cross16
-
Posts
29,746 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
488
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by cross16
-
-
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:
Canucks actually had several chances to win yesterday's game without Demko but they couldn't finish. Beat themselves.
But ya, Demko to Desmith is a huge step down, much like Markstrom to Vladar. Week-to-week may as well mean season ending injury.
Like you said, two hall of famers. Flames need to draft those first. Buium and Parekh have the best chance to succeed playing that style of hockey. After that, we need to tankasaurus next season (or two/three) to draft a #1 Center. Be patient with this retool. After we have the players, then we can play the Avs style successfully.
Yes but as usual it sounds easy but you could tank for 10 years and never get players like Mackinnon and/or Makar that's all I would point out.
Just saying the Avs style of play is not easy to replicate no matter what talent level you have.
-
1
-
-
I know i'm not supposed to but I feel for the Canucks. That's a tough, tough injury to get now after the season they've had. I wasn't confident they were going to win the series with Demko but I really don't think they have much of a chance with out him. He's very key to their success.
Caught a bit of the Avs/Jets game and boy that is fun. What great hockey, what pace. It may be hard to replicate, given it appears the Avs likely have 2 hall of fame players in their lineup, but I wish the Flames would build in the Avs image. Their speed, creativity and fluidness to their game is the best to watch in the NHL so as a fan I would love to see that replicated here.
Avs feel like a goalie away though. Georgiev was better last night for sure but still not great. Avs don't have a ton of cap space so you have to wonder how attractive Markstrom would look to them with salary retained or if the Flames took Georgiev back.
-
1
-
-
On 4/20/2024 at 1:11 PM, robrob74 said:
To your point and hear me out; he's scored some goals. Grant that... i am sure Conroy is looking at it like, what else does he do? Is he killing penalties at a good clip? Is he scoring 5v5 vs just the pp?
im with you, is this the player?
How close does he resemble kuzmenko? Is kuz's contract the one to base the contract on?
Well tough thing with Kuzmenko is that contract was based off 1 year in the NHL. Sharangovich has a few years so there is more to base on but I do think there are similarities so it's a potential comp for sure. Kuzmenko is the better goal score and offensive player but I think Sharangovich is more well rounded. He produced on both the PP and 5 on 5 at a good clip, one of their better PKers too. Can play a harder role against opposition too where I think Kuzmenko you have to bury.
but I do think he gets overrated for his defensive game. It's ok, but it's not good, and while he owns a wicked shot he isn't great at making other around him better.
They won't do this but I think the more I look at the less i'd re-sign him too. His situation leads to a bad deal more often than not. Hopefully the Flames handle the negotiation well.
-
What a bizarre hire.
Got experimental with Granato so as is typical with NHL decision making now they have to go "conservative".
NHL has probably the most bizarre hiring practices of the major pro sports leagues
-
1 hour ago, robrob74 said:
how often can you get a Hronek like the Canucks did?
How many players are 3rd pair needing a chance? And do those teams that have them see them as that?
had we not traded for Hamonic, we might have had a decent player in, I think it was Dobson?
Although, maybe we'd have taken Farabee? Or other players not in the NHL now.
Think this really comes down to how willing are you to stretch the definition of elite.
Dobson, not for me. Very good, but not elite. Hronek not even close. Hronek was just the right pair for an already elite dman in Hughes.
If your plan is to trade for an elite dman and actually think you can harbor more then one then good luck but i'd reckon your are really stretch the definition of "elite".
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, sak22 said:
Round 1 begins on Wednesday against Tucson, entire series will be in Tucson with the Wranglers getting last change in game 2. So potentially no playoff hockey games played in the dome this spring.
The AHL sure is a quirky league when it comes to their playoffs.
I get it, but it's weird. Would be nice to see some Wrangler playoff games.
-
The "the Flames like to go off the board" narrative is one of the many really dumb ones that consistently float around here. Jankowski was the outlier and not the trend and even then that one gets pretty misconstrued around here.
I can very much understand they don't always pick who someone wants but if you go back and look at the first round I think your going to be hard pressed to show the Flames making mistakes. 2nd rounder hasn't been their friend but in the first round they've done well.
I think the imbedded criticism in that is more that people wanted them to have more picks and for the picks to be lower in the first round, which is a more reasonable argument/expectation then looking at the draft record IMO. I think the Flames are one of the better drafting teams in the NHL.
-
On 4/20/2024 at 3:48 PM, phoenix66 said:
Except you forget Yegor plays all 3 forward positions including center ... Power play, and kills penalties .. does he need more experience at all 3, sure , but in the end he's not "just a winger"
But .. what is gonna happen , will happen..
I was highly relieved when Connie outlined just what the plan and blueprint is.. it is 100% NOT bottoming out .. it's getting better every year ..kids what played this year need to take a step next year ..
He named Dallas as the model..
Veteran core at all 5 positions ..so don't expect him to be shopping Markstrom.. if NJ wants to blow us away , maybe he listens ..but if that happens expect a vet quality starter to come back thru the door ( Talbot?) I don't rule it out cuz when asked about Markstrom he did say " we'll see"
Trades will be for ages 18-23
Free agency ..expect some reinforcements from there .. likely nothing long term or high ticket but significant adds
From there..need to hit on draft picks on all rounds .. expect him to be more frugal with trading any picks than his predecessors. Quantity gives you a higher chance of hitting quality
Again.. we can hope..we can wish all we want , but that is the blueprint in action straight from the source
I would disagree with this. IMO Markstorm is not a Flame next year. I think that relationship has come to an end.
Just a question of seeing if Conroy overplayed his hand or not but I don't think we are in the "you need to blow me away" to trade him part of this anymore.
-
2 hours ago, pcs said:
Didn’t Connie say in one of his recent pressers that he doesn’t think long contracts are the way to go right now? I got the impression he’s not looking at anyone with a mind to signing any more than 4-5 years at a time. And if he’s saying that to the press the players must be aware of the messaging (unless of course he’s saying one thing publicly and other things to players/agents). I’d be surprised if he buckles to any demands for massive term at this point.
Believe that was in reference to UFAs.
The Flames had long term deal offers on the table for both Hanifin and Lindholm.
-
8 minutes ago, robrob74 said:
is Utah changing their staff?Not initially at least. entire franchise (players, personnel, reserve list and hockey ops staff) are transferring to Salt Lake.
-
I think Yegor's camp will start with the Hagel contract. Lightning gave him 8 X6.5 coming off a 30 goals and 64 point season and a 25 and 44 point season before that. Pretty similar, although I do think Hagel is the better player the comp is pretty spot on. They were only 1 year apart in age too.
I'd be surprised if the Flames can get him for 5 or less. Jason Dickinson just got paid 4.25 with a career high 14 goals in a season (finished at 22 this year), Bertuzzi got the 5.5 from the Leafs for career highs similar to Yegor (and in a flat cap environment). Zucker 5.2, Killhorn over 6. Even Mang at 5.8 is a pretty good comp for Yegor.
Unless he's willing to only do a 4/5 year deal I'm not in a rush to be getting that deal done, especially if he is asking for a Hagel style deal. I'd let him go into the season if that is the case and see what type of player you get.
-
22 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:
Agreed .. I don't put a whole lot of stock on those statements unless they're definitive . I do like Kadri shutting it down for example ..he likes it here ..wants to be here ..period
I would argue however that yegor should be a key piece. Yes it was a career year ..but that was due to where he played in the lineup. This wasn't truly a breakout becaue in NJ when he was given the opportunity to play up the lineup, he produced at the same rate he produced here .he just got buried down the lineup due to the Hughes ' and Hischers ahead of him. He got I think it was 22 in NJ his rookie year cuz he was played higher .. I think you can safely consider him a 25-30 goal scorer . Giving him the contract you tried giving Lindholm would make sense to me
that would be the exact type of mistake I’d recommend avoiding. 8 x 8? No thank you, that’s a brutal contract.i think the fact that he got moved down the lineup as Jersey got better needs to be taken into account. Sure he was great here and yes he is a good player but as the flames get better he’s going to move down the lineup too, or should. That needs to be considered in the negotiation.
-
I think the practice of sticking a mic into a players face the day after their season ends and expecting an insightful answer has to be the dumbest practice out there. I feel for the players who probably haven't even come to terms of what they need to do but yet we hang on every single word they said, not to mention you still have many reporters in Calgary still trying to work this angle of players maybe not wanting to be here.
I'll preface this by saying that I really like Yegor but the Flames have to be VERY careful with that extension. Yes I understand opportunity and all that, but this is a soon to be 26 year old player coming off a career year. Prioritizing that and giving them what they want falls flat far more often than it succeeds. Now i'm not saying that that they shouldn't sign him or that he isn't worth it but they should not be treating him like he is a core piece and just giving him whatever he wants to keep him here. It has to make sense because in the grand scheme of things Yegor is not the type of piece you should really be building around, he should be a great secondary piece. Flames need to keep that in mind.
-
3
-
-
11 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Because one player can't turn a whole franchise around in the NFL. Best QBs are usually found in later rounds.
NBA is arguably the most affected by 1 star player. They have a tanking problem too.
You'd want to do more research on that one.
I think we've already seen it in hockey where 1 player cannot turn around a franchise.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
The draft is luck based right now though. There is a lottery system.
For me, whether it makes sense or not is a matter of cultural acceptance over time. Restoring integrity to the fanbase cheering for losses and GMs from trying to lose up the draft ranks are more important.
Minimal luck yes but your proposing to turn it over entirely to luck. Doesn't make sense to me.
I don't buy the integrity argument. Why isn't that a thing in football where they have no lottery at all? I don't see an integrity issue here at all which is why i've always aid your trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist
to each their own though.
-
I was really hoping Vegas would play the Oilers so they could hopefully both knock them out and get the Flames an upgraded pick.
Not optimistic either of the Flames picks are gonna get upgraded.
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, cberg said:
I think it’s a matter of semantics, and timing. So let me ask, when our GM traded Tanev for an AHLer and picks, was he expecting the Flames to win more games the rest of the season or lose more? Same question with Lindholm? Same question with Hanifin?
Acquiring future assets and tanking are not the same thing to me. Of course he knew he wasn't going to win as much but it doesn't make sense to me that you would frame it that way.
Don't think your factoring in the idea that potential has value in a trade. Ok he could have traded those players for players to help him now but is that more valuable than what he got in return? No chance IMO.
-
51 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
I'm glad you said this because an unweighted draft lottery is really a reset of what it means to go through a "life cycle". Teams don't have to intentionally tear it down as deep and lose on purpose as much.
I'm not in favor of any system that based solely on luck. Team will still go through life cycles and if they don't get the right luck they could stay in that downward cycle for longer.
That type of system makes no sense to me.
-
17 minutes ago, robrob74 said:
So, they're moving to Utah and then expanding back into Arizona or Phoenix?
why not move the team back? I guess they need to settle the players in. Not fair to them.
I find it weird the Winnipeg team is called the Jets when we all know they're the Arizona team.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, cberg said:
Players tanking and GMs tanking are two different things. Shedding assets and rebuilding is GM tanking.
As i said above I don't agree with this.
-
Florida in 7
Bos in 6
Rangers in 5
Car in 4
-
Dallas in 6
Avs in 7
Nash in 7
Edm in 5
-
10 hours ago, The_People1 said:
You said throw the Oilers, Sabres, Islanders, and maybe Red Wings and Leafs into a bucket of teams that tried to "tank" and failed to turn it around successfully. So you are saying it exists but it isn't always successful.
We clearly have a different definition of tanking. Tanking to me is losing on purpose making intentional and deliberate steps to make sure your team is as bad as they can be. I don't think that happens anymore with the lottery rules. I would have a problem with this if teams were doing it but as I said I don't think this is occurring.
I do think teams shed assets and rebuild which to me is not tanking, it's just a life cycle or a pro sports franchise. That process comes with risk which is part of the reason why i don't think teams intentionally lose on purpose because often the risk in doing so outweighs the player your going to get.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, The_People1 said:
You are trying to say "tanking doesn't work so it's not a problem"
I'm saying tanking itself is a problem.
We are not the same.
we are not because what you describe as tanking I don’t think exists, therefore it’s not a problem.
Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition
in Flames Talk
Posted
I think you'll have a taker for Mang but the price is going to be low. Think at best you'll get a couple of mid round picks, maybe a 3 if you eat some salary. There might be value in waiting til the TDL.
As i've said before I personally would just take what I get and move on, even if all you get is a 5th. I think he needs a change of scenery and I think the Flames need the spot on the Backlund line to work in young players. That's more valuable to me than the picks.