robrob74
-
Posts
14,099 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
57
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
I'm not too happy with the way the organization let one of our best clutch goal scorers to play through nearly crippling injuries, when trainers had to tie his skates. It's an "admiral trait?" For him to be the team's player, but at the same time, it did more long term damage to the organization than the immediate gains at the time.
was it BT? Does he get blamed? Would Johnny still be here with Monahan? Would Tkachuk still be here if Gaudreau stayed? Would Bennett have developed into the 2nd line center if he played up the line when Monahan was injured the many times?
maybe JJ should be happy it turned out this way, if it didn't go this way, we'd still be mid pack mediocre, in one year and out the other... maybe it's a blessing?
I just hope the team sees it needs changes in the many ways it runs itself... develop, don't depend on one line, don't let the main stay to play when clearly is broken in many ways.... how many surgeries in one off season?
anyway, I think it's worth a discussion organizationally. We blame GM's because they're the main team builder figure, they get a lot of the blame or a lot of the praise when losing or winning.
I didn't like BT in the end...
-
1
-
-
Wow, so the Blackhawks hired an Indigenous women to work with them in bridging relationships between the team and local Indigenous groups to either change the logo or work with them in the multitudes of relationship building...
only someone in the organization made sexual passes on a consistent basis on business trips in hotels... the Indigenous women is suing them as they haven't lived up to their deal and for sexual harassment. There seems to be a culture of sexual advancements in the organization and the org maybe sweeping it under the rug? I read an article about it a day or two ago...
they will be relevant soon enough again. Winning org, winning lotto, getting a high 2nd...
-
Just now, cberg said:
True, but in 3-4 years who would be left that we really want?
I get that too, hindsight. It'll be hindsight. -
1 hour ago, cberg said:
Well at least Toronto was getting a top end RS D and top end goalie, two of their biggest needs, and freed up some money for additional D. The problem for the Flames is Robertson and Liljegren are probably not better than prospects Calgary already has and Marner isn’t a big game producer Calgary needs.
i wonder though, right now the prospects pool is still kind of bare and having guys fill needs while there is a shift to youth, which will take time, to insulate the new picks. -
1 hour ago, 420since1974 said:
Dallas has to make to SC Final for it to benefit the Flames.
Vancouver has to make to the Conference Final.
that depends, some here would prefer to pick at 25 than 29,30 or 31. If Van made it and won it would be 32...7 spots up, is it worth it?
-
13 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Ya it's too bad though. Not saying a deep rebuild is a guarantee to win the Cup but just saying, it's a necessary evil. Hockey decisions would say so. The business side of things, not so much.
It also depends on the year. Some have McDavid, MacKinnon, Matthews, or even Makar at #4. Meanwhile, Flames got Sam Bennett at #4.
As they say, time in the market is more important than timing the market. Don't cheat and shortcut. Spend the time there. But easy for me to say since I don't pay the bills.
Sam Bennett is a good player, but in other drafts, where he plays in a lineup he should have been a later round pick.
I agree, to let it flow naturally. They got lucky one year, played a horrible, nosediving Vancouver team that was at the end of their runs and at the natural stage a team reaches before the writing is on the wall...
They got lucky at drafting Peterson later... Got a deal on the Miller trade didn't they?
-
8 hours ago, conundrumed said:
What's worse is I liked Barkey more than Cowan last year.
I can't believe that I'm so wrong, it's so foreign to me. *tries to maintain a straight face*
It is ok, How many kids light it up in their year after they're drafted. They light it up for a reason. He still hasn't played any NHL Games yet, so could be just the one year.
-
18 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:
In 2022 the Flames couldn't weather the storm in game 3 in Edmonton.
Lets see if VAN can
I dunno if it was game 3 that did it. To me, it was Game 1. The Flames opened a big lead and then they showed a bunch of cracks in the foundation when Edmonton poured it on. I don't think the Flames really recovered from that. -
2 hours ago, jjgallow said:
Someone will be available that we don't expect to be. Only takes one team to make a "subjective decision" with their pick, which is highly likely.
Assuming there will be a surprise drop, the most likely scenario is that drop will be Russian
Has Any of the teams ahead of us gone way off board in the past?
I can think of Columbus and Montreal as teams that might have, but can't name the players.
-
1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:
Beckett Sennecke is a name worth knowing. He could be in the mix at 9th. Really good player, that's elevated during Oshawa's playoff run. 22pts in 16 games.
Right now though I'm hoping for
Buium
Dickinson
Catton
Helenius
my bet is we have a Russian in that spot... no reason, we'll, just all the Russian love lately. Maybe they're looking at some untapped Russian potential in other areas though, signing... -
57 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
What they're saying is sucker punch. Bennett's right hand sneaks in for a solid right to the chin. If you watch it in snail time, they have a point. But it's also stretching 1.5 seconds out to 1.5 minutes. lol
However you want to read it, that made Bennett look really crafty to me. Bennett isn't crafty, so I believe that was happenstance. I used to really like FLA and they gave Lomberg a home. Then Bennett I didn't mind.
But now with both Tkachuk AND Bennett, they have 2 of the greasiest weasels in the league. I'd love to see both of them get annihilated.
Though I still love Barkov and Lomberg.
but that can also be push. Pushing through looks like a follow through on a punch in slow motion, I've only seen the angle where its side and Bennett's back is to the camera on the hit. -
So the Bruins thought Bennett's hit was cheap? Playoff hockey, Marchand looks like he's gonna make a hit on Benny and then Benny insulates the hit but also kind of follows through with a push... I don't see it as egregious though. Anyone else?
lol
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Would CBJ be interested in trading down to #9 so they can draft Jiricek and unite the brothers? And should the Flames trade up to 4?
while grains of salt are had, I think conroy said 2-12 is going to go any way it goes, and the flames are happy with the quality that will be at 9. What would you want at 4?id prefer to package a deal to get the 10 or something...
id do
Mangiapane and Markstrom with salary retained, for #10.
or do Markstrom, Pelletier, Canucks 1st for 10 and Holtz.
I dunno if that is too much, I'm not sold on Pelletier these days. Get something if he has some value as a prospect... -
I'd like the Flames to dip their toes in some international waters for a change. While Baertschi and Valamaki are international by ancestry, didn't they play in the WHL?
not saying all WHL players first round, just could be good to try find a Pastranak, or other players that could be out there. A lot of teams passed on him, just using an example as trying something different.
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
Not even close. That's laughable.
But look at the bright side, you still have, like, 300 days before you start moaning about this year's pick. lol
no! That happens the second they make the pick! However long it takes to type/text it.-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, cross16 said:
Can we please stop with this off the board nonsense?
I completely understand if you didn't like the Honzek pick, really do. It was an underwhelming pick for me too and it's fair to want other players. Scouting is based on subjective opinions after all.
But to complain that the Flames went off the board is just such a wrong and tired debate. For reference, Mckenzie had him 19, Corey Pronman had him 12th, Elite prospects 15th. Yes some had him in the 20s too but that's scouting and the draft for you there is no such thing as consensus scouting and ranking. I don't find it valuable at all to try and put down draft picks by comparing them to a non existent board, it's not fair IMO.
I think it's far more productive to question whether or not the Flames have the right scouting criteria or values when it comes to the draft, instead of suggesting they should stick to some non existent board.
I see your points, and if they targeted him as a guy they really wanted but knew he'd not make the second round or later rounds, they weighed the pros and cons of how much they like him...give him the time to develop and grow into his body. Hope he pans out. Would love for him to develop top6. It takes deep teams to win cups, not 1.5 lines the way the Flames have operated. It's a good route to playoff economics, but not a perennial contender...
we had really good years and some really bad years.
I hope the picks pan out and they get a good mix to build a solid foundation.
-
38 minutes ago, cross16 said:
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.
Could 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?
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
I so want a Rantanen.
MacKinnon and Makar are too pipe-dream, so I'll take a Rantanen with a side of popcorn, please.
i think it's why they went Honzek last year. Hope it's the right choice. Tough to call right now.
id love a Rantanen. I guess who wouldn't? Haha
-
48 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
But I mean...actual contending...
elite 1st line D, forwards that weigh more than 150 lbs, goalies that weren't overplayed. leading standings.
Not just "finished top 10 in standings so we will go for it"
If it's not....imminent, then, honestly, i think there's an arguement as a small market team for rotating the older guys out even when you're making the playoffs. Because you Should have the pipeline to do it.
It's why I didn't get the forbort and Gus trades that year. Spend picks to up the slight chance of it breaking meaningful, kind of like seeing something on sale you don't need and buying it because it is on sale. -
29 minutes ago, sak22 said:
Well its actually a system where the odds of the worst team winning are worse than they were 15 years ago, but also a system that has punished 2 of the worst teams in the cap era the 2017 Avs and 2020 Wings who both picked 4th, people forget about the Avs because they still wound up with the best player at 4 and Mackinnon and Rantanen became 2 of the best in the league after that season, but again how does one try without sacrificing the future? There are no real hockey moves to be made when you don't have a surplus to give to fix a need because every position is a need. All it comes off to me is envy, no way if a system like that existed would've people been happy losing Tanev, Lindholm, and Hanifin for nothing just to improve lottery odds. When the Flames ultimately bottom out, nobody complaining now will be upset at the process if it works in our favor.
To your point. Why are most of us saying trade all the guys we traded plus ones we didn't yet? Sure a major reason is drafting higher, but also because we need more draft picks to get better and improving odds that one or more of the picks gained and drafted turns into a good player.
There are multiple reasons to trade away vets. Anyone traded for them are going for a cup so the draft pick gained means it might be a later pick anyway. A part of that trade off is possibly winning the lottery. They go hand in hand.
-
46 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Yes Cup contending. Why commit to Kadri, Weegar and Huberdeau if given a second chance when the team is going nowhere fast?
Also, if it's a Giordano, Tkachuk, McDavid, MacKinnon, etc... franchise level player, then commit long term and build around them to win.
I wondered if Tkachuk was a guy to build around without a C... as lone player he can't be enough... the Flames didn't have enough to compete in the playoffs when he was here.He works in Florida, we aren't deep enough for him.
-
1
-
-
Just now, redfire11 said:
So correct Without Markstrom this year no Flame fan would be advocating for an equal 16 team lottery representation.
yup, and if we lose the lotto it is fixed... ask Detroit and Vancouver how that feels. -
Teams at the bottom also trade for picks to get more picks, and I felt we saw Chicago try a lot, they beat the Flames a bunch the last few years...
we want to trade everyone away. Then we complain that the bad teams do it. We want to trade them all away so we get more draft picks and possibly high ones.
Thats why teams trade away picks because when all those picks you just got mature, maybe a decent team is built.
-
Where would the flames be if we didn't have Markstrom for most of the year?
Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation
in Flames Talk
Posted
I think Player Safety is a real issue. It's tough, as you have the Keslers and Monahan's who put themselves through so much. I get it is their choice...
plus hits to the head should be automatic and no room for subjective reasoning. or other kinds of suspensions. Attempted murder is still a penalized offence....
But that isn't a BT thread convo...