robrob74
-
Posts
14,324 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
58
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
Holy Satoshi Nakamoto Kassian with the big kick with his skate! That’s Blockchaining extreme potential damage.
-
23 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:
I agree! The team looks lost.
-
listening to Sarich he talks about his time being coached by Torts and how he taught different play situations. How they practiced situation by situation. It started at the 1:15:00 mark-ish, give or take seconds.
i think we need more grinding out the details and teaching how to defend in every situation. There just aren’t any details played out in the Fames’ game. I think it starts with D because they need to get the puck out.
refine the game!
They’re talking about how Players can be taught to play D but they can’t be taught to be skilled. So skill could learn to play D.
I think a part of it is pride and desire.
-
58 minutes ago, cross16 said:
If it were this easy don't you think Flames would have done it? Are you prepared to lose Dube or a 1st round pick over it?
This talk about Lucic's contract being buyout proof needs to stop as it is not true, Neal's is actually the rougher buyout. Cost you almost 12 million in cash and 6 years of 2million of dead cap hit.
Lucic cost you 3mill in cash to buyout and 3 years of 4.8 mill, 3.5 mill and 4.8 mill of dead cap and then 3 years of only 500k of dead cap. It's a sunk cost but the sunk cost was there with Neal so once you realize that it's the easier deal to actually buyout.
I don't like giving him as many opportunities as ward does but I have not minded Lucic's game this year at all. Playing his role above avg IMO. The contract will always suck but again this is a sunk cost that the Flames simply were not getting rid of so at least the Flames found a way to get a useful player out of it.
I haven’t minded his game overall.
I think if they break away from the loyalty to the player (Wards extended relationship) and the thought of his contract (the actual price tag) and view him as a 1-$1.5m player then he’s doing exactly what we expect.
if he can get a few more goals on the pp like he scored the other night then I am ok with that. Set it up like the old Holmstrom days and he can tip a few in, good! But that isn’t how they’ve used him.
id say there has been a lot more games that he’s tried than ones that he has taken days off on. Two against Edmonton and I can’t really remember when else.
I don’t expect a lot of fights. Maybe just a few timely roughings and a crash and bang.
-
48 minutes ago, lou44291 said:
This team tends to feel satisfied very easily. You can see it when they go up a goal in a game: every subsequent shift is half assed until the opposing team ties the game. Then there’s a little more effort. But god forbid the opposing team goes up 1 on us... then the game is out of hand and we don’t try to rally until about 2 minutes left in the 3rd. 👎🏻
They played well last night, but I’ll reserve praise until I see more. I also recognize that Ward simply reverted to BP lines for the most part. We’ll see how it goes moving forward.
It was like that for me in the Edmonton game, all the talk after with Loubardias and Wills was how they're back and how they've taken a step and grew immensely. For me, it was more, what do you do with it? What do you next? Can you maintain this play for a number of games. Can you find it after a game where that level of play has slipped away?
If this is the new NHL and what parity has created, then I don't know if this is the kind of hockey I want to watch. This up and down level of play isn't entertaining.
-
2 minutes ago, crazyflames said:
Lucic had best game of the year. He had lot of hits, he almost had a fight, he got a goal. If Lucic can play like this every game, then he is fearful force out there.
If he is going to be on the pp he needs to be a net front presence like was tonight. -
9 hours ago, travel_dude said:
Can't send him anywhere.
Can;t trade him unless he waives.
The only thing I can suggest is we wait to the buy-out period after next season and buy him out.
I believe that removes him from the protected list.
The cap hit is severe for two year ($3.6m and $4.9m).
Only other way is to ask him to waive his NMC, which means a cap hit of $5.25m for two years.
Any of these choices still screws the Oilers
how does it screw the oilers?
i actually don’t know.
-
5 minutes ago, stubblejumper1 said:
At this point I see no reason to dress Lucic for games. He is on pace for 6 goals and is not contributing enough offensively. He isn't fast enough to be effective on the forecheck. On many nights he can't give or accept a tape to tape pass properly. By his own admission he can't goon it up anymore because of the way the game is officiated.
I don't know the details of his contract, but if he can't be sent down to the minors the Flames need to scratch him. At this point he isn't helping the team and is below replacement player value. It sounds crazy, but they may need to scratch him for the remainder of his contract because he isn't going to get better over the next 3-4 years.
stupid trade. At least the Flames could’ve bought out Neal or put him in a deal with a sweetener. May have taken a prospect or a high pick. Horrible considering the cap ramifications we saw the next year with Tkachuk. I guess the way BT does business is like having a credit card.-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Honestly speaking, how important is it for us to lose the next 3 games?
typically this is when the Flames go on a small run to make us think it’s gonna happen.
-
Well, coach ward gets credit for wins where the team doesn’t deserve to win and gets credit for losses. I dunno, sure the players aren’t working hard, but neither are the line combos
-
4 hours ago, phoenix66 said:
I think people need to see how deals go down .
Do some for a second think the deal was done without Fox, and BT decided , " hey why don't you just take this guy too" . No.. at some point the deal hinged on Fox being included
What we do know, is that he already knew he wasn't signing here ..pretty sure all teams knew he wasn't signing here ..not a position of strength.. bottom line safe to say the deal didn't go down without him being included or another name we'd hate even more just to be able to trade him separately maybe for a 2nd rounder
Yes..we gave up an extremely talented dman.. but all reports point to Hanifin growing into just as good . And we have him locked up at a great price
Hamilton will be making close to $10M long before Hanifin signs his next deal
Also do we believe for a second ,that we'd pay Ferland $4.5? Fans would be screaming for BTs head..
I did say that in an earlier post in this thread that I would have said no if they still demanded that he was involved. I (myself) would not have added Fox to the deal and then I possibly would have backed out of it. I am saying that trading straight up player for player, the Hurricanes got the better deal. I still believe it. It's okay to have my opinion. I was disappointed then that he was in it and can still be. When we trade for players what we do with them after we've got them is on us, not on the team dealing them. It's not our fault that the Hurricanes failed to re-sign Ferland. Not only that, at the time, Lindholm was something llke a 45 point guy. Yes, he was an RFA, but we may not have had the ability to sign him to what we thought he was worth. That's part of the gamble. It's the same with Hanifin. There was a bit more control over the players because they were RFA's, but they also got a top2 D guy, and a lot here argue that the going rate for a top pairing Dman goes for a lot more, or exactly what we got, Hanifin and Lindholm and possibly a pick. We basically got a lot less back than what we paid for for Hamilton to the Bruins. Well, I get the idea that Hanifin is a 5th overall, but he sure hasn't played like a 5th overall at anytime during his career. And draft position does not count after they've been drafted. We aren't getting a 4th or 5th rounder if we trade Gaudreau. And Andersson would go for higher than a 2nd rounder if we traded him as well. Hanifin barely looks like a 2nd liner half of the time. So I still think that the deal was lost...
How many here were pissed at the Phaneuf deal? If we use hindsight we'd see that both teams lost. But at the time, everyone felt that Phaneuf was worth a hell of a lot more. The Leafs may have gotten a bit of a better deal... Anyway...
Long answer, but the short of it is, I did take it all into consideration... I still think what I think.
-
7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
I'm fine with the Dougie deal.
He's protected in CAR with an awesome defense, so he can just go nuts scoring.
Knew there might be some issues with Hanifin, due to the team dangling him for some time and the fans wanting him gone (some vocal ones at least).
Knew we would have trouble re-signing Ferland.
Suspected Fox was only going to sign in NY.
So, we don't make the Lindy deal.
We maybe get a 2nd for Fox from NY, or they just wait it out.
Essentially, we barely recoup the original pick.
We are no better defensively.
We get no new offense.
Maybe we get a better return elsewhere.
Doubt we would be any better off.
Baertschi for a 2nd got us Andersson, but that doesn’t always happen. I am just saying I think that the deal didn’t have to include Fox and it’s still a fair deal in my eye.
I just think the Fox deal should’ve been on its own and that would’ve been the 2nd that Rangers sent the Canes. It’s over but still critical of some of the picks the team gives up. It’s just kind of a down time for our team. I am just an arm chair GM.
-
38 minutes ago, sak22 said:
Can't say for a fact we get the same return a year earlier, I don't know if it was common knowledge that he wasn't gonna sign here when the trade was made, but there was some fan panic when he decided to go back for his junior year. If Brad starts calling every GM looking for a 2nd I bet every GM questions the kids intentions, even if the Rangers knew they were getting him they could wait it out, if the player was going to play college why would the Rangers risk an asset that season. They spent a pick this summer because they wanted to sign him this summer, if he had told Harvard he was 100% going back for his senior year the Rangers would wait until he hit UFA. We can always speculate, but I think its unfair to criticize someone for something you can only speculate on. It's a hard job, I think we're all foolish to suggest we can do any better.
ya, but it was still common knowledge he wasn’t signing with Carolina and they still got a 2nd. I know he wasn’t going to sign, and I think it was lip service by BT to ease the criticism. I just think you get more from waiting and doing the lone deal. Maybe that deal with the Canes doesn’t happen if he’s not in it, then you say no deal. At least that’s me.
-
9 minutes ago, sak22 said:
Fox wasn't a throw in. Remove him and the Flames got a 23 and 21 year old for a 27 and 25 year old with. At the time Hamilton was the best player, Lindholm has closed the gap but still the scales still tip in the Flames favour with Ferland being a one and done in Carolina. The thing with Fox is he was committed to play his junior year, the Flames know he won't sign maybe he suffers a major injury that year so it's best not to take the risk knowing a major injury in his junior year, Rags probably don't offer much and you can't roll with him going into his senior year. I don't know, I get many people just need to hate the guy for any reason possible, but it was a tough spot and IMO he came out of that okay.
they offered the 2nd rounder to Carolina which is what I suggested we should have gone for on a deal.
I don’t agree that it was an even trade even without Fox in the deal. It might be even, but even still, one year of Ferlsnd, you can’t know he’s not going to sign. Plus both Hanifin and Lindholm were unknown RFA deals. The Canes weren’t willing to pay them. Hanifin isn’t that great and Lindholm is good. The top 2 D makes the deal Satoshi Nakamoto!
-
I decided to check up on Fox. He has 29 points this year so far.
Gross!
I was pretty pissed at dealing him in that deal. I think it helps make that deal a fail. For me, that player should’ve been dealt on his own and possibly just to the rangers anyway. Even if it’s a 2nd rounder you get, he had the cachet that should’ve made for a lone deal, not a throw-in.
Hanifin is a 4/5 D With #4 upside (questionable?)
Lindholm 2nd line C or a good 1RW.
hamilton should’ve netted at least A Hall type haul... -
1 hour ago, cross16 said:
The longer Ward is the coach the less impressed I have become. I'm for sure in the camp that you can't lay everything at his feet and this is majority a player problem but at the same time it's also fair to look at Ward and say he isn't doing a very good job. Both are very possible and IMO are correct.
Between how big of a mess they are defensively and some of the really perplexing decision he makes he sure looks to me like a coach that is in over his head. He's really just making stuff up as he goes and trying it out rather than having a plan. I'm sure he is a good coach in many attributes but to me he's not looking like a head coach.
See if he can correct it here but the trends are not positive.
I think the coaching has been off all year.
I get giving Lucic playing time, as he was one of the only guys trying for most of the year. But rewarding it by giving him undying love on the PP is where I see part of the mistakes. Those little coaching decisions, I think, kill the room and the motivation. We see players are not motivated. It's the players, but I also think it's the coaching.
Earned never given, and they played.
Given never earned, they stopped playing. And they've been doing both of these off and on. I get that coaches have to go with guys they trust, but when those guys aren't going and they keep going with them, it's detrimental.
-
Just now, phoenix66 said:
wonder what the over/under is on a Lucic -Kane fight tonight .. ya gotta think Lucic is gonna be looking for a dance partner to appease the fan base
I don't need him to fight as much as I want him to hit, make energy happen, change momentum. Fighting might be a bonus. I still say, he was only a minor part of that game which had some of our best players quiet, and our D making errors that let the Oilers walk all over them. So for me, I want him to send a message, but not necessarily a fight.
-
18 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:
again , we are assuming it was him who declined to go.. ,most likely other way around .. .likely looking for another facejab to get him suspended again
There are ways to rough without taking face jabs. I also think the face jabs weren't really just face jabs, as he actually lunged onto the guy when he got suspended. He jumped at him and punched him a few times. Jabs, I think is a little underselling what he actually did.
But if the Oiler guy actually face-washed him, then he should be face-washing back and making a bigger deal out of it. There is grabbing the jerseys and rag-dolling that way instead of punching.
-
1 hour ago, CalgarySTL said:
I don't expect him to fight all the time... just hit some guys ffs, talk some Satoshi Nakamoto, shove someone, facewash, etc. Cross said "maybe some injuries flared up"... well, why the hell is he in the lineup then & why does it seem like injuries have flared up every time we play the coilers?... Because, he's played the same soft as baby Satoshi Nakamoto game all 4 times against them. Put someone else in that can actually do something to help the team, not just turn the puck over every time they touch it (ie Lucic). He shouldn't need to be "poked" to be "riled up" for games like this.... what a pathetic excuse. He should be benched, traded or sent to the minors. I'm done supporting his coiler loving Hash Rate
But Ward has "a long history with this player." So we will see him on the PP and a regular on the 3rd or 2nd lines. Plus his salary means he should get that playing time. How can you justify paying a guy to play 8 minutes?
I don't like it either! I was willing to give him the benefit, but he is trying my patience. I need a guy like him to be up for the big games. If it was me playing my friends, I would do almost anything to not lose to them. I would play rough with them, maybe not fight, but definitely hit them.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, JTech780 said:
My biggest issue with Lucic and everything after Saturday was when he said that the scouting report on him is not poke the bear so teams leave him alone.
He needs to find away to get to that level without being poked. We need him engaged every night. We don't need offense from him, just physical play and to be good defensively.
I agree!
I get that every guy needs to be engaged every night, but when you’re getting paid the money you are getting then you really need to be even more engaged. So yes, a guy like him definitely needs to be engaged and find ways to be so if no one else is poking the bear.
get on it! Our 5m plus guys have all been way too quiet all year.
i just think we need him to create a spark. I don’t expect him to give guys simple face jabs and full on rag doll someone , but at least rough it up a bit. Even if Draisaitl is your buddy, get in his grill! I hate losing to my buds and wanna rub it in.
-
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/flames-lucic-fails-answer-call-latest-battle-alberta/sn-amp/
He needs to get involved in a rivalry like the Flames vs Oilers. We can't have Tkachuk fighting Kassian and Baer while Lucic doesn't go after Draisaitl and Nurse.
I get what he's trying to say. When he's on the ice, the Oilers respect him and don't do anything out of bounds. For example, no Oiler was chopping Gaudreau or running our goalies.
Still, I feel the expectation on Lucic is that he become an aggressor rather than a passive police man on the ice.
I agree. Not that he has to rough guys up in the tussle it up kinda sense. He needs to make guys aware he is there. In the game Tkachuk got into Kassian’s grill, Lucic seemed somewhat enhanced then. since that game he’s been a passenger.
he basically needs to be the guy he’s been most of the year. Skate hard, hit a bunch of guys. If a guy gives an extra couple of whacks, rough him up. Maybe not as hard as his suspension but like that in a way. Guys get rough after extra shots on goalies all the time and don’t get suspended.
lucic needs to play engaged at all times or he’s basically Brouwer or Neal.
-
20 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:
EDM played well last night, but If they make the playoffs they are in for a bowl of disappointment.
Top ranked PP. Good luck getting more than a PP or 2 a game in playoffs. They’ve got almost 50 goals on the PP. Hitchcock once had a good line about teams that are too reliant on the PP, I’ll paraphrase but it’s something like “if you need your PP tonwin you games, you aren’t that good”
Lack of depth will do them in
I do think they're a bit better than we think they are. They have about as many lines and players as we do that can contribute. Our team has too many holes as well. I can't see us getting past the first round if we're not playing a Pacific Division team in the first round. None of the Pacific teams are very good. I actually think the Canucks and Oilers might be passing us in their depth... the oilers are closer, but their best players are better than our best players which put them over us.
-
36 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
The problem with the trades is that they essentially provided us with one capable D and one deteriorating one.
That for all the picks we gave up.
I'm more annoyed that Hamonic is as bad as he has been.
Perhaps we would be a better team without building the D that way, but we might be more like the Oilers.
Total crap on D.
My issue is more around the scouting of players signed as UFA.
Brouwer, Neal, Potter just to name a few.
Thinking that Lucic is what we needed.
Neal bought out would have been better for the team.
Trade at draft for a few measley picks.
We have good players, but are missing players in the 26+ age to build the team.
We have two decent partial lines.
We have the makings of a 3rd line.
We are missing players that complete the team.
Trade the 1st if it makes the team better for more than one season.
Trade one of the D if it makes the team better.
I think that makes a lot of sense. I just think you can end up signing Fantenberg in that process to make the D work.
Every team deals with injuries, and the Valamaki one hurt. But they did trade for Fantenberg last year, someone we could have kept. Not that he's a saviour, but there are other ways to build the D. It is a tough call. On the first talk of trades for Hamonic, I was all for him. Then the 2nd time the rumours came up, I was not into it. I didn't even like Hamilton.
But you're right.
I mean, scouting did find Andersson. If we keep our picks, maybe there are other guys that are up there.
-
12 minutes ago, lou44291 said:
I shared that same idea about Gaudreau in my posts after the playoff exit JJ. All I was saying was that no one was arguing against signing Gaudreau after his entry level deal expired, and nobody was unhappy with the new contract salary - though some hoped for longer term. After the playoff exit, I recall BT saying they’re going to rewatch and do a full diagnostic after the elimination. I recall him saying and being the opposite of happy. I just think the players have a lack of being unhappy with it. That’s my take.
I think management is doing a better job than most out there, you see it differently and that’s ok. Cheers bud.
I think the problem could be that we are seeing where we are at because we rushed the rebuild a few seasons and those high picks we didn't get are possibly lacking now. We don't have a complete top6 and by spending those picks on D we barely even have a top4.
I am unhappy with rushing the build in trades. I've been unhappy with it for years.
Now there isn't anyone to support for the top 6 forwards. Our top two lines are incomplete and it is showing. Last year we had 1 top line and PP. They stop that line and it's over, so they tried to spread it, and it is spread too thin.
I don't see anyone gifting us a top 6 forward or two to complete us. The mix is just wrong so far.
Maybe trading Gaudreau helps?
I dunno. I think he could still have a lot of value and some teams could give up enough for him. He would be a driver on the right team. Right now, really being the ONLY driver on the team, other teams know, stop him and you stop the Flames.
I think it's him and the coaching. They're not changing things up enough. Gaudreau is doing the same things, while I don't see the playbook changing either.
Oilers
in NHL and Hockey Talk
Posted
his own guy was on him