cross16

Deprnds how you define skill it in most cases I’m taking the skill. The odds that skill, such as hockey sense, puck handling, IQ and skating are learned post draft are extremely rare and not likely to happen so you wind up with a bunch of guys they can’t play. Exactly what happened with Sutter. This isn’t an either or thing either. Of course you can find players who have both and that’s the goal. My point would be the fall back shouldn’t be guys who have holes but are “big” with “intangibles” the fallback should be skill. And if that means small so be it. At least if you draft for skill and they don’t pan out they can be depth, trade assets , or play other roles. If they are big and unskilled and they don’t pan out they are in the AHL

Clutch and grab was for sure a part of it but then who look at teams winning cup and you see the likes of St Louis, Richards, Leclavier, Elias, Niedermayer, Scott Gomez etc. youve always needed skill to win a cup and drafting big guys just because they were big didn’t really work for anyone, including the flames so I for sure pin that on Sutter. It’s changed for sure since clutch and grab but I don’t think as much as you are suggesting. You still needed a skilled roster to win a cup in those days.

See and that’s exactly why I think Sutter and co missed the boat. It was always about skill, it’s just swung A little more recently. Even in the clutch and grab era the teams that won cups were skilled

It was worse under Sutter, and honestly it isn’t close. I remember going to prospect camps back then and it was a depressing exercise because the quality was so low and you had just no one worth getting exited about. Sure, now it’s built up of high risk guys but at least there is some potential reward there unlike the Sutter years where there was just nothing. I personally am not a fan of Pronman and I don’t think he is a good scout so I don’t put much stock into his reports. He’s been low on the flames for a while and yet they have had a very successful system. He really favors high end prospects so good teams at the nhl level almost always wind up at the bottom of his ranking. Not saying the flames are in good shape or deserve to be higher because they probably deserve a bottom 10 ranking, but when you are the 2nd best team in the league on the backs of mostly younger talent that is going to happen.

Not too familiar with his positioning on the PP to be honest. Looking at his PP production it’s pretty below avg for the most part save for 1 or 2 seasons where he took off. His most successful year was in Edm during his first season but it appears to be unsustainable. Hes never really been a great PP option in his career.

It’s a cool story and I’m happy to see lucic taking steps to improve his game and back up his words about how he was embarrassed of his performance up in Edmonton. But I don’t think it means flames should get ahead of themselves and start thinking lucic is a top 6 option. Flames just have better options there and I don’t think the my can afford to have his lack of speed there. I would be more optimistic about the PP and Lucic maybe becoming an option for the 2nd unit. The 2nd unit doesn’t really have the players that can play either at the net or in the middle of the 1-3-1 so if Lucic can work on some positioning, passing and puck handling maybe he can be an option for those 2 spots and give the 2nd unit something.

No Oates doesn’t focus on power skating. His program is more about increasing a players offense. Article talks a little bit about his general philosophy but the key elements are positioning and puck handling The issues, as I’ve understood it in the past, is that Oates doesn’t divulge his teachings or program. Coaches and teams were frustrated because they wanted to know what was being taught and got a “no”. At the end of the day I don’t think its an issue as he has some really high profile clients who have seen success and not turning into issues for the coach or team.

Lucic has hired Adam Oates as a skill coach. Mentioned at the bottom of this article https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/bruins/2019/08/10/former-bruin-adam-oates-adds-points-and-value-players-careers/Gy8PLPfPsCJ6bL031XuUPP/story.html

I never really had a problem with Mason Raymond. Flames were rebuilding and the salary cap wasn’t going to be an issue for years, so taking a risk like that and having to buy him out doesn’t really matter. Bad contacts when your rebuilding are going to happen,but they compound when your trying to contend. The fact the organization hasn’t seemed to adapt is frustrating. I mean every team has at least 1 or 2 bad contracts so it’s not the end of the world, but I’d like to see the organization show they were learning more about their ufa process

Treliving makes the final call, but I have bigger questions form their pro scouting process and not just Treliving. Most of the problem trades/UFA deals come from what I would call questionable pro scouting Lazar Raymond Brouwer Neal It didn't take much scouting there to realize that these moves didn't make sense and weren't going to work. I give Treliving a small break on neal because it was difficult to project just how bad it would turn out, but at the same time there was more then enough there to not offer the contract they did. Pro scouting has long been questionable here I think. They have a few wins (Engelland and Lindholm come to mind) but their strength is certainly more on the amateur drafting side not the pro side.

This is what scares me about that part of the deal. city gives them first rights which limits bidding and thus lowers the market value to allow sometime to be built that will provide them minimal revenue moving forward. Would really increase the risk on this overall project and IMO ensure that the city would take big losses on the deal. That's really valuable land so if anything is going to go there it should be something that provides a substantial revenue source to the city. I don't know and likely understand he legal situation behind the first right of refusal, but I can't imagine the City would be keen on letting CESC build a stadium there.

Didn't realize this until now but the renderings we have seen in the media are actually from Rossetti, the company who has patented this design. They are probably one of many that have been consulted, but would appear there is at very least a proposal from them. King is quoted on their website. https://www.rossetti.com/work/project/calgary-entertainment-district

I don't believe anyone has actually built the "inverted Bowl" as outlined here. In the past King has said Columbus' arena is one of their design inspirations and it has some of the concepts of the inverted bowl but not all.

Their outline is different it doesn't stack, it overlaps

I may have put these elsewhere, but there are rumors that the Flames have already picked this design for the new arena. The video even has the Flames in it.

As I’ve said I don’t like the deal and wish the city did better but at the end of the day it’s done and I’m happy to see the vision and future come together. Exciting time for Calgary and will be cool to see how that areas comes together and the plans for the building. I look forward to my first game there already.

Where we differ, is I don't think it's simply playing politics when you are sticking to the values you've had since you been in council. Ok to disagree with those values and disagree with him but at least he's being consistent IMO. Also he did say the biggest reason why he is voting against it is part they have other needs and also due to the fact he's not satisfied they have discussed flood mitigation enough. I have no idea where Woolley stands and he's all over the map so him standing up against it I do find a little strange. another thing I like about Farkas is at least he is voting no, not just campaging for more time to likely vote the same way he was always going to. He's made a decision but I owuld agree Woolley is probably just playing the political game here and would wind up voting Yes anyway. I like politicians who try to remain consistent and stand for certain things like Farkas regardless if I agree or disagree with this point.

I can respect Farkas because he's been consistent. he's held town halls in his ward to talk about the arena and he campaigned on Fiscal prudence from day 1, voted against the Olympics etc etc. So him voicing displeasure over the arena deal fits with what he has always said and thus his principals and I can always respect that. It's not only him too Evan Wolley has been equally as vocal about wanting more time and in fact it was him who put forward the original idea to push it.

I would only question the work ethic of a few, but I'm sure they all put in the time I just don't think they are effective at all. They are starting to drop of the ball on just about every major project and most of the time the issues are so blatant it's really hard to see why they are struggling (Green Line for example). The deal may not change but I do think the potential is there for the public to force the hand of some Councillors. As i said before I don't think this is a good deal for Calgary (and honestly it gets worse the more you look at it) but I also don't think it's a horrible deal and it's probably the best deal they are going to get. But I'm a person that wants an arena so i'm ok settling for a bad deal but the more this drags on the more I could see many people not being ok with settling for a bad deal.

I think the declining confidence in council and they desire to delay this deal go hand in hand. I think if this council wasn't a borderline disaster then the consultation period wouldn't be as much of an issue. Be interesting to see how CESC responds because a delay is not good for them as the deal looks worse and worse the more you look at it.

this is me too. There is significant public consultation during an election and at the end of the day it's the public who hires politicians to do a job so go do that job. Sending every major project to public consultation is IMO a way to skirt around making tough decision and I feel like that's exactly how this council has been operating for awhile. People should have a say, but don't bog it down for a month when the result is probably going to be the same anyway. I'm also not of the belief that more public consultation gives you a better or more correct decision anyway.

An area has been discussed for probably a decade and it's been 3 years since CalgaryNext dropped and another 2 since they both walked away from the table. I think there has been more than enough time for people to share their opinion because I highly doubt an opinion is going to change very much by looking at these numbers. Those for and those against are typically in those camps for philosophical reasons that are unlikely to change based on this deal or any other deal. I think the public should get a lot of say in terms of ideas for what the building should look like and the surrounding areas but that can come after.

You get UFA after 7 years or age 27 whatever comes first. Bennett will only be at 6 years once the deal expires so remains an RFA

Maybe a tad under what I thought he’d get but right in the ballpark.

Given how these deals usually go it's fine and the city probably got the best deal they were going to. Bigger picture thinking, this is still a private corporation getting a much, much better deal than they should IMO. I think those numbers are very budged and the report I mentioned there says so as well. This won't be a very good economic deal for the city but it probably will be a good social one. Edit: Another feature of the deal is CESC is getting options to develop the land around the Event Center as well.