robrob74
-
Posts
14,355 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
58
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:
I would just really caution going into another rebuild.
It's very difficult to win the lotto under this format, the last few years lotto winners have been;
2020
1. NYR- jumped from 11th to 1st
2. LA- jumped from 4th to 2nd
3. OTT via SJ, a rare occurrence of staying put.
2019
1. NJ- jumped from 3rd to 1st
2. NYR- jumped from 6th to 2nd
3. CHI- jumped from 12th to 3rd
2018
1. BUF- worst team in the league and stayed at pick #1.
2. CAR- jumped from 11th to 2nd
3. MTL- jumped from 4th to 3rd
Let's look back at the Flames last rebuild.
We'll say it started in 2013.
2013 draft- No lotto luck
6th- Monahan. Absolutely the correct pick at the time and still is. Can't fault the team for this pick, no lotto luck, but to their credit they tried to trade up to #1.
22nd- Poirier. This felt like a reach at the time and unfortunately it didn't pan out.
28th- Klimchuk. They took Klimchuk right where he was slotted to go, I have a hard time being too critical of this one. I am a little surprised though that they went with 3 forwards in the 1st, especially in what was the 1st draft of the rebuild.
Unfortunately, the Flames whiffed on 7/8 picks. Hindsight, tells you though it wasn't a fantastic 1st round, the Flames have had 7 2013 1st rounders in their organization at one point or another and only 2 of them are legitimate NHLers.
2014 draft- No lotto luck
4th overall- Bennett. This was the right pick at the time and to be honest, if the Flames picked 1st overall, he might have been the pick. Is he still the right pick? Probably not. There's blame to around between the team and player.
The rest of this draft was ugly. The Flames went 1/6.
At this point, the Flames are 2 seasons into the rebuild and have went 2/14 in terms of drafting NHLers, both were their top picks. These drafts coincided with the end of Feaster and the start of Burke/Treliving.
2015 draft- this is where things become very interesting IMO. The Flames were projected to be a bottom feeder, yet again and be in the McDavid/Eichel derby. Of course, they overachieved and made the playoffs. Anyways, the Flames acquired Noah Hanifin, it's not hard to see him being the pick if the Flames had struggled as everyone expected.
For sake of the argument we will say they drafted Hanfin. This was a very good draft for the Flames, they draft Andersson, Kylington and Mangiapane.
2016- no lotto luck, Flames regress as everyone expected and select 6th overall.
6th- Tkachuk. Steal of a pick, you got the face of the franchise and two rivals passed on him.
This looks to have been a very good draft, the Flames were able to draft Dube and Fox(let's not discuss this) and Phillips.
So for those wanting another rebuild, just take a look back at the 4 drafts from 2013-2016. High draft picks are fun and exciting, but far from a guarantee. The Flames have 5 players selected in the top 6 from 2013-2016 and as constructed, are probably a slightly above average team. The Flames could very well burn it down and end up in this very same spot in 6 or 7 seasons, just because you select high doesn't guarantee Cups.
I think the one thing that needs to be considered is knowing the strength of upcoming drafts. The ability to project a draft to choose when to rebuild so its incumbent on your scouts to know how that looks.
I think the Flames chose to wait too long on the Iginla rebuild, by about 1-3 seasons.
-
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:
All good points, but let's face it, they were bad coaches for the most part.
What Ward has to be evaluated on is what his record was, what he did in-game to adjust, and what he did after a game to adjust.
Was his record due to the new coach bump?
The team breathed a sigh of relief after the BP fiasco.
In-game I felt he didn't make smart decisions.
It wasn't just the playoffs that the top line was getting more D-zone starts or playing top lines.
After a loss, he was ok.
No throwing playes under the bus, but demand better in practices.
Some of the healthy scratches and players given a game were curious at best.
It took till when that Bennett was played at center?
And I thought Bennett looked like a C when he played the 3 or 4 games in the season. He didn’t keep him there.
it really only took Ryan being unfit to play to play Bennett in that spot because I think there was really no other choice. He lucked out that Ryan was unfit and actually recognized that Benny could play there.
all the right things were said. Players have the chance to make an impression. He ended up going back to Ryan even though it was obvious Benny was the right choice. Luckily for us he noticed too. But for me, you just keep together what is working.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:
That’s my biggest concern with bringing back Ward. This more a personnel issue than coaching, but the team tunes their coaches out after a season. At least that’s what it looks like from the outside, noticeable dips in play from year 1, to year 2, regardless of coaching. Can’t trade everyone unfortunately.
Ward will probably end up with the job though. I just look at it as BT’s last hire and if I was him, I wouldn’t love hitching my wagon to Ward
plus, BT has seemed to be very loyal to his guys.
-
4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Well therein lies the problem. These key pieces can only be attained with a top 10 pick. Only can get there by trading a key peice away or by tanking. We fluked with Gaudreau in the 3rd round. So hard to rely on lightning striking twice.
or by a player falling (Barzal) to where you pick. But that’s so rare. Not often do you get a Gaudreau in the 4th round, and guys like Point or Pastranak are rare late as well.
Mangiapane, Andersson and Dube are good finds In their positions and needed for team depth, but we can’t expect them to be Top6 saviours and if we are, we are not deep enough for a Cup. I think they’re great 3rd liners that can jump up in a pinch. They have heart, but I still think size that uses their kind of heart is important to winning Cups.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:
But of the 4 coaches BT has had I'd say easily the best of the 4
Should have hired him instead of GG
If any of the other 3 had this ad their lastest season on their resume , I don't see anybody them getting fired.
Outside of Laviolette, and even he has a few .. no other option comes without major flags and questions..
There is no Quenneville.. ironically this is the prefect team to now hand over to Vigneault..
That to me just leaves one
I think it’s too early to tell. GG looked great in the first year and the second year he looked like Satoshi Nakamoto. Same with most of the first year with peters.
-
For me, I saw a team, again, playing a tentative game. For a skilled team they’re not a very smart team. It’s the same team that came back having to figure out GG after playing his system the year before and missing the playoffs.
maybe there was but-in, but to me, the fact they were just going through the motions doesn’t allow them to play with passion. To me that’s not second nature that full buy-in teams become. I saw it with the Bennett line, but aside from that I felt the rest of the team was treading water. I liked that they were engaged and skating, but also it felt like running on a treadmill, not really getting anywhere.
-
1 hour ago, tmac70 said:
I hear what your saying but thry are not the only two that were no shows. Mony is mony but Gaudreau has been keyed on. Most teams know the play orientates around him. Just imagine a line that moved with pace if we had a guy that could asssit in pushing the d back balance an attack, JG is a secondary threat now. Vancouver just lost out, but there was a team that stuck to the system and bought in, way better coached hot goaile. We lost as we were out coached players bought into a coaching system that is poor and our tender had one bad game. Does the top line deserve the heat partially but maybe they are not as good as we project them tobe
not only that I feel that this core has not fully bought into a coaches systems 100%. or 100% of the time.
I still think it’s coach. If players don’t respect their coach, they’re not going to buy in.
it’s a tough call because it sounds like Green is a hard Hash Rate, but then again is being demanding a bad thing?
-
Looks like we should have drafted Demko. That McDonald pick sure looks worse now! 😬
-
13 hours ago, travel_dude said:
So, what is the problem with the core?
Unless you can define it and point to one or two players that create the problems or fix the underlying reason, you aren't doing much.
We've had a variety of coaches, but none of them have managed to do anything to adjust to the playoffs.
Ward didn't adjust properly.
BP wasn't able to change even after we won the first game while giving up a ton of shots.
Gully was useless.
I'm not letting the team off the hook.
Maybe we had a string of extremely useless coaches.
Won't know for sure until some trades are made or a new coach is brought in.
Ryan is a good player, but in a cap world it's tough to justify over $3m for a #4C.
Gaudreau an Monahan, no shows more often than than they are for a better part of two seasons. We need more from those core players. They’re paid to perform every night and it’s not happening. That sets a tone.
-
1 hour ago, sak22 said:
I don't know I think you are being too harsh with the top 10 stuff. I think we are clearly better team than Anaheim, Ottawa, New Jersey, Los Angeles, Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago, Montreal. And I think if you watched Phoenix, Nashville, Edmonton, Florida, Toronto, Carolina, Columbus, Rangers, Winnipeg, Minnesota, with the same microscope you wouldn't be blown away with them either. I think they are where they belong when it comes to the draft, but whether it trends up or down we will see, but staying where we are at would be the worst. Not as bad as you think, but the problem is we aren't good enough either.
Oh yes and that’s what I said kind of. We played as bad For most of the regular season but have the talent that should be where we ended at.
-
For me, this team played just good enough or just bad enough to draft outside of the top 15 but for most of the season was bad enough to draft closer to the top 10. Not saying that the talent isn't good enough to draft where we are drafting, but saying the team played like they should be drafting in the top 10 this year. For most of the year they struggled but won in spite of how they played, and early on it was due to goaltending.
Again, like in season's past, they had a spike in play for around 7-10 wins when Ward took over, that catapulted us into playoff contention, and that part of the record made a poor playing team look better than it was actually doing. I feel like the team's success this year was winning just enough to get them into another crappy draft position despite their level of play for the year as a whole.
-
5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:
i think its more than just being likeable , if that were it then GG would still be here
people forget we were in the hunt again for 1st after an abysmal start
The radical line changes , were important because now , you can shuffle lines and players know the other when you have to do it
all the comments weren't " we like the coach " . it was " we were playing for each other".. that's a major improvement to me . never used to hear that .. it was always canned speeches
other thing is for the most part he knows where to put players to be most effective .. he got Johnny off the half wall on the powerplay for example .. but he forced them to be good in other areas just in case they were needed there .. bottom line is he's a teacher and they respect him . When they respect the coach , and he teaches them things they only keep going up
I'm not giving him the Jack Adams or anything right now , but to me i dont see a radical improvement available ..
I also wonder what you are saying to the players if you replace him..
we preach all the time that players need to earn and be rewarded .. I think Ward has earned it , what is it saying when you just give it to someone cuz they have a bigger name
I just haven’t seen a huge improvement though. They played tentative hockey the whole year and almost never looked natural, even in the playoffs. The Lucic, Bennett, Dube lime was the only one that seemed to roll. Maybe they look better after 50-60 games?
-
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:
I think one thing overlooked was the situations that burned us the most , the scrambles and close in pressure .. is precisely where we missed Hamonic . Not enough players dropping to block shots . Even the no stick goal , Dube should have been dropping in front of that but he made a half effort to get in the way .
In terms of coaching , not sure who that's on but right now I'm watching Dallas doing exactly to Colorado what they did to us. Not to let them off the hook but I'm giving more credit to Dallas now than I was before
I personally think Ward did enough . Just like the players , he gets to learn and grow as well .Were mistakes made ? Yes .. but I bet id we got to play some moments again there would be differences .
And it comes back to who is really out there?
I'll stand by saying only Laviolette makes me willing to change.
Babcock .. no
Boudreau?..sure let's bring in a coach that doesn't win in the playoffs to fix a team that doesn't win in the playoffs
Rierden? He was supposed to be the next golden child ..he just got fired..he's not an upgrade
Gallant ? I get the attraction, but he historically has a low shelf life .. didn't do much in Florida or Columbus, and anytime a coach gets fired and many can't figure out why.(twice).something is happening backstage
Carlyle? Haha.. just kidding
Another up and coming next one ? Let's not do that again
Our last 2 coaches were fired because they lost the team.. (and the other was starting the year looking like the same thing). That's why BT fires coaches .. I'd be highly surprised if he doesn't announce Ward here very soon
the thing with ward though is, it’s the perfect storm. He comes in at the lowest of the low and they slowly get better. They win a bunch but doing it looking like the shell of their former selves. They still looked very bad after the coaching change bump. Lindholm and Tkachuk carried them until they got silenced, then Ward reverted back to Lindholm on Johnny’s line.
He gained their respect, yes, but then i wonder if he can maintain it over a few seasons? GG, playoffs, and next year lost the room. BP playoffs and lost the room by the all star break. I wonder if ward has had enough time to lose the room?
i guess this makes it more of a personnel thing, or a coach they can’t get behind?
-
6 hours ago, travel_dude said:
Pretty harsh.
Part of winning is being able to steal a game, and stay in the other games.
We did.
Yeah, there was a meltdown when we brought in Rittich.
2 goals should never have gone in.
Good team lose.
Bad teams don't belong.
Not saying we would be beating VGK, as they are a superior team in the West.
Then again, it's hard to get a sense of what the team is capable of.
I don't buy into the line that Dallas was just getting rolling.
They had a better defense for jumping into the play.
Ours had trouble exiting the zone.
There's your difference.
Fix the defense and this team could easily be considered a contender.
that’s where it’s easier said than done. Every other team wants to fix their defence. Most of the time defence is drafted and high end guys get them in a trade.
can you use Monahan or Gaudreau to fix it? Is Lindholm basically a slightly better than Monahan at C?
-
21 minutes ago, ABC923 said:
So Dallas has the Avs on the ropes. Just curious, if Dallas wins in 5, or makes it to the finals this year, does that change anyone’s opinion on whether our team needs major changes?
not me. We had our chance to put a team out while it was down and failed to have the killer instinct to do it. They collapsed, choked when it mattered. They weren’t able to skate with them and Dallas didn’t even look that great the whole time.
albeit, they did pounce on the Flames at will. When Dallas decided to play, the Flames had no answer. I still see a lot of deficiencies.
We definitely need to get a D that can actually handle tough situations, and if that’s the case, maybe Talbot is enough, but could need better Goaltending, or the team failed to play while our goalies were hot, and possibly just not hot enough.
plus, if the Avs can’t play with them then we are worse off. The first game was kind of a gimme game.
but also I feel the flames acted as a team to get Dallas going, like a warmup to playoff hockey.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, travel_dude said:
One thing is certain.
Defense wins playoffs games.
TOR, CGY, EDM, WPG all had less than effective defense.
Ours was not able to provide much scoring.
5 goals in 10 games rom the D.
And we looked like crap in about 50% of the games.
Forget about trading the forwards, how about an actual NHL defense.
and that’s how I’ve felt for years. When other teams decide to put the pressure on the D caves and it has for years. It’s also the fact the team waits to start playing, getting a feel for the game instead of playing their game. But the D just isn’t strong enough.
-
28 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
We had the choice of Demko and MacDonald.
It was a poor choice.
No sense to it at all, save for maybe the thought that he was an average goalie behind a great team.
MacDonald was an average (at best) goalie behind a poor team.
TBH, how often does a goalie come out of the Q league?
I hated the pick then and more so now.
Demko at least looks like he could be a good goalie.
and that’s kind of what I was thinking in asking. I fear the Flames organization doesn’t assess goalies very well or make it a priority when scouting(?). Goalies are voodoo but also needs to be some scouting or development involved. Some organizations are better at it than most.
i guess that is just it. Some are good at D, some good at goalies, some good at C and others good at other things.
what would the Flames be considered good at when it comes to drafting? I think middle 6 nhl forwards. Not necessarily the best, but ones that play NHL.
-
2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
They develop smartly too. We didn't. Monahan and Bennett and even Baertschi were all rushed in for short-term objectives.
oops, and a goalie.
would Demko have been a starter by now for us? Maybe he’d be a reason to let Markstrom walk.
-
I am kind of in the Tampa section these days. Sure they have hiccups but they drafted high for awhile then built through the draft and traded smartly, developed their players.
studs all around! And they got lucky deep in the draft. Sure they’ve tripped a few times but when they trip, they trip big. Last year was a collapse but my bet is the president trophy winners won’t trip every year. They’re generally perennial contenders.
Bennett didn’t turn out so that’s a big one. But we’d still need a top stud Dman.
-
1 hour ago, JTech780 said:
For me the lack of production at 5v5 with this core is concerning, but the biggest issue with this core is the fact that they continue crumble when the going gets tough. This has been the M.O. of this team for years now. This core just isn't strong mentally. IMO they just haven't shown anything close to the ability needed to have success in the playoffs.
in the playoffs as the games get deeper power plays get sparse. It killed the Canucks in 2011 as the finals weren’t reffed the same and they died by the pp and lack of 5vs5 scoring.
-
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:
To say 5v5 mattered more is forgetting the obvious.
PP goals and shorties are usually the differences that matter to a game.
Bennett, Monahan and Gaudreau had 4, 5 and 6 PP points respectively.
Those were needed goals.
The more unfortunate stat is GA.
But it also shows that none of the above were scored upon even strength.
Bennett even.
JH and Monahan even.
So, while I agree 5v5 is important, when you skate EV to a draw, it's PP that matters.
If the other lines were all even at 5v5 we would be in the 2nd round.
are the numbers including Winnipeg? I don’t count that as it’s more a regular season round. The hockey is different from the Winnipeg series to the Dallas.
they just weren’t good enough. -
39 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:
I agree with the fact that with the current flat cap scenerio this is probably one of the worst times to try a rebuild or major retool. But what you are suggesting is basically what has been unsuccessfully tried for the last 10 + years.
Yeah, I hear you. The constant adding to this core. There have been a lot of poor additions with maybe one or two that has worked. Ryan is one, Reider is another. Rinaldo is what it is, but the rest have been failures.
I guess Talbot could be a success. I’d only be comfortable in giving him a two year deal. He might want three or four. 3 would be ok if the final year drops his cap.
4-4-2. That is 3.33M per season.
-
44 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
Sorry, I didn't mean to be hard on you I was just dying to say that for a long time (not directly to you). I often feel like we are great fans in the sense that we seem to be happy with anything. That's great during hockey season but during the offseason I think we should want more.
The thing is, everyone here seems ok with what is...well....not very good hockey.
So, why wouldn't they be okay with a rebuild? I don't see much difference other than a chance at something better.
At some point, the rebuild happens whether you want it to or not. But those are more painful.
see, I am opposite. During the season I expect more. The thing people are pointing out is this is 2020 and the days of playing a full 60 or a full season are over. But I expect more from the team and if the higher paid players.
last year I was not happy with a lot of starts but the whole, “it’s the third now blow ‘em out!” Was a thing and I would get lambasted when I’d critique the Part of the Game wHere the team wasn’t skating, or playing to their opponents’s level. The team out scored their deficiencies because they have skill. I asked what happens in the playoffs when they concentrate on Johnny and the rest of the team can’t keep up enough offence?
it was good hockey to them because there were a lot of comebacks and a lot of offence late in the game. But I wasn’t happy with how the team was shaping up. I expectEd and still more.
to say JH and SM had this many points is really stat cherry-picking. Yes, they had those points, but no, they didn’t score when it mattered the most AND the true reality is that the Dallas series was technically the first round. So there’s that. Plus the Dallas team really clogged things up and made it hard to play the game “our way.” I still think it’s being a bigger team with the ability to use a heavier body to make it harder for our smaller team to get around or through. But that’s perspective and others will differ.
-
Johnny is saying all of the right things. He says he’d like to play his career in Calgary
Calgary Flames Drafting and Development: Your Analysis
in Flames Talk
Posted
a part of me wonders how much of Gaudreau’s lack of adaptations are also coaching. Coaches should be pointing out or discussing new ways of doing things to create success in other ways. That’s not all on coaching but I also think a player needs to be able to take pointers or ideas to help them succeed.
we need Gaudreau to play like an 85+ point getter and not a 65+ guy.