jjgallow

my guess is 5-7. and I'm okay with that.

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.

dude Ortio is still NHL bound, just late bloomer. wait for it.

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.

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.

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.

They get the Russians and Swedes and destroy everyone.

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.

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?

@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.

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.

just throwing those complements around, love it

Who was saying that? about no D in the top 10 https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/draftcentre/craig-s-list-after-impressive-u18-showing-axel-sandin-pellikka-moves-into-top-5-1.1960662 https://www.tsn.ca/intrigue-and-excitement-in-the-year-of-connor-bedard-at-the-nhl-draft-1.1976262 At least one of the buttons thought there was. but...don't get me wrong, your point is valid. The discrepancies are beyond wild lol. I was...shocked...to see the Flames pass in the D department. I'm not a Button fan, but I suspect he got it right with Pellika.

very tough call. a lot of them need d badly due to their history of short term decision making. traditionally, d are the ones that drop. i still think Tij, as much as I would like him, may be a moot point because someone will pick him over an incredibly good defenceman. We just have to know who that defenceman is. Because not all 6 of them will end up being difference makers.

yeah that's fair, it's just a salary question. he was the "unless we want to start eating salaries" bit for me. he good.

Mr. Andersson is sort of our last big play. Outside of things like Coronato, Honzek, Wolf. I'm not too excited about trading Wolf. But I would trade Coronato or Honzek, for future equivalent picks or better. Or as part of a package for a top, top D prospect. Of the vets we have, yeah it's kind of Andersson and that's it, unless we want to get into eating salary.

that was all pre-trade deadline though. We knew the spike in Markstrom's performance wouldn't last, and it didn't. He would need to have another year like that, and we'd have to wait until trade deadline, for him to have that value again and even then it would be very hard with him a year older. But hey, there have been crazier trades, never ruling anything out. But it's a bit astonishing that we didn't take it. One thing I did realize after: It probably actually helped our first pick placement, keeping him.

they won't do it because good organizations would win all the cups and bad organizations would spend decades in the basement. or at least that would be the fear. Meeting halfway would be nice though.

I wonder if there might be some salvageable staff. I mean I still prefer poaching detroit but sometimes you gotta mix it up

You remember me in the last draft. Wanted the D. You defending Honzek. Draft before that too. I'm still like that, but I think we should be picky. With the D available, should be able to get someone who has it all. Or Tij, but Then acquire a D to make up for it. You just wanna fight. I been there. Try taking the wife away for a few nights. Just sayin. In a redraft right now Seider would be unchanged. But some fell behind him, some have surpassed him. The ones who surpassed him did it with talent, and yes they can score, and there will be more of them by the time we do a 10 year redraft. He has a ceiling. I want to draft someone who doesn't. Don't get me wrong, I like Detroit. I hope they contend. They did most things right. Maybe not all

You would be surprised to know that in the NHL, it is possible to acquire players through trade, as well as free agent signing. I like Detroit and I like Seider and it's all just fine, but if that's the epitome of proving me wrong, you came up short. Seider is not yet a bonafide 1D on a great team. If he continues his development path then he could very well become that. Yes, I know he's got a good 2 way game. But it's still not quite enough. When people do the 10-year redraft, Seider's just not going to be on top of it, sorry. Or in the top 5. Lucky to be in top 10. Unless he's got another big development step coming, which he of course might, with his style of play. He's doing all the things defencemen finally learn to do as they hit their prime. And he's doing them early. But he doesn't necessarily have some of the other intangibles that the greats just...come with. There's just a few key things missing, and he could still learn them before he hits his prime, but they are HARD things to learn after the fact. D is a mess largely in part because the draft needs to be pushed back a year. It's too early to say if Seider is the best D in that draft. Ask yourself the best thing the Flames did with D in the last 20 years. Then load up on over-agers. I'll be happy if we draft a D, but to be completely honest I hope they are a little better than Seider if we do. He's very wholesome, I fully agree, but I'd still hope for a little more with a top 10 pick. Not that I'd mind him on he Flames, just saying.

there is only one GM in this league right now who would give a 1st for Markstrom. And that's the one. Fingers crossed.

thank God they didn't consider goal scoring and mess up by drafting Cozens.

my wife bought the tickets for that, because she's luckier ( for example, she found me )

that's the kind of pessimism we need!!!