Jump to content

jjgallow

SeniorMembers
  • Posts

    8,918
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

jjgallow last won the day on March 18

jjgallow had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

24,534 profile views

jjgallow's Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (3/3)

1.1k

Reputation

  1. you guys are so mush lol. it's cute. When they draft Tij, I'm gonna make a Huge thread about how horrible of a pick it was and force you all to defend him lol
  2. that's only because if we talk about anything other than last decade, the response is "way too soon to make a call" that's all fine but I remember your reaction to Honzek quite clearly.
  3. dude Ortio is still NHL bound, just late bloomer. wait for it.
  4. General comment: There is a lot of talk about how important it is for us to draft an elite D this year. IMHO, while that's possible, it should actually be more in this topic. The hard nuts of it is, we need to Acquire an elite young D prospect. Quite frankly, two of them would be better, if we set our sights a little higher. IMHO, the draft is only One way to do this, and if it happens that would be nice, but I really believe the focus at draft time should be "not screwing up". Because for sure, in that top list of D, there are more than a few future duds. We simply need to get the right guy. Whatever position. We need to get the guy that we think will go highest in a redraft 10 years from now. The need for an elite D is a Real issue, but I don't think it should influence the draft decision in any way unless there is a literal tie between two players. Of course D always imho should be rated a little higher than they are at the draft, but that's a separate convo. I feel like we should be looking at it like this: We should be actively pursuing an elite D. And quite frankly should already have them by now, easily before the TDL. We should be actively pursuing it instead of just hoping for the draft. If we acquire an elite D and then we get another elite D at the draft, great. Then we would have two, and something to get really excited about. We should always be looking to move players to get elite D prospects until we are good here.
  5. The worst case is the Flames pull a Honzek/Jankowski. And based on recent history, it is also uncomfortably likely. Flames haven't got the 1st round right since 2016 imho. You can debate 2017, 2020. And that's totally fine, not looking for a fight there. But, the chances of them going completely and wildly off the board, are much higher than we'd like. Maybe in the 50% range based on recent. We are all worried about drafting Tij, and that's a debate for sure, but at the end of the day, I'm worried about drafting a guy rated in the 2nd round lol. We should all just lower our expectations a bit and pray that they do something reasonable with the pick.
  6. I wonder actually if 2027 could be an even better year. Highly unlikely, but if any team does massively struggle for 2 years in a row you could end up the makings of a modern day dynasty.
  7. They get the Russians and Swedes and destroy everyone.
  8. I dunno. Haven't thought that far lol. But I think what you pay is a function of number of fans, not amount of stars. Obviously there is a relationship between the two. I would like to think that such a system would generate more genuine interest in the sport, and thus more fans, thus more revenue. I might be wrong. But I feel even in Canada there is room for a lot more growth.
  9. Hamilton should happen. Do some limits, like one player a year. I dunno. I feel it could work better than it is now. How could it possibly be more unfair than shipping them all off to Edmonton to be slaughtered?
  10. @cross16 alluded to this being something about nothing. I would say, maybe, something about something else. The reason the NFL and most leagues don't have this issue, is they don't draft 17 year olds. This whole convo is about the problems around bad organisations drafting kids. Raising the age would solve more than half the problem.
  11. It seems like there's two sides here which are far apart. If I can be any help, I'd like to offer to unify you in a proposal that you can all disagree with. Have a locale-weighted draft. Cale Makar. Landon Dupont. Come to mind. I think that if a player comes from your city or territory, you should have some kind of advantage over everyone else in being able to draft them. I dunno what that looks like, but back in the day, guys just played for the closest team (I mean like, back, back, back in the day) and it was just fine. When we talk about good organizations versus bad organizations, I like to think of more than team performance. I like to think of teams that give back to the community, help support new rink construction and upgrades, help kids play that otherwise wouldn't be able to. In that sense, I think the Flames have actually done very, very well. They should be rewarded for it. What's the arguement about this? Well it's that there's teams that need the top talent in order to promote the game and expand it. No they don't. They need to give back to their community and help foster hockey locally. Then when their city develops NHL players they can have first shot at them. Players get to play close to familly, means all sorts of less issues. Fans have something way more powerful to cheer for. So really what's the downside? Well yeah it's possible Toronto could run away with many cups, it's true. But maybe not. And, if they do, they would pick last in the draft and things would balance. Counter-balances could be put in place if they aren't already. Point is....all these guys who wanna play for Toronto because that's where they grew up? Let em. Calgary? Let em. To a point, of course. Maybe one player per draft. And maybe you pay a price if you have massive advantage. But I think it would be cool.
  12. just throwing those complements around, love it
×
×
  • Create New...