
Separate names with a comma.