robrob74
-
Posts
14,099 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
57
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
Take back a Chabot or Hamonic to make the money work? Or another cap dump. I guess it sucks we had to give a 1st to get rid of Monahan... horrible deal.
but I guess would that work? This is just for fun and convo, by the way...
-
1 minute ago, The_People1 said:
Trade Andersson + Markstrom + Canuck's 1st for OTT's 7th overall.
I guess it costs a lot to get that pick-
2
-
-
Prefacing, the Flames won't be doing a full tear down rebuild, otherwise, I don't think Conroy goes after guys who can play now.
If we trade Andersson, what is Andersson worth? Is he not worth a decent 1st rounder?
-
38 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
They will totally be yesterdays when the resulting players retire and the Flames are a contender with prospects.
@cross16 listed off like 72 GMs in a row that all had same behaviour. I think it's okay for us to want the actual behaviour to change, rather than just constantly saying it was in the past.
I also hope Conroy is that changemaker. Not proven yet, but reason for hope.
I agree with the desire for Changed behaviour, plus, to think just because most other teams or GM's do it so it is normal. Why be normal? Do things that "work" for this team, not the 20 other teams that have problems maintaining their systems.-
1
-
-
It depends on whether the Oilers continue to get Regular Season Reffing or if they start to move toward Playoff Reffing.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
My Leafs friends and family have one consistent hate. That's the guy. The media is relentless with Marner though.
I heard Tavares' name in the 3rd period of game 7 (ESPN feed). I'm certain that was the first time that I heard it.
It was that signing by Dubas that was completely unnecessary, and I've always maintained that. Ahh the things $11mil could have gotten them.
makes sense! Divide that up and that's 3-4very good depth players that win cups.
-
3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Obviously I hope they are a lottery team by 2026... But they still got enough star power to be a playoff team for two more years. Eichel, Theodore, and decent goaltending... But looks doubtful they will be legit Cup contenders going forward. Team is getting seriously old.
injuries sometimes drop good teams to lotto, and some of those teams, once out, they're checked out. -
Looks like Dallas is going to win. 5 min left.
-
3 hours ago, The_People1 said:
"At his current level"... But isn't that the thing? Every prospect looks like a super star against their peer group right now but every prospect would only be a 3rd liner at the NHL level. They all have to gain more XP, add more ATT, DEF, and STA points. Yakemchuk is no different. He's 3-years away from NHL ready and his skating can improve in 3-years.
What's great is he's got grit/intangibles that many of the other top prospects don't have so you get a special prospect to work with.
I'm kind of tired of getting guys who have to work on skating, or they tend to be small, just want guys who don't need to concentrate on having to build as a skater. I think it keeps our team full of pluggers. While gaining NHLers, we aren't getting super top end talent, enough required to compete for cups. -
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:
If you look at Gaudreau before they worked on his defensive play, you might see a somewhat one-dimensional player. I know that JG brought other things to the table that Kuz maybe doesn't do, but then again Kuz is able to withstand hits a bit better.
I tend to think that you can find the balance with a player you hold to account, but also provide some belief in his abilities.
Johnny was able to play the same D right away. He did it one year and then not again until Sutter arrived. I think in the d zone he's always been bad but he could always pressure the puck out back check -
12 hours ago, conundrumed said:
I think the idea of moving him now is counter-intuitive. The idea of acquiring a player that perhaps just needs opportunity has pretty fleeting success. When you have success with that, I don't think it's very savvy to go ahead with, "okay, let's trade him now".
There's more at play imo. It took him awhile to settle in, but he kind of found a way to do it. Now he hits this offseason knowing what to work on, where they see his fit. So I think it's still an adjustment period.
Add, now you've probably got a player that's grateful for opportunity and being given a purpose.
It's not very compelling to turn around and say, "well, we'll get better value trading him now because we won't be able to afford him, won't fit our window etc etc".
These are made up excuses disguised as foresight. Same goes for Kuzmenko. Give the players an offseason guided by your instructions, for pete's sake. You can't just throw everyone you've just acquired to the wind because of the possibility that you'll have to pay more for what amounts to your successes. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face. Plus, you haven't completed the opportunity that you're giving them.
I'm happy knowing that there is no way that Conroy is going to manage like that. Nor do I think anyone would be allowed to turn a franchise into a chaotic misadventure. "But, but...draft picks". The potential of giving away NHL players for zero should easily outweigh that.
only way to keep the player is if he wants to stay in Calgary. All depends on their ask in relation to our ask. -
And, Conroy did say they were looking at what is available in UFA.
I doubt ownership would be into it, but I'd love for the Flames to get assets for being a cap dump for some teams that want to give up assets to get some cap relief.
-
If we were able to deal Markstrom, that opens up a bit of cash, on top of what we currently have available, there is room to cash in.
is stamkos and Sharingovitch very different? Does Stamkos have game left? I don't wanna sign extra money to a guy and then they struggle to score. We made that mistake before. Not saying he's a James Neal or even Ovi, but Ovi kind of fell off the face of the earth there for a minute.
-
44 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
It's never clear cut, you take a risk either way for sure.
Phaneuf is interesting because we're at the 10 year mark, and a little past.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/2010/20-years-of-hindisight-the-great-2003-nhl-re-draft/
on the other hand Phaneuf is not interesting in the sense that he had a whole lot of unrelated off-ice issues.
Basically in a redraft, he's unchanged. Would we have drafted him again knowing what we do now? Hell no. But assuming all the other teams also had hindsight, we wouldn't have gotten much better in that spot.
It was a very low scoring era for D. No 30-goal scoring defencemen to compare to. So sadly, the "wait 10 years and look at the redraft) is also frought with difficulties. but adjusting, generally the D who could put the puck in the net did better. Just, 15 goals was a lot back then instead of 30.
Not a lot of strike-outs that year. but, the ones that did strike out are interesting.
Brayden Coburn: 6'5 giant, with great defensive intelligence and skating.
-Couldn't score a goal to save his life
-NHL career was same. Loads learned these skills later and surpassed him.Beware the giant mature players in the top 10 who can't score. We have a few of them this year, and most will probably go onto have long NHL careers. The question is, will they be remarkable.
The real story of that draft, the big learning, is how Weber got drafted so low imho
I don't mean to imply he was a bad player, just that if he wanted to work on his game he maybe could have been more dominating.-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, jjgallow said:
I question the defensive vision, many aspects of defense, like position can be taught and instructed. Very hard to convince me that this guy isn't talented enough to learn it.
Is he high risk high reward? yeah.
When you've got the picks that we do, and you know only the top 5 will be near guaranteed stars, you have to take that high risk high reward. have to.
Well, I see it as a half-truth. He's 6 months older than Parekh, as an example. He's got that extra season in junior, yes, but with very limited minutes. I see this mattering maybe slightly more with forwards. But with D, their development is so much further out I think it really loses its relevance. You're looking for trajectory and you're looking for no plateauing. Here's the thing. Of these 7 or so D that we think are special in this draft, about half of them will show zero improvement next year. basically. Just how it goes. And whoever drafted that half will get a little nervous. Dude's showing an insane improvement curve.
If we can all agree on one thing here, it's that the current draft eligibility ages are ridiculous. We wouldn't be having 90% of these debates if they just pushed the ages out a year like a normal sports league.
I dunno if that's the case all the time, if it was that easy guys would learn it. phaneuf's downfall was that he felt the team should be happy with him as is and he wasn't willing to grow beyond that.
if they're willing to learn, or are able to pick it up is one thing, but you waste a pick if they don't catch on. Similar with E. Poirier, he had all kinds of speed, but wasn't able to put it to use. He was a goal scorer, but when shutting it down he had nothing else.
-
3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
That would be a great trade. Husso is an upgrade to Vladar. That 15th overall pick could do some damage for us. I would love the NJD or BUF 10/11 picks because that's Tij territory... but something good could fall to 15th. Perhaps Yakemchuk or Jiricek is still there at 15. If not, then Greentree or Connelly... Hage, Sennecke, etc.
we'd have to trade Vladar as well or buy him in the A -
Eric from the Athletic mentions Detroit might be in the market for a goalie. He suggested that Jersey might reengage talks on Markstrom, but if those don't garner results, could Detroit be interested in our Goalie?
he suggested Husso and a first could do it. But the flames prefer getting a center in any Markstrom trade.
begs to question, which center is out there that can aid a Markstrom return?
-
Is Heiskanen that much worse than Makar? I think the difference is whether you want a specific kind of D.
-
10 minutes ago, sak22 said:
Petterson was part of the 3 elite afterwards I referred to, Necas is good but not in that class and I'd put him down the list behind guys drafted after him like Suzuki and Thomas.
yup! But mostly pointing out the quality taken after they took Patrick that year that they missed out on. Still a big blow. -
1 hour ago, sak22 said:
I’d rather have there problem than Philly who took a consensus top 2 pick and while 3 elite players went after.
You also have petterson & Necas but those are more hindsight in that draft -
7 minutes ago, cross16 said:
It's an analytics take on it. I think what the stars have done a nice job of doing is focussing on players with skill, talent and production and ignoring some of the traps of size and "potential". They take players who if they hit on will be stars, and if they miss can still carve out a depth role.
Contrast that to the Flames and in particular the picks of Boltman, Kuznetsov and Stromgren. I think in all 3 of these cases they Flames took players for the wrong reasons. Botlman was always a hard one to see but Kuzentsov they took him for size and Stromgren size and straight line speed. The problem with both is neither had any history of production so your basically trying to develop skills that arn't really there and that lowers the ceiling. Even if the Flames were right on Stromgren/Kuzentsov I think you are looking at a bottom pairing dman and a bottom 6 forward. They took a gamble and in an area with a low probability of it paying off.
That's essentially what he is saying.
That is a very large hyperbole considering how good Heskinen also is. I love Makar too but that's not as egregious as you make it sound.
I think it's more that they didn't really describe the analytics that I noticed, from the post.
-
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:
They also picked Heiskanen and passed on the future greatest Defenseman of all mother time. It may go down as the biggest missed draft opportunity in Dallas Stars franchise history.
But ya, get lots of 1st and 2nd round picks and draft safe. Take the obvious pick and don't outsmart yourself.
who did they skip on?
-
4 hours ago, cross16 said:
This is an interesting thread related to the "Dallas Model" idea and what the Stars did to have some success. Talks about some trends that the Stars used. Long story short, you arn't going to get there by taking long shots and flyers, you need to take players who had a good chance to hit.
The good news story is the Flames are pretty good in this area. Sure they have some misses (Kuznetsov, Boltmann, Stormgren are the primary outliers here) but what is really key to point out about the Stars is they made their headway in the first 2 rounds. That's where you can avoid the flyers and bet on talent so if the Flames can keep acquiring more picks in this area they've got a shot.
It doesn't really say much about their scouting, other than the fact they picked those picks at those draft positions. What were the players rankings? Ok, they draft well. It isn't actually saying what they say, that there is something telling about their picks?
-
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:
Well, on one hand, I know what you are saying because if Gaudreau and Tkachuk stayed for big money, then I don't feel that's enough firepower to truly win a Cup. On the other hand, we spent that money anyways to lock up Huberdeau, Kadri, and Weegar so the Flames dodged a bullet but stepped on a landmine instead.
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:Two wins in ten playoff games for Winnipeg in the past two seasons. Sure, tough matchups, but not good enough.
They’re pretty committed to that core too. A core that’s been largely underwhelming, aside from 2018.
That’s what the Flames could have been if they extended everyone. Think they dodged a bullet.
there is also spending assets to compete, trading for Monahan and Toffoli costs a lot. Something the Flames did their last year of those two, Tkachuk and Gaudreau, understanding it was an all-in year.
I was excited for the bet. I bought in, understanding that was the chance. I should have known better.
I was also hoping Hubie would have shown better.
I think Sutter was correct in his assessment of the team, but he also really soured me on the team as well. I get they canned him for it, but I think it went on for too long, the way he treated people and the media.
I get it's over. But is it? Or did they can him to save face?
2024 NHL draft - A New Hope
in Flames Talk
Posted
Ummm so can every team not be last place in the league? What does it take to make every team make the playoffs, make every team not last place in the league in the same year?
That's not possible.... there has to be some teams not making the playoffs, some teams in the very bottom. Its unavoidable.