cross16

May 10

With the Leafs firing Keefe and opening up that job, which despite all the Leafs hate is one of the more attractive jobs in the NHL, this could wind up being a crazy summer on the hiring front. For the record I don't think Keefe is that good a coach so I think the Leafs made the right call.

There are currently 5 open positions and 1 Interim coach in LA who has not been confirmed.

To keep the gossip levels high, Rob Brind'Amour's contract is up at the end of this year. While the speculation is he'll stay does a sweep change that?

Jon Cooper only has 1 more year left on his deal.

There are rumblings that Dubas wants Sullivan out in Pittsburgh, but doesn't want to fire him. Could we see a swap of coaches there? Keefe to Pitts and Sullivan to TO?

Could be interesting

May 10

Just now, robrob74 said:

I'd it the playoff format as well? You have top teams playing each other early. Albeit being the second round good teams will play each other. 1/8 4/5 2/7 3/6. Ultimately 2/3 could be a second round bracket in a fixed bracket system.

didn't they used to go with the better record adjusted to play the lowest seed in the next round?

Yup and personally I'd go back to that format.

May 10

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

I think his name is Igor Shesterkin. He's sick and tired of hearing that Vasilevsky is the best goalie in the world.

He's taking matters into his own hands. lol

I agree. I do think the Canes are still a little too quantity or quality for the playoffs and would probably benefit from some adjustments. But at the end of the day still got to beat Shesterkin and he's on top of his game right now.

Feel for the Canes though. I do think that is a good hockey team that just cannot seem to catch a break when it comes to the playoffs.

May 9

49 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Again I don’t disagree, more playing devils advocate, but I think we starting to see a trend with an emphasis back on size. I think size has always been important, but I think teams are starting to put more value back on size.

Now I think this applies mostly to defense, but I do think you will see more emphasis put on size across the board.

For me I think Calgary really needs to start emphasizing speed. It’s a dimension that is sorely lacking top to bottom in the organization. Calgary was a below average team when it comes to speed last season.

If you can get that top end speed and combine it with size and talent you have a deadly combination.

Yup I hear you, its all a good and fun debate.

I think the last sentence here is what i'm getting at in a nutshell with Lindstrom. Is that combo there or do you want it to be there? I think with Lindstrom people want it to be there but i'm not sure it is which is why I think you see him all over different draft boards rights now.

I'm in agree on speed. Speed and skill for me are the priorities. Of course if you can get that with a player who brings size and physicality then score, but I'm not wiling to put size ahead of those 2 things. I do agree that I think Conroy values size more than Treliving did so see if that continues.

May 9

43 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Big=good vibes is Silayev, not Lindstrom.

Lindstrom uses his body to shield the puck so he's not just big and doesn't use it. He uses it to his advantage. Watch how he places the put away while taking contact and leaning in. That's tremendous confidence, balance, strength, etc and he's still got the edge work to spin 360 and make quick moves usually reserved for someone smaller. There were a few seconds in the highlight package where he came out of the corner with the puck and did some McDavid-quick cross overs and lightning stick handling to attack the front of the net.

The talent and numbers he put up justifies a top 10 pick, if not top 5. I guess it comes down to injuries and not being able to stay healthy.

I'd personally be more cautious scouting off highlight videos but that's just me.

From what i've seen I don't think his talent and numbers warrant a top 5 pick. Maybe 10 yes but that's where the injuries come into play. IMO he's a pick more based on projection that what he has done/is now because I dont' see the level of offence in relation to other players available in the top 10.

I think he's in the top 10 more based on what teams think he can. Teams are alwas looking for size down the middle so if you can get size plus any amount of skill I think it creates a situation where you are reaching. It's just not the direction I would prefer to go.

May 9

9 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Apparently Minnesota is willing to listen on Marco Rossi. I think Calgary should be giving Guerin a call. A skilled young center.

Agreed if true but also i'm not seeing the logic here. Minnesota needs players like Rossi.

May 9

Lindstrom gives me big=good vibes. I'm not going to deny he is talented, he for sure is. Does his talent match a top 10 pick? I'm not so sure myself. Reminds me a lot of Micheal Rasmussen.

Not a bad player to have and size down the middle is something all teams are looking for so I get it but it's not the direction i'd go, especially when you consider injuries.

May 8

Back in the day I was a big fan of unique stadiums and i would have advocated for unique designs. Stuff like the LA Forum, MSG, Saddledome, Maple Leaf Gardens etc were all really, really cool. Now it's expensive enough as it is to build these dman things, just keep the exterior bland and put the money on the inside.

but I do miss the iconic designs we use to get

May 8

I still think Dallas is right there and it will be a good series but boy oh boy is Colorado just humming right now. They might look better now then they did in their cup run.

If Georgiev can give them even average goaltending it's going to be very tough to beat them playing like this.

May 7

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

they did this last year too lol, but this time it's worse. looks like leaked to me.

Wasn't a leak. Order in the photo was not what it wound up being.

May 7

9th it is

Also Utah did not move up. Order does not change based on the pre draft lottery odds. No one moved up or down.

May 7

25 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

They haven't actually completed the draw yet, at least according to their own timeline.

sounds like that is a rehearsal board.

May 7

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

They will totally be yesterdays when the resulting players retire and the Flames are a contender with prospects.

@cross16 listed off like 72 GMs in a row that all had same behaviour. I think it's okay for us to want the actual behaviour to change, rather than just constantly saying it was in the past.

I also hope Conroy is that changemaker. Not proven yet, but reason for hope.

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

I agree with the desire for Changed behaviour, plus, to think just because most other teams or GM's do it so it is normal. Why be normal? Do things that "work" for this team, not the 20 other teams that have problems maintaining their systems.

I've said multiple times the Flames should be doing things differently. The Flames are a small market club and they should act like it. Focus on the draft, always be in pick acquisition mode and don't get attached to players as they get later in their career. Don't spend big in UFA.

I hope they learn and grow i'm just very skeptical it's going to happen because I don't think the direction is changing. Hope to be wrong.

May 6

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Whether it was the pro scouts or the players brought in over time that just didn't quite fit, the results were a lot of wasted picks for what Connie had left to use. The Gustophson, Forbort, Jatnkrok, etc trades were the ones that bothered me, since we just took on TDL players for the playoffs. Jarnkrok should have been a better fit, but perhaps the wrong players on a line with him. A lot of picks for a 12 playoff games.

What is funny that the pro scouts looked at Sharky and saw something there. Or the right time to call up Pospisil and Zary. I'm not exactly sure how the D that we got from DAL and SJS will work out, but only the Dallas trade is a costly one. I liked so far what I have seen, but who knows.

Pro scouting is the area that does not come up enough IMO when it comes to talking about the future. If we want to discuss what lessons the Flames are/are not learning from the past their pro scouting should be high up on that list. I'm not willing to give them credit for Sharangovich that's a matter of opportunity not good pro scouting, as is Kuzmenko. Now if i'm wrong on Miromanov then not were talking but let's see. for sure an area that needs to be improved. Okhotiuk is not giving me confidence that they've improved in this area but let's see.

There were a lot of picks spent no question and in some cases it's frustration. I don't mind the Jankork, Toffoli, Carpenter trades but ya when your spending picks on rentals to barely get into the playoffs that isn't good. When you spending a 2nd round pick on a goalie who you probably should have done more digging on to fit into your organization, only to lose him for nothing 1 year later that isn't good. That goes back to the situation though, if your building to win you need to get assets and assets cost you picks.

May 6

2 hours ago, cberg said:

Well as they say, they play the games on the ice, we’ll see soon. I just think it humorous how virtually everyone jumps on the Oilers bandwagon after they have a few good games.

They are the number one team in the NHL since the changed coaches.

I hate the Oilers and will be actively rooting against them but don't think pointing out that they have some elements of a good team means i'm jumping on the bandwagon.

May 6

54 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

I know just one, and they would agree with you.

Yeah things are not where I want them to be, it's true.

Your point...Conroy may have gotten lucky with arena deal: Maybe. But I dunno, this is the 2nd deal and they never let up for the 1st deal before it fell through 🤷‍♂️

As i've been saying circumstances. The first arena deal was never finalized to the level this one is (there was a final out clause and COVID was happening right in the middle of it) but the organization looked quite different. Tkachuk, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Monahan, Anderson, Hanifin all 26 or less. You can have the argument that they bet too much on that core but to pull that down and start a rebuild I don't think any logically or sane organization was doing that. That isn't the case this go around where they core of the team is all at the tail end or past their prime. Big change in circumstances.

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

I know just one, and they would agree with you.

Yeah things are not where I want them to be, it's true.

Your point...Conroy may have gotten lucky with arena deal: Maybe. But I dunno, this is the 2nd deal and they never let up for the 1st deal before it fell through 🤷‍♂️

I think you were right here. You look back at that thread, Conroy literally did everything we were moaning about him not doing. And the return was pretty decent. We had no idea then that Markstrom could have value. He started his tenure with "if you don't like it, that's okay, you won't be here". And he was extremely nice, he was very Conroy. But that's exactly what he did.

Maybe...just maybe, this stuff takes longer than we want it to. I don't like it...but I can live with it. Conroy is a guy that I believe is good at making people think decisions were theirs. Making owners think decisions were theirs, making players think decisions were theirs. I might be wrong, but,

Either way, you can only fault him with hypotheticals. He got that job done. Let's see what he does now. Most importantly, he didn't go veering off in the opposite direction.

Now if he messes up the draft, my love-in is over. But, this is an arguement about Conroy not going far enough, versus Treliving going in the opposite direction.

Actually it's not it's a discussion around how circumstances matter. As I pointed out when Treliving got the job he was in pick acquisition mode. he did the same things Conroy is doing right now.

As I said above if you want to levy critique on Treliving is that IMO he bet on the wrong players. I personally would argue that's hindsight bias but I could see that discussion, that he did too much to build around Gaudreau Monahan, Tkachuk. The "he's a short term thinker" is IMO product of the circumstances.

May 6

34 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

Markstrom should have been traded, we 100% agree. But, totally different spectrum, right?

In 2016, Giordano should have been traded. Imho But nobody wanted that, everyone wanted to forge ahead, even though it may have cost us a cup by now. We're not complaining about that though, we're complaining about all the picks that were sold.

Here's the thing. I fully admit there's truth in what you're saying and that ownership has a role here. Conroy for sure wanted to trade Markstrom, and for sure told Markstrom he would be dealt. Something happened. And I don't like it.

But, Conroy's not selling out. He's not giving up. He's publicly said that his mandate is to have a contender when the new arena is built. Well hello that is a rebuild mandate if I ever heard one, and for anyone else who's ever been involved in construction lol.

So what happened? Did the owners have an afterlife experience and change perspective?

He's never publicly said this implicitly no. I do believe that ownership did relax on the win every year because of the new arena (just like they put pressure on Treliving in his last summer to not rebuild in order to get the deal done) but I don't thikn this is as implicit as you make it sound.

but either way to answer your question, yes I do believe the owners did relax their perspective once the got the deal done but it should also be pointed out that a lot of this is being driven by the players saying no to them to.

I also think this is a lot of semantics. I don't believe the mandate here is win every year or playoffs every year. I do think there is an understanding of if you miss the playoffs, ok that happens but how do we get back in next year? The idea that this club can spend 2 or more years out of the playoffs is where the mandate starts IMO. I think the new arena changes that slightly be we are talking about the allowance of essentially 1 extra year (especially when you consider their goal was playoffs this year). If we want to call that a rebuild fine but I woudln't.

34 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

In my brief experience in management, I pushed back on owners. You would be surprised to learn that I was not fired. You would not be surprised to learn that I didn't like it. So I run things myself now with nobody above me to answer to. Just a team and customers to answer to.

It's possible to push back. In my limited experience. And I appreciate people who do push back. Conroy, I feel, is extremely skilled at this, to the point that he can push back without owners even knowing he's pushed back.

Case in point, his mandate of putting together a contender in the new arena. Who's mandate really was that? IMHO, a good GM helps make that mandate happen. What we are seeing in Toronto, is the opposite of that. Again. It looks, to me, like a GM trying to build a legacy in the shortest amount of time possible.

I'm in management and I push back all the time but did you work for Murray Edwards? I know I haven't but i know people who have.

time will tell but i'm not seeing the changes you are and the ones I am, dealing players for picks, is being dictated by the players and not the club. I am 100% of the belief that the Flames put big deals on the table for both Lindholm and Hanifin and the players said no. They wanted both here gave them market value deal to try and keep them and ultimately the players said no. Hard for me to suggest change is a foot when the behavior is consistent.

May 6

McKenzie's Updated rankings. Wroth pointing out his are rankings based on polling of a selections of scouts and are an attempt to get a consensus of what league is thinking.

I say because as he notes in his article he's never seen such a lack of consensus as he is this year. I like his conclusion though, I don't think it speaks to quality of prospects but more so the talent different is less so it's going to come down to what do the clubs want and what do they value.

Iginla still not ranked above the Flames pick at 9.

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/bob-mckenzie-s-nhl-draft-ranking-an-unpredictable-ride-after-macklin-celebrini-1.2116004

Quote

The lack of clear consensus beyond Celebrini — from No. 2 through to No. 10 and beyond — would be unprecedented. I’ve been doing draft rankings like this one for more than 35 years, and I don’t recall a year where the Top 10 is such a hodgepodge of opinion.

Will that change between now and TSN’s final draft rankings, which will be compiled in early June and released the week prior to the NHL draft in Las Vegas, June 28-29?

Perhaps, but this draft may simply have a lot of really good prospects with maybe not that much separating them, which may well put an even greater premium than usual on each club’s individual likes, dislikes, preferences and/or needs — big vs. small; offensive vs. defensive; forward vs. defenceman; skilled vs. physical.

May 6

29 minutes ago, cberg said:

Question: What part of the Canucks manhandled the Oilers all season are you discounting to start at the Oilers are pretty much a shoe-in to move on? I get it that regular season is different than the playoffs, but mostly differences that favour the Canucks(more rugged, less space, more D-focused…)?

I wouldn't say discounting but rather looking at current more than past. It's a factor but it should be pointed out that 3 of those wins came early in the season when Woodcroft was the coach and the last one came when McDavid didn't play.

Doesn't' feel super relevant to me other than i do think the Canucks can keep the games close which is why while yes I expect the Oilers to win I don't think it's going to be easy. Think it will go 6 or 7 games.

May 6

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

If we were so far away, then, how'd we get Tkachuk?

We were absolutely right there. We picked up Hamilton, Elliot, Stone, for....how many draft picks?
And we didn't stop there. Kept going, Smith...Hamonic (NYI used that to get Noah Dobson),

Just a constant stream of selling picks for short term solutions at a time when we should have been acquiring more picks and prospects. We played guys injured, we switched up coaches, and we achieved....

regular-season mediocrity.

For the price of an arguably generational home-grown player whom they were fully aware of.

Following season we were right back down there.

You yourself were frustrated by the direction. Very frustrated, you've said many times. You gave Treliving the enormous benefit of the doubt that he was made to be a puppet. But now we see the same behaviour in Toronto.

The way I see it, we should be happy because if Treliving was a big part of the problem, then we are Not doomed.

What you see as pessimistic, I do not.

I've never discounted the short term thinking and for sure I'm frustrated about it. I was frustrated when Sutter did it, I was frustrated with Feaster did it, was frustrated when Treliving did it (albeit yes a little less so because at least I thought he had some pieces worth betting on) and now i'm frustrated to hear/see Conroy do it too. I don't like hearing about the Dallas model, didn't like that he didn't deal Markstrom and didn't like that they went into the season talking playoffs. Not gonna hide from that at all because its the truth, but it's more true of the organization then it is the GMs.

Difference between you and I is you seem to really like to make this personal towards the GMs themselves. Treliving was the short term thinker and reckless with picks whereas I look at the environment and the mandate. The Flames did not hire Treliving to oversee a patient rebuild and nor did the leafs so why be surprised the behavior is different? In the first year on the job Treliving acquired multiple draft picks and came very close to adding 2 more 1st rounders in the 2014 draft until the clubs balked at the deal (mostly due to who was available to them). So this idea that he has this reckless mindset isn't really there and the behavior is consistent with the mandate and the environment .

May 6

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

My Leafs friends and family have one consistent hate. That's the guy. The media is relentless with Marner though.

I heard Tavares' name in the 3rd period of game 7 (ESPN feed). I'm certain that was the first time that I heard it.

It was that signing by Dubas that was completely unnecessary, and I've always maintained that. Ahh the things $11mil could have gotten them.

Very fair. I understood it and probably would have done it myself but the counter argument is very valid.

The Riely one felt to me like they knew they wre overpaying but felt they had to keep him because he was their defacto number 1 d. Think they fell into that trap but that was Dubas for you. He sure isn't making friends fast in Pittsburgh.

May 6

23 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

I do understand your frustration (with me lol), and I admit it does seem like there's a vendetta. But there's really not. Treliving's being discussed across all of hockey right now, and not too favorably.

There's a lot of true gentlemen on here and that's why nobody "yet" bumped this thread.

For me, it's not the man. It the short-term moves. Now if that's the owners, fine, but, man oh man it sure doesn't look like it now.

There is Sooo much...that I actually think we should learn from.

7 years ago, we agreed on something. 😅 (I'm joking, it actually happens pretty often)

The first mention of Cale Makar on these boards, by you. Our scouts knew what he was. Draft was deemed week, and upgradeable. We were artificially lower it in after numerous other short term decisions. You were intrigued, I was intrigued. He was in our backyard.

But he was a "project". Sure enough, Valimaki was ready sooner.

I don't totally discredit organisations like you think. I think they knew very well of Makar's potential. But they went with the D that would be ready the fastest. Big, not bad at anything, all checkmarks, no uncertainties, no warts. I feel the Flames knew, and went with the short term decision. As they did 95% of the time.

We got a draft coming up where we get to pick from long-term and short term success. We have a busy summer where we get to pick between long term and short term decisions.

All I am saying, is I hope we learn from it. And yeah, if we don't learn from it, that does actually vindicate Treliving lol. But hopefully we do.

No frustration from me i just don't get it especially when (as this post shows) there is usually little logic behind it and rather some weird conspiracy style bulletin board rationale. Someone not getting a dman taken 12 picks ahead of their draft spot is the GMs fault which is weird but i'm sure you'll connect the dots for me in some post that also makes no sense.

As I've said for multiple years now if you want to lay this on the feet of the GM and ignore the pattern that is the Flames organization, go nuts if that is what makes you feel better. I'm sure you said the same thing about Sutter, the GM, and i'm sure you'll say it about Conroy soon enough too because I don't think the Flames (or really any organization for that matter) are capable of hiring a GM that will meet your approval.

If you want to talk about what lessons you want the Org to learn or do differently I'd be here for that discussion but linking it all back to Treliving (especially when didn't do any of the complaints you have differently from the last several GMs) is where it makes no sense IMO.

May 6

19 hours ago, The_People1 said:

I'm reading a lot of fans happy the Leafs made a push back down 3-1... Felt the team left it all on the ice and they are proud.

Except for Marner. Leafs nation will turn on Marner and it's pretty much over for him as a Leafs.

Core Four shouldn't be anymore. Marner needs to go. Tavares evidently slowing down. Should either retire at the end of his contract next season or return at 50% paycut and stripped of captaincy.

Play Nylander as 2nd line Center and Tavares as 3rd line checking Center moving forward.

I think this is a fair place to be. Mind you the counter point is the "core" are not really the ones who brought them back so that's a challenge but the Leafs got back in that series by playing some more old school "playoff" hockey. Control the neutral zone, slow a team down, box them out, get good goaltending and count punch. LImitied offensive success but the fact they could change their change and make it a series I do think is a positive they can take moving forward but that team needs alot of work. not in the best of situations IMO.

I wish I could take the Canes to win finally but Rangers look too good right now and I think at some point Shesterkin>Andersson is going to matter. Should be an entertaining series though.

Boston looks like they are going on fumes right now so I will take Florida in that series as well.

May 6

12 hours ago, The_People1 said:

Obviously I hope they are a lottery team by 2026... But they still got enough star power to be a playoff team for two more years. Eichel, Theodore, and decent goaltending... But looks doubtful they will be legit Cup contenders going forward. Team is getting seriously old.

I think they've got 1 more year. They played very well against Dallas and I think had they had been a bit more healthy they likely win that series. Health is going to be the biggest question for them. I think they are talented enough to continue to be a playoff team but their age is leading to a lot of ongoing injuries. Hard to see them competing for cups in that state.

Dal - Col should be a heck of a series. COL got some questions marks in net but out front they were the most impressive team for me in round 1. Playing some high level hockey right now. I still think Dallas will slow them down and ultimately take the series but I think it's going to be close.

I've under estimated the Canucks all year, and while I think they will give the OIlers a handful it's really hard for me to see them winning the series. I think they are very capable of slowing down the Oilers and keeping games close but then it comes down to can they put enough pressure on the OIlers D and Skinner to expose that? Can they keep McDavid/Draisaitl and the PP quiet for a entire series? and if alll that fails can their goalie steal at least 1 game? I think they need Yes to all 3 of those to win and that's a lot. With Demko I think he could steal them a game or 2 and that would make it more of a toss up but right now I think the Oilers move on.

May 6

For reference, number 4 has the puck. So on top of the fact that iMO that player heading off didn't leave the ice before the puck got into the zone, that IMO is clearly too many men. I get there is an unwritten rule about a grace period for guys entering the box but 3 players on 1 in that short vicinity violates that. Blown call that the Wranglers were right to be mad at. Pelletier had to be restrained from yelling at the officials as they headed off the ice.

But to be fair this is really a game the Wranglers should have won in regulation. You tempt your own fact in sudden death OT so bad call or not not fair to say this cost them the game. They had opportunities especially during a 4 min PP early in the game where the had the puck in the o zone for almost the entire 4 mins and didn't score. Their PP is as basic a PP as you can have in hockey and that's a big disappointing consider I think they've got some pretty good skill on it for the AHL level. It was a big factor in them not winning this game as CV took their fair share of penalties.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Videos

Events

Gallery

Posts posted by cross16