cross16
-
Posts
30,202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
517
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by cross16
-
Hard to say because what is the salary of said elite goalie. If you paying the 7million price tag for what an elite goalie typically cost that's going to impact the team in front of you. I personally don't think the Flames need an elite talent. They are a really good team, but under the aggressive system Peters played I think what you need is a goalie who can make the big stops. The volume isn't going to be there and they aren't going to need to be super athletic, but you need some who can confidently stop the breakways etc chances they give up. Part of the reason Rittich I think has been such a better fit than Smith this year is he seems to be that guy, whereas I thikn Smith is a better goalie when he gets lots of volume. JS Giguere, whom I believe you are referring to, was actually a Hartford draft pick. Flames acquired him in the Roberts trade. The best Flames draft pick, from a goalie perspective, in the last 30 years is Craig Anderson and they never ended up signing him.
-
Schneider went back to the ECHL so it's pretty unlikely he'd get the call. Just call up Gillies. This is a broken record from me, but you develop depth for a reason so use it.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
-
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
cross16 replied to rickross's topic in Flames Talk
Often hindsight isn't far, for example Bennett and even Mason over Demko to be hoenst, but Smith is one of those pick where you don't need hindsight. Was a pretty terrible pick from the word go and for me at least personally, never made sense. That being said the 2014 draft is also looking like a pretty big dud across the board. Almost as many players from the 2015 draft had made the NHL as the 2014 draft and % of players in the NHL from 2014 is the lowest in the last 6-7 drafts. -
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
cross16 replied to rickross's topic in Flames Talk
That "average" is also not taking into account that the general rule of thumb is it takes a minimum of 3 years to grade a draft. So really in all fairness to him we really should only be judging him on the 2015 draft. To take the "results" from the 2016 draft is still getting ahead of ourselves so IMO it only makes the results that much more impressive. Obviously that's bypassing the 2014 Draft but I agree with above that it's not fair to put that on BT. Generally speaking teams don't have good drafts in that transition years between GMs especially when the GM was from outside. Not enough time to change the scouting guidelines, standard etc. -
Stockton Heat Updates [2016-2017]
cross16 replied to travel_dude's topic in Calgary Wranglers and Flames Prospects
Schneider did get pulled in 2 of his last 3 starts and I beelive I read Parsons is back soon. -
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
cross16 replied to rickross's topic in Flames Talk
The funny thing about Bennet and hindsight is this place would have lost their collective mind if the Flames had past on him. He was the right pick at the time zero question about it and to think differently is to use complete hindsight. Bennett is starting to remind me of Ferland of a few years ago, he knows he has more potential and more upside but he's struggling to find what game is going to maximize that. Start of the year, he was the bull in the china shop, physical 3rd line grinder and that earned him a promotion to the top 6. Not wanting to waste it, he put a lot of pressure on himself to be that finesse offensive player and he's gotten away from the bull in the china shop attitude. Problem has been magnified because once again the guy can't catch a freaking break... Similar situation where if he can find the happy medium he can still carve out a really nice career. I'm not giving up on him personally. -
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
cross16 replied to rickross's topic in Flames Talk
100% agree BPA is subjective not objective like some like to argue. I competely reject the idea that there should be master scouting list or consensus among prospects. Your list and your BPA criteria should absolutely change and be adapted to fit the vision of your team and what style of game you want to play. The likelihood of this happening is pretty much zero so it's a pretty extreme example to counter the point. Most teams, and Flames are included in this, group in tiers so if you've already taken a goalie or two your list should be flexible so that you just pick another player with the same tier provided you have equal grades on both players. But if there is a goalie that is in a tier above everyone else, then I would fully support taking them even if another goalie has already been picked. The possibility or goal of drafting every element of your team is simply not realistic. You are going to have to make trades or sign free agents to fill holes and on top of that needs change all the time so if you draft for need what's to say that need will still be there in 2-3 years? Going into the Valamki draft the consensus was the Flames needed a forward but took Valamaki and how does that decision look now? Pick good players and you always have assets that you can move in trade. Reach for needs or pick players for other reasons you wind up with prospects no one wants (see Darryl Sutter) -
I will. But doesn't mean I can't be frustrated that it sure seems pretty clear that the org is really committed to Smith being the starter.
-
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
cross16 replied to rickross's topic in Flames Talk
I don't think there is, nor should there be, any consensus on how the Flames should pick. Should always just pick BPA anyway but with them having needs all over it should really just be BPA. -
Goalies have been playing well, but some goalie news today with a Flames twist...
-
I am a little frustrated by the fact that Smith was giving ALOT of latitude to find his game but Rittich has 1 bad period and they seem to have gone back to Smith as the starter. See how how it goes I guess but it's a little frustrating. I get the stats won't back me up but I honestly don't think Smith is even playing thst great. Teams been really good in front of him and he's gotten a little lucky, which happens and he was very unlucky to start the season. There are still a ton of holes in his game.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
Always hard to define because we don't see the background. He's more involved than simply and advisor though he is the assistant GM. He's run the day to day in Stockton (currently done by Pascall), he's helped run the draft and build the list, and he's handled some contract and trade negotiations. I'm not personally aware of any stories/players etc that you can directly link to Conroy so it's a tough question to answer but that's true of an assistant in almost any capacity. Enough people have mentioned his candidacy that I think he's generated a certain respect factor around the league in terms of his abilities.
-
funny thing is that the Oilers, in terms of shots against, chances, high danger etc, really are not executing better under HItchcock then they did under Mclellan. So I agree, it's that new coach bump. See how long it lasts, but looks like it won't last much longer.
-
I don't think this is fair. I don't have the numbers but there was a segment on TSN recently where one of their analytic guys did a showcase on Talbot and showed a major reason for his problem is he gets beat high glove far more than league avg and has one of the worst save rates in that area in the league. Combine that with how many soft goals he lets in, especially early in the games, and I just don't see how you link it to a team problem. Seems more of a Talbot problem to me.
-
Another goalie on waivers...
-
I think that's one of those moves were both sides are happy. Pesn badly needed that cap space and certainly would not have been able to give Fleury the money Vegas just did.
-
Interesting to see Murray's name on this list. Was reported that the Flames had pretty strong interest in Murray at one point. https://www.tsn.ca/tradecentre-five-goaltenders-who-could-be-on-the-move-1.1217436
-
Goalie news for the ABS crowd. I'm not a Pickard guy, nor do I think the Flames have interest but he's out there.
-
So the Klimchuk trade closes the book on the Flames rebuild trades. They officially now having nothing to show for either of the Iginla or Jbow trades and the 2013 draft is basically a bust now too, outside of Monahan of course. I get that technically Nielsen could maybe be a find and turn this around but I think it's unlikely. So Flames officially started a rebuild about 5 and a half years ago. They completely blew their rebuild trades, blew their first draft (especially depressing giving the amount of high picks) and for the most part blew their 2nd draft too. The fact that they have a competitive team today, let alone a team at the top of their conference is a huge testament to the work of Treliving and the hockey ops. Especially when you consider that they never drafted in the top 3 the entire time.
-
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
I think you need to get Smith a game here. Don't let him sit that long and with 2 games on the road I think it's also a good opportunity because Smith has actually been decent on the road. While I get most want to see Rittich against Vegas, I can also see the rationale for giving Smith that game. If you play Rittich against Vegas he then sits for 5 days which could be good or a negative depending on your perspective. So I think Smith gets 1 of the 2 games and IMO which game he gets isn't terribly relevant. I can get behind either plan. Rittich against Vegas and Smith against Arizona would seem to be the preferred route, but like I said I don't mind the other one either.
-
- 13,148 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
Conditioning stint is theoretically possible with Smith, but probably not practical. The key thing with any conditioning stint is the player has to agree and why would Smith agree to go to the AHL? Prout makes sense, he's literally sitting here doing nothing, but Smith is still playing and will continue to play. You also have a roster limit issue, as with Prout he's an extra body but you would need to call up someone to replace Smith. So who do you send down, and likely expose to waivers, just to try and get Smith a few games? That potentially gets you into a situation where you are circumventing waivers and to Deeds point that is where the commissioner can step in. That being said, conditioning stints happen somewhat frequently and I don't recall a circumstance the league has stepped in. Possible but not probable.
-
I still think Mclellan is a good coach and while I understand why they did this I don't think it's going to help. It's a bad roster, devoid of depth and devoid of puck moving dmen and thus unable to play the game the way it is structured today. Mclellan tried to get them to play a game that works in today's NHL and the roster construction held him back. Good coach or not, any coach who loses as much as Edmonton has under his tenure will eventually lose his players (see Peters in Carolina) and I thikn that happened here. Hitch will likely gt decent short term results but I think that roster is so poorly constructed it wont' matter much.