cross16

This was the last World Juniors for Zary, he turns 20 next September and won't be eligible for next year's tournament.

I came away with the same conclusion, it's really difficult for me to see Pelletier not being an NHL player. He just has too well rounded a game, too competitive and the right character. I do think his ceiling is a little lower than I previously thought but I think he'll get there and has a high probability of wearing a letter at some point too. He's a pretty impressive kid.

Credit to US they played a heck of a game. I don't thikn Canada was well prepared for their speed and their aggressive style and they never really seemd to settle into their game. Have to give the US a lot of credit for that though as I thikn their game plan had a lot to do with Canada being tentative. I don't think it will be long before we see Nate Leaman in consideration for NHL jobs. Maybe he doesn't want to, but he is a heck of a smart coach and did a really nice job with the US in this tournament. I'm consistently impressed by teams he coaches.

Very interesting. I actually think putting Rasmus in Johnny's old post (LS half wall) could be a killer spot to set up 1 timers but mostly just happy it looks like Ras will get more opportunity. Also happy they have flipped the LS/RS and have Johnny on the right side wall. They also need to find a new QB for the #1 unit so makes sense they may try a few guys. It's not a good spot for Gio anymore IMO.

umm what? since when is making the 2nd round "almost" winning the cup? And your critique is a bit bizarre considering the Flames actually had the more effective PP in the playoffs (they were 3rd best). I would also agree that getting upset by line combos on day 1 of training camp is very over the top.

A nice takeaway from the tournament is I can see why the Flames liked Kunetsov as much as they did. While he hasn't jumped off the page he's been very solid in the games i've watched and is your modern day defensive dman. Really, really good on his gap control because he's got great short area movement skills for his size. he really does a nice job not getting beat in the defensive zone and really closes well at the blueline. Other than having a solid first pass he hasn't really shown much offense but it's also not really the role Russia is using him in. I have read some reports that say he can hammer a puck so there could be some other options down the road. All in all, while I don't love taking defensive specialists that high in the draft I do get why the Flames liked him and that they see more potential in him.

This is something i've liked in both Pelletier and Zary this tournament, their versatility. They've been used in shutdown roles, top lines roles, special teams and when looking for a spark they generally move up the lineup not down. A lot of faith in both of those players from the coaching staff. For me, it shows the qualities the Flames are looking for in the draft, intelligence, compete and skill. You need all 3 to gain the truth of coaches and being able to be utilized the way both have. Doesn't mean it's perfect but for me is it nice to see the Flames prioritizing the right qualities.

I would hope a lot. the pairs he is running out all have familiarity together so I don't think there should be any concern with building chemistry and with no preseason I don't think you'll build much chemistry anyway. They should be experimenting a ton IMO.

One thing to keep in mind, Ward was adamant yesterday that we should not read into into combinations or pairings. So while there are some decent ideas here I expect we are going to see a bunch of different ideas, combos, and lines the rest of the way. I'm actually disappointed to see Bennett on the wing but like I said I'll let the rest of camp play out.

The "unit to play" designation" is a very vague title designed to give some players privacy/protection around COVID. It could mean an injury or it just could mean something COVID related. LTIR isn't relevant during training camp so we likely would not know anything about the long term implications, or potential cap implications, until later in camp. This early in Camp it would likely be related to COVID but we'll see.

For me, the Oilers are not better than they were last year. The big problems I saw with the Oilers last were 3 things: 1. They don't defend well 2. Their goaltending is bad 3. They get nothing out of their top 6. Their D core is returning unchanged and IMO actually takes a step back with the loss of Kelfboom. I liked the Barrie signing but all that does is replace Klefboom on the PP (which was already one of the best units so how does it get better?) They returned the exact same tandem and Smith continue to get older. I like their signings of Ennis and Kahun as well there is a bit of a wild card there in Puljujarvi. however, Ennis was there at the end of last year so you are realying on Kahun and Puljujarvi to move the needle? Pretty tall task and while the talent may be there in Puljujarvi the odds of him become the impact player some thought pre draft would take a pretty unprecedent turnaround. So i'm not see where they are better, I see a team that had major flaws last year and addressed none of them. I can actually see a team that goes backward just as easily as i can see them going forward given the fact that special teams really carried the Oilers last year. Tough to sustain that year after year.

I agree, this is a smart approach. I would look at the NFL where 1 positive case, and in sometimes even a false positive, led to teams having to play their 4th/5th player on the depth chart due to contract tracing/exposure. Why even though i don't like Stone I have no problem with him being here on a PTO. It's not hard to imgine scenarios where you might be into your 10th dman or 19th forward so if you can get some veteran players for those options it's smart to do so.

I like watching Pelletier play, he is just so involved in the play and looking to make something happen on every shift. I'm still not sure he will make it but he is the type of player you root really hard for.

Agreed, his intelligence really jumps out at you. It seems simple but the way he anticipates and makes the play quick and easy is pretty impressive for his age. Reminds me a lot of Backlund, just the way his intelligence stood out at the same age. I agree on his skating, he's got to get his first few strides better but that could come with strength too. The top end is find, but he's got to get to areas sooner but his intelligence is going to make up for it to a large degree too.

Quite a 2 months or Zary (Dec and Jan). Named to Team Canada, playing at World Juniors, gets a contract and sounds like he will be invited to training camp once the World Juniors is over. Today was the deadline to get this done for this year which gives the Flames some extra flexibility on his deal as it can now slide for 2 years.

Wow i'm surprised I had just honestly assumed it had been closed down. But happy to hear it's back. I was missing it.

This is fair and as I mentioned it's not all bad. Ward makes some valid points in the article and I'm a big believer that the Flames attention to detail needs to come up. It was for sure better in the playoffs and it's also not fair to put it all on Ward's strategy. Execution is more important than strategy and the Flames failure to execute cost them on multiple occasions in that series. What is also becoming concerning is I think too much credit is being given to the Flames for the Winnipeg series. Yes they won and yes they played pretty well but beating a not very good team that was short handed is not a great feat. If you put that aside and focus just on the Dallas series, while there were still positives, I don't think the needle moved as far as you'd like it to.

Pretty concerning article. Don't get me wrong you have to have by in and it starts in the defensive zone. I have no problem with that philosophy. But to hear him say how they played in the playoffs is the blueprint for how they want to play going forward is very concerning. Parts of it were good and stressing details in the defensive zone is much needed but if they plan to be that soft, conservative, collapse everything down to the middle team i think they are going to be in big trouble. Did not work for them in the playoffs so I really struggle why people seem to think it's a strategy worth building off of. for context, in the first round the Flames were bottom 6 or 7 in all major defensive categories and while it's easy to suggest how "close" the series was in certain areas, worth remember that at 5 on 5 Dallas ate the Flames alive in games 2 through 6. Fair to debate strategy vs execution as to what the primary problem was, but for me to suggest there is anything there that should be a blueprint is very concerning.

Looks like no Nikolayev for Russia but Kuznetsov got an invite. Flames 2nd rounder in the most recent draft

I don't disagree with that at all, but even being really conservative with ice time. 1st line - 18 mins 2nd line - 16 3rd line - 15 Leaves Bennett with 11 mins. It's far from horrible but it just begs the question that if they don't trust him why are they keeping him and talking him up this off-season. It's just more of the same we've seen since his rookie year which doesn't make sense to me.

Ryan on the RW I would think is on the table as he's done it before in his career so it makes sense. I like the pairing idea but I do hate the idea of Bennett being limited to bottom line center and playing less than 10 mins a game. To me it's counter productive to put him back to his natural position and then bury him with no opportunity. Your basically continuing the same problem they've had since his rookie year. Baring a trade, there really is no ideal way IMO to set the lineup with Monahan-Lindholm-Backs and Bennett as all centers so something has to give. For me it's obviously that you leave Lindholm on the wing but we'll see what they come up.

Flames want a lot of people to play center next year apparently. I say that with some sarcasm, but I also fully approve of this message.

That is the narrative but i don't personally agree with it and the numbers don't support it. I thought he was very much himself and was back to his dominant self in the 2nd half of last season. I actually thought he carried it into the Winnipeg series but as that series went on and then onto Dallas, is where his game just wasn't there. But in terms of his engagement I actually thought he was really engaged in the game, he was just really ineffective.

I wouldn't really argue against that point nor it is my central argument. i don't disagree at all that the Flames need more out of Monahan in the playoffs too and while I point to Gaudraeu more it really is a matter of opinion and I see both sides. What I am saying is the things that made Gaudreau great are much, much harder to do in the playoffs and I don't think it relates to Monahan. Even if it did, it still prompt the question is Gaudreau is only as good as his center then is he worth a contract that is going to make him a franchise caliber winger and is that a smart decision for the Flames? The answer to that is no for me and I don't think it will change because I don't see his game being able to adapt to be successful in the playoffs because it's not about line mates so much as it is about his strengths and weaknesses.

For me the debate is not and never has been about Gaudreau needing to go because of the regular season. The concept that Gaudreau took a step back last year is false. The reality is they as a line, and he as a player, had a terrible first third of the season. He was fine and very productive once he got more comfortable with Ward so the argument he is on the downslope is just lazy analysis. The key question and debate should be centered around can Gaudreau be a productive player in the playoffs and IMO those video are evidence that I just don't think he can be. Those types of plays are so much harder to execute in the playoffs. That leads to the discussion around with 2 years left on the deal is Gaudreau the type of player you go all in with an extension. Those are still questions I have and I think the organization really needs a plan here.