robrob74
-
Posts
14,324 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
58
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
21 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
I agree with what you've written above. Quick question though...I've never really wrapped my head around it...
How did we sign Nick Schneider, who is younger?
He went un-drafted in his draft year. I think we signed him after the draft.
I think it probably depends on whether the goalie enters this draft or not. Did he not get drafted last year? Was it his first Draft year?
I think that players can sign after they've gone through a draft and were not picked.
I guess that adds to a question, do all players end up in the draft pool? Or does a player have to apply to be? I guess players can't just skip it and end-up a free agent.
So I guess it depends on whether he went through a draft and wasn't selected?
-
2 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:
1st year eligible for the draft so we'd have to draft him.
Seldom do goalies go high but in a year where the skaters are considered decent but no stars chancing a higher than normal pick would be in order. The stigma of 6-8 years development has been shown up by guys like Rath. By the 2nd round he could be gone. With another year playing against men (under contract there) he could be ready sooner.
The converse is the list of Team Canada WJC 'tenders who were good in junior & the WJC but a complete flop in the pros is long. I've already advocated trading our 1st & 2nd rounders but if he's hanging around in the 3rd (which I doubt) I'd chance it.
The one thing about the Fins is that they've been pretty decent at developing goalies. Just a thought to go with JJ's post.
-
3 hours ago, CheersMan said:
Thats good information, thanks for sharing. Reinforces what we've been seeing. We need more from Elliott.
It sounds like he had a good game tonight. From what I saw, watching the third, he made the saves when he had to. Nothing flashy, but shut the door.
-
Just now, travel_dude said:
I recall Joey McDonald saying something similar. It's bad enough to hear the coach rant about you, but to have a goalie that previously stopped 1/4 shots and lets in 5 needs to look in the mirror and shut the heck up.
It was the first ever coaches rant. It's not that terrible that the coaches ranted. I get it, shouldn't call out the players and players shouldn't call out their goalies. This team does have a history of defensive breakdowns. We had some clean hockey for awhile, but they've reverted back to breakdowns.
I also get he only saved so many. It's everyone's fault right now.
-
4 hours ago, ABC923 said:
Elliott only has 2 seasons (outside this season) where he is below .900 Sv%. You have to go back to when he was 25 and still developing to find a season comparable to this. Was he better in St. Louis? Sure, but he was there for five seasons. Has the defense always been stellar? And if so, why is St. Louis getting such poor goaltending this year in front of virtually the same defense as last season?
The only fair criticism of Elliott going into this season is he has never had to be the true number one. Could he carry the load? Legitimate concern for sure. But he hasn't been played like a number 1 this year either. He's on track to start pretty close to the same number of games this year as last. So I would say that Elliott had been proven a capable 1B coming into the season, but is failing to live up to being an average backup, so what gives?
Elliott hasn't been played like a #1 because he hadn't played like a #1, and has yet to so far.
-
37 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:
Seems the book on Chad Johnson is to go high for a corner. It also seems the book is in reprint and circulating to the teams we are playing. I hope I am wrong on this observation.
With the new smaller pads already being used in practices and about to be rolled out across the league for Feb 4, I am not going to hold my breath for either of our goalies to find their "A" game any time soon.
It is like you say, we have to start finding goals and fast. If we want to win, we have to start outscoring the other team. That means scoring 5-6 goals. But we are having troubles scoring this year.
Everyone else on here seem to think that we are doing well with getting shots on net too. It's not just some of the commentators. Steinberg and Kerr seem to think that it's not the shots, but the quality of chances we aren't getting. And it's on the players to get those chances.
And when they do get the chances, they don't hit the net.
-
5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Dave "Tank Job" Tallon? I wouldn't mind but I do feel the Flames should be past the tanking phase and should be on the up and up.
Tallon would be great for a team looking to strip it down to bare bones and live in the basement for a few years.
I think that was something we had to do 2 or 3 years ago. Making the playoffs now looks like it hurt us a bit more than it helped due to not having that high pick that year. Although, that pick is Hamilton I think?
-
5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
I would hope that the plan is to move BT up to POHO, and bring in a GM that he can work with. I suppose you could use Maloney in one of those two roles. I am comfortable with BT, in that he does not make huge mistakes. He is a good negotiator. If anything, he fails a bit in the trade market. Russell brought back enough at the time, but we haven't really added anything in trade that has helped this year. Bollig, Jokipakka and Pollock don't really cut it. Elliott didn't really pan out as expected, though that's not on BT for making the trade. It's as much an indictment of the team this year.
I think you're a little overly critical on his trades. Those ones didn't really involve anything and aren't ones that you consider blockbuster, or meant to make a huge difference.
You fail to mention the Hamilton deal and I think everyone thought the Elliott deal was very good.
-
6 hours ago, The_People1 said:
Cam Talbot has had a resurgence this season. I wonder how much of that has to do with the addition of Adam Larsson and Kris Russell along with improved Klefbom.
Larsson especially has been key.
And that goes back to the Flames who don't have that shutdown D for when it matters most. We must get one or we are going nowhere. The Oilers are able to answer or our top forwards. We don't have answers to theirs.
It's apparent that if we don't get a shutdown D, then it doesn't matter who we get as our goalie. His numbers won't look pretty.
I definitely agree with this. I think we have a good start to the D, but I've been preaching for a shut down the past few years. We say we have a good mobile D, but yes, we have four offensive guys, and they are all decent to good defensively, but sometimes make a bad decision here and there. There just isn't the shut down type who is heavy on the other team's stars.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:
I think where BT needs to prove his worth is trades from this point forward. We have needs. We have players that need to move on. We have prospects that will never get a chance on this team.
There are vets, yes, but if we don't want them, who will? It's not like the NHL is bustling with trades right now. It's a cap world and all GMs are handcuffed until the trade deadline.
Yes we have needs. Our biggest need is a top6 forward. This is another reason why I think we need to play Bennett at wing right now. It would (hopefully) stabilize the top6 for now.
-
This year the team has gotten a bit tougher. So the only thing I question is, are the Flames the type of team Burke envisions? Maybe not yet.
-
2 hours ago, jjgallow said:
On one hand, the Flames have goaltended their way to me thinking about eating my words by end of season.
On the other hand, at 15th overall in the NHL, this is, imho, a Worst Case scenario and the ultimate problem with band-aids.
With nearly zero chance of winning the cup,
With not exceptionally good odds of making the playoffs,
With nearly zero chance of a top 5 draft pick,
With the bad-aid relying on 30-something goalies, and our next top goaltending prospect (Gillies) not a clear AHL starter.
With Edmonton and Columbus clearly ahead of us in the standings in what appears to be a long term trend
With zero chance of acquiring prospects at the trade deadline
Essentially, more of the same drift we've seen over the last 10 years.
We've watched other teams take it on the chin in their rebuilds, and actually take their rebuilds seriously. We did the "right thing" by never really committing to any one thing. And floated through our rebuild with mediocrity, and no solid plan to advance from there.
But yes, our 30-something goaltenders have allowed us to be in the middle of the league. A definite "improvement".
Isnt Johnson 27?
edit: checked, he is 30. Not terribly old. Even if he became serviceable for another 5-6 years it gives us time for the youngsters to age into their position.
-
30 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:
For me right now , its coming down to , i do like our tandem better than last year.. were it not for the Knee Injury , I think Ramo played as good as Elliot . Cant put my finger on it but for some reason yes, Elliot adapts to the team in front of him more.. Johnson was used to a bad team in front of him in Buffalo, hence hes been stealing games here. Hes a better fit.
Personally , I dont see Elliot being resigned, Johnson yes.. and wont be too surprised to see Rittich get a look real soon.. i think he may be the next to arrive as a backup . hes been a Great surprise .
It's not that I don't like Elliott, I want him to play well, and he has from time to time, but not always looking pretty while doing it.
-
25 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:
This year:
Last year:
I have to disagree a bit on the team playing 1000x better.. After 41 games last year and comparing to this year they are almost identical. Goaltending has made little difference but has won two more games compared to last year too. Maybe last year it is because Ramo went on that nice run last year to bring us in contention but....
I do think that the team has finally learned the system and feels comfortable playing with either goalie this year, although the team struggled early on with both the system and playing in front of Elliott.
We have 2 more wins than last year after 41 games.
We have scored 1 more goal and allowed 13 less goals. Is that goaltending or D? or both?
We have 6 less shots and allowed 25 less shots against. This is the team not goaltending.
We have 10 more PP goals and allowed 9 more PP opportunities..
The glaring difference is we have been shorthanded 57 more times. Our goalies are not taking the penalties so....
This years team is better on faceoffs by 1.2 %
Well, at least this year we have reason to believe the play is sustainable. At least I hope it is. Like you said, the system.
I just feel like Elliott still hasn't been very comfortable in net yet. The coaches are giving him easier games to try get him into a groove. It's the NHL and no game is supposed to be easy, but his opponents, minus the Canucks, have been less than stellar.
I like how the team team is playing for the most part. PP and PK are coming around. It is a huge jump considering we were last about a month ago.
-
See that's where my theories on team play and goaltending differ. Last year, The team played like crap more than not, but the fans believed the goalies could and should prop them enough to win. While now, the team is playing a 1000 x better but now this goalie doesn't give very much comfort in how he plays but I gotta give him a break? Maybe I am being too harsh, but even when he wins I am not sure he is going to make the saves. Until he puts it together consistently, I can't change my mind.
Or he just isn't starter material and St. Louis already knew that. He had a team that played next to perfect D to prop his numbers.
-
I would even say that Elliott has been just as bad as our goaltending was last year. This year, we are playing better as a team overall. Last year he would have lost just as much as the goalies we had.
-
4 hours ago, travel_dude said:
Johnson was coming off a break. Over the long haul, Elliott is superior.
Both have had recent bad games, but are we expecting more out of Elliott because he was supposed to be #1? Bad bounces for the previous game against the Nucks. Johnson was better down low tonight. Let's see where we are after the end of January. Both goalies will face tough teams. Elliott has a history of coming up big.
Just because Johnson had a losing streak doesn't mean he was playing poorly. His opponents were more difficult as well. Elliot had a winning streak against bottom feeders and didn't even look good doing it.
I don't know I still think Elliot has to find a way to win that Vancouver game.
I hope he can turn it around, not much has suggested his game has improved this year. I take the bottom feeder games with a grain of salt.
So far this season, nothing in Elliott's game has proven he is the better goalie or superior.
-
12 minutes ago, CheersMan said:
Ramo’s fate was sealed with the injury, Flames had to look elsewhere. I think Ortio was much weaker than Elliott up high. Interesting comparison with similar games played though.
I feel bad though, as I really wanted Elliott to do well.
In terms of his style of play, has he always crouched as low as he has? I know it makes him looked dialled in, but I just feel like he's not all there at the moment.
-
Anyone else feel like Elliot looks a lot like Ortio?
I wonder if Ramo would be as good or better than Elliot?
I know the numbers do not say that is the case. And I guess he didn't even make the Leafs.
Is it just that Elliott isn't confident? I feel like he leaves the upper net open too much. Which was what I didn't like about Ortio.
-
I think I can get on a lot of what the article is saying. I always had a problem with the shots for against argument most anal-ytics cling to.
Russell is a decent D. When paired with Wideman, what do you expect? Plus, remember the first year he was in Calgary? We suffered really bad without him and then he came off injury and there was a noticeable difference. I think he is tops, a #4 D guy. But he'd be a great #5... but he will probably get paid as a #4...
-
15 minutes ago, JTech780 said:
So watching the WJC two players have really stood out to me for Team Canada, Matt Barzal and Tyson Jost. The reason I mention this is because they are both players we could have had in our system. Before I go any further I want to say that I am extremely happy to have Hamilton and Tkachuk on this team and wouldn't do anything differently.
That being said if we didn't trade for Hamilton we could have drafted Barzal and if we didn't draft Tkachuk, Jost would have been my next pick.
I just like thinking about the idea of having those two dynamic skill players with speed. Tkachuk does so many good things, fills so many needs on this team, but he does lack a bit of that dynamic quality that I see in a guy like Tyson Jost. Barzal is dominating the tournament so far and is looking like an absolute steal at 16th overall.
Again I wouldn't do anything different and happy to have the players we have, just dreaming about that skill that could have been.
I was and have been worried about the player(s) we possibly gave up by trading our 1st for Hamilton in a deep draft. If we could shore up another top4 D for next season, I think I will be happy with what we have.
Not having Hamilton makes me wonder where we'd be on D.
I guess I am coming around in this one.
How many dynamic players do we need? We have Johnny. Hopefully Mangiapane can develop into a complimentary dynamic player for lower lines.
Right now i like how our Top6 forward pairs are shaping up.
Gaudreau
Monahan
Bennett
Tkackuk
Pair the wings with a center.
It is a matter of getting some speedy skilled enough wingers to compliment those lines.
But I, like you , want another threat.
-
Is it time for the Flames to start Elliott? Has Johnson fell from grace? Or is it the team play? Again?
-
I think Johnson is a starter and this not not just a hot streak. Nothing in his game tells me it's a fluke or a streak. He goes about every play the same way, makes a 1st save, controls the rebound, and that's what you ask of a good quality starter.
When you've been a career backup, what games do you usually have to play? The 2nd game of back-to-backs. Games where the team is tired. Plus the rthym is usually off, and the team doesn't know what to expect or have chemistry. Communication with the players is important.
We are witnessing a goalie coming into his own.
-
21 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
I know you are stuck on the idea that the Flames do not know how to develop goalies. Probably nobody will make any arguments that convince you otherwise.
If Rittich's age means he should be better able to start right now, then why rush Gillies? Gillies came back from injury to a goalie on a hot streak. If you are the Flames do you ignore a goalie you scouted and signed because you have another one that you drafted? I thought that was what made the Flames bad in the past. Ignoring talent they have and letting them walk or not playing them.
We have two NHL goalies this season. Johnson was pegged to be the backup but is on a hot streak. Elliott will or should get back into form, so why would an NHL club decide to bring in an AHL backup or starter while they are still developing? Doesn't make any sense. Every team has goalies in the AHL. None of them are getting called up unless its an injury replacement or the current goalies are crap. Gillies has 19 games of AHL experience and 3 years of college, where he played a much shorter than AHL schedule.
It wouldn't surprise me if Gillies takes two more years to develop. Maybe one or two more year in the AHL. He could come up when he is 24 or 25. Is that considered a failure or good developing?
Is it that we have bad developing or bad drafting of goaltenders?
Flames Defense
in Flames Talk
Posted
Its why i wonder why us colleges don't allow jr players to play in college. They don't make money and they're now fighting to get paid a minimum wage to play.
I guess it is because the organization pays trainers to train them? Flights and room and board?