robrob74
-
Posts
14,099 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
57
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
2 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
That's why Reaves was out slack-assing on the 1st and 3rd goals. lol
Do they even watch hockey?
might have been an article before the last game. I know they hated the moves and signings in the offseason. -
6 hours ago, conundrumed said:
I'm glad they stayed with Swayman. He is clearly in the Leafs heads, and has been all year.
I kinda wonder if it wouldn't have been a sweep already.
Boston may need Ullmark at some point, but that point isn't now.
Still impressed as heck with Boston's 3rd line. They're a handful for any team, I think.
Leafs continue to play Reaves, Brodie on LD. Wow. Coach much?
read an article by editor in leaf... that site based trereliving all year on signing Reaves, but in the article I just read was praising him in the playoffs as being super impactful, like the only thing working for them... if that's the case there is a lot more wrong with the team.
they'll find out Marner is super injured. Nylander still injured...
-
6 hours ago, conundrumed said:
Dallas has cost control on a developing prospect, vs a 3rd liner at $5.8. Can't see it working out. @cross16 likely correct. Mangiapane has become a salary dump. Painful, but probably true. Also murmurs of his unhappiness, as ironic as that sounds.
Some days, my hopes exceed reality. Hate to see so much time invested turn into such promise and then come crashing down. At the end of the day, we have...hmmm, let's see, do the math...carry the 1 over....okay. Zero large, physical wingers. Coleman the only one that's close. Leading scorer...imagine that!
Maybe $5.8 can buy one?
edit
Okay, Pospisil. He's making inroads being one. He's kinda proving what we lack.
May not be true, but it seems we usually only ever have had one since the rebuild started after iggy was traded. It seems to be a weakness the org has had in scouting.
We had to sign plugs, like Bollig, and others who seemed like their role was the enforcer, which was why I think we got England.
i was at the game he fought two or three Canucks at once, was so fun!
But I think we've relegated one or two to the role as a second or third thought instead of it being a drafting mantra. Guys we can sign instead of making it part of team building through the draft.m
although, we did draft Ferland and Posposil. -
1 hour ago, cberg said:
Yeah, D wins championships, but you also need enough offence to win games. I was thinking this morning how many SC champs over the past couple decades have been led by "superstars", versus not? Not sure who are the superstars? Crosby probably tops of them all....
Since 2000 these teams have won a SC:
NJD-Brodeur, Niedermayer
Colorado Avalanche-Roy, McKinnon, Forsberg, Sakic
Detroit-Zetterburg, Lidstrom
TBL-Stamkos, Vasilevski
Carolina-Brind'Amour
Anaheim-Pronger, Getzlaf
Pittsburg-Crosby, Malkin, Fleury
Chicago-Kane, Toews
Boston-Chara
LAK-Kopitar
Washington-Ovechkin
St Louis-
Vegas-Eichel
In this same time period Calgary had Iginla, Kiprusoff.... never quite put it together, although 2004 in retrospect should have been.
PS: Great Stromgren game-winning goal for the Wranglers last night.
you can also add Makar to the Avs.TBL also had Hedman and other pretty close to elite D, and Point?
Pits had an in-prime Letang who was bordering on Elite. I dunno if some might consider him that.
Didn't Anaheim also have Niedermayer when they won? Detroit also had Datsyuk. And Colorado, did they have Rob Blake when Sakic and Forsberg won?Chicago had an elite D in Keith, Seabrook great at defending.
Boston had Bergeron and the weasel guy .
LA had Doughty
Ovechkin had elite C with him and can't think of the D.
St Louis has close to elite D and a solid forward group. Probably as close as Calgary will get to if they skip ahead of the retooling.
Since it's the way the organization tends to trend, I think them and Dallas is kind of how I feel they should build, also Carolina.
Draft well and build and shore up a solid core, keep drafting well and only trade the tertiary players once those players can be supplanted by younger players.
i really think there's a solid foundation built on all those cup winners and a commitment to the elite players to add around them. What they all have in common are solid building and years of it.
in my mind, they built then sacrificed futures once the window opened up, and instead of sacrificing future to fill holes quicker thus maintaining holes.
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
I have not watched Russians this year, so my opinion is virtually zero. Whereas last year I watched a fair few with Michkov and Simashev. Just in reading, I don't think the top 2 this year are as good as the top 2 last year.
Artamonov seems like a total wildcard for where he might land.
As far as the Flames, I'd say they have 5 really solid bullets in the chamber. They should come away with a nice mix of skill and potential. Potential is definitely the most under-rated quality, as your trying to project guys 3-4 yrs out.
Jiri Fischer's kid, Lukas, comes to mind. Plays for the Sting. He's an honest 6'3" right now, but is likely not done growing. Chances are better than avg that he'll top out at least 6'5". That would change the dynamic of his ranking right now. So they say he's raw. He has great skills, but it's expected that he's still growing. He likely won't be around at the Dallas pick, but I'd give him heavy consideration if he was.
Because there is a lot of potential there, and lineage, of course plays into it. Jiri's like 6'6" and his older bro is 6'7" if I remember correctly.
So it's pretty fickle between what a kid is now vs @ 23yo.
I don't envy NHL scouts, it's such a fine line.
For the record, I still think Kerins and Stromgren are our best prospects. People tend to write things off way too early. I also think Sam Morton is a sneaky good add. Older, but hey, if he wants to be a bottom 6 C at 26-27, I'm all for it.
You can't just have 4 top 2 dmen in a cap world, or you better be deciding which ones to trade to boost other areas that will undoubtedly be weaknesses.
Look no further than the Leafs and Oilers. You can be very O-centic if you like, but you're going to have big problems with D-centric teams and stellar goalies. A big problem.
Kind of obvious, I know. You need to account for more than potential stars when drafting.
I wonder if it is a coincidence that Conroy traded for a bunch of Russians and have Russians in mind for the draft or signings? Might start fostering a community comfort for some up and coming prospects. -
22 minutes ago, cberg said:
Question for all you draft experts: How many players in this draft have a realistic/possible ceiling of a/ Top Line, b/ Top Pair D, c/Starting Goalie? Who are they? How many in the 1st Round?
tough call. How many times has any one here actually watched any of the prospects? How many times live in person?
as 18 year olds they can be ahead right now but then drop off the face if the earth once they go pro.
To me, and this is going off of radio announcers, conversations here, this draft is D heavy. After some top forwards there might be a handful of top/middle sixers? My bet it is closer to the Poirier and Klimchuk draft. Either way in many deep drafts teams still miss on players and draft guys who don't make it.
-
On 4/25/2024 at 2:15 PM, The_People1 said:
I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup. So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups? But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year. Still possible. We shall see.
depends on your analysis. You're looking at it with one lens, Cup. I get it's the ultimate goal. Should be.
What I see is a team that drafted well and hit on three very very good players in one draft, and so I think he is referring to scouting and drafting and hitting on multiple players in a draft and then developing into a top team.
how many years are top teams top teams without winning the cup? And how many go deep many times without winning?
how many go the, if we could just get in and then we have a chance model?
which of the two question would you prefer? sustained excellence or just get in and you have a chance??
to me, you're sounding a bit of both? Do you want division winner and consistent playoffs and not a in one year miss a year out two and back in again kind of team?
We all want a team like Tampa who has a bunch of chances or Pittsburgh...
i want to see a huge shift in philosophy. I want to see a good plan. I want to see things change. Sure we "draft well." We draft nhlers. But I sometimes think, ok we have nhl players who can play in the league. Sure that is a measurement of success, but how do you measure impact players teams draft?
i measure success similarly to you, only difference is I would settle for not winning and having a team that is relevant and committed to excellence at all times. Gretzky didn't win after leaving Edmonton. Does that make his time in La a failure? Should he be considered the GOAT, or should it be Richard or Messier or others? Gretz wasn't able to do it without a stacked team...
just meaning a team can be great and win once. 80's Flames...
-
I think our problem with Mange is we've had too many similar players. I'd like him with guys who are bigger and find room.
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
Are you actually a Flames fan? /s
I am beginning to wonder if I am. Wondering if the game is passing me by.
It is hard to keep to a vision because trends change after just a few seasons.
Flames seem to traditionally be a "put on your workboots" team. I hope there is a shift to a team that has more movement. Watching a PP stand around there is no wonder it was bad for awhile there. But it is an example of those things.
-
2 hours ago, cross16 said:
Well tough thing with Kuzmenko is that contract was based off 1 year in the NHL. Sharangovich has a few years so there is more to base on but I do think there are similarities so it's a potential comp for sure. Kuzmenko is the better goal score and offensive player but I think Sharangovich is more well rounded. He produced on both the PP and 5 on 5 at a good clip, one of their better PKers too. Can play a harder role against opposition too where I think Kuzmenko you have to bury.
but I do think he gets overrated for his defensive game. It's ok, but it's not good, and while he owns a wicked shot he isn't great at making other around him better.
They won't do this but I think the more I look at the less i'd re-sign him too. His situation leads to a bad deal more often than not. Hopefully the Flames handle the negotiation well.
thanks for the reply. I think you're right... good middle 6 on a good team.I think Conroy probably has a pulse on the kinds of players he wants. We will find out if he has a vision soon enough, a philosophy and so on.
Be good to get some assets from guys like him.
-
1 hour ago, cross16 said:
Think this really comes down to how willing are you to stretch the definition of elite.
Dobson, not for me. Very good, but not elite. Hronek not even close. Hronek was just the right pair for an already elite dman in Hughes.
If your plan is to trade for an elite dman and actually think you can harbor more then one then good luck but i'd reckon your are really stretch the definition of "elite".
yup, and I wouldn't necessary call them elite. If I did I didn't mean to, only that they got some good players. Elite is a tough definition. I'd think there are only a few that are in certain positions.
Hronek has been good for Van, Dobson a good pick.
I also don't like thinking, just because a player was drafted by a team that traded for a Flames pick would end up the same player the Flames would have drafted. They have their own list and might have drafted someone else. Could be we wouldn't even have drafted Dobson with that pick.
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
Re Honzek and the, "shoulda taken Sandin-Pellikka" crowd. I very highly doubt the Wings org will remove him from the SHL next year. He still has a ways to go. When he does come over, he'll be in the A for at least a season. There are no shortcuts. 2 years out at very best. I'm sure that we can afford Honzek that kind of leeway also.
I hope we go that route with all the prospects.-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Well, worse case is we get the right player but he trends Sam Bennett.
worst case, we decide he's ready just because he can play in the NHL in relation to our roster and opt for the shiny new toy instead of developing them.
id prefer they dominate and maybe work on the missing parts of their games in a league where it won't matter and they won't get sat for making a mistake. Develop into a man, add one more year of man bod, then possibly play a year in the AHL, more rounding out their games.
development .
What players have we done well developing? And which ones might we consider failures? We need to learn from both.
Two off the top:
Mange
Dube (earlier results, but started to move him around the roster too much)
I get every player is different, but I think we need to start developing the players into what they want to be and what we want them to be. Hone them!
-
57 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
But it's hard to trade for a young elite D. Especially if you are talking about Makar/Heiskanen level. It requires we give back an elite player in return and we don't have those, let alone have those in excess.
Byram Bowen was traded but he struggled with post-concussion problems and he's only 22. He might be retired from the NHL by 26.
Seth Jones was traded a couple of times. Perhaps overrated from the beginning. He plays like a 3/4/5 type D being paid $9.5-mil.
Hanifin types get moved all the time but they are not the elite variety. They are good complementary types.
When is the last time a young elite D was moved?
I agree we need the next Mark Giordano. Norris-level D. Leader. Captain. They are hard to find from trade. Need to draft them.
how often can you get a Hronek like the Canucks did?
How many players are 3rd pair needing a chance? And do those teams that have them see them as that?
13 minutes ago, jjgallow said:Well there's Fox and Hamilton 😅
had we not traded for Hamonic, we might have had a decent player in, I think it was Dobson?
Although, maybe we'd have taken Farabee? Or other players not in the NHL now.
-
3 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:
Friday on 32 thoughts podcast, Friedman said that Utah wants continuity and it is looking like Armstrong will continue as GM and Tourigny as coach
has Armstrong been good? For me, I'd gut that organization, they've been so bad. -
3 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:
My take on a few teams picking before the Flames
CBJ- I think they would take Lindstrom. Catton or Helenius could be in play too. This pick will be made by a new GM so there’s no track record to project off of. It can be argued they go Lindstrom because the Jackets have a lot of small skill on their team and in the pipeline.
MTL- the hardest teams to predict are the ones that have had a boatload of picks, Montreal is that. With Guhle/Hutson on the left and Reinbacher/Mailloux on the right I don’t see D being the pick. I think they’d take Iginla. I think it’s a pick their head coach would really like.
Utah- another tough one to project. They’ve coveted size early in the past two drafts. Geekie/Lamoreux, Simashev/But. Armstrong was AGM in STL, they were a big hockey club, it looks like he’s looking to build something similar. Dickinson would make sense here.
OTT- first draft for Staios. Like you said they need RD. Maybe they address that via trade and go bpa, which is hard to pinpoint as this franchise has made a lot of picks in recent years. If I had to guess I would pair them up with Parekh.
SEA- agreed here. The biggest annoyance to the Kraken picking ahead of the Flames is that it’s highly likely they look at D. Francis prioritized D early in the draft when he was with the Canes. Think this is the draft where they target a defender with their top pick. Buium makes sense.
is Utah changing their staff? -
If his brother is really good, could it inflate his stock by playing with him, and this year's bro isn't as good? Or he's the real deal?
-
Ya, I don't think it's that Marner, Matthews or Nylander aren't playoff players...
they've had no depth.
similar to Edmonton, Do you think McDavid and Draisaitl would have a cup by now had they had an average goalie, some D and a bit more depth?is it the cost of paying the top too much?
-
5 hours ago, conundrumed said:
It's all about depth for me.
Bottom 6 is where the real chess match lives. Are they dominating or being dominated? Driving momentum and drawing penalties, the opposite, or a saw-off?
As much as people will say, "just a 4th liner", the playoffs remove that. They WILL get caught out there with unfavourable matchups. Can they handle it, or are they getting owned?
Playoffs are always the same to me. Look at our own Stephane Yelle. I thought he was our MVP in 04 (and Kipper, of course). He was massively driving the bus.
Every team has great offensive players. It's the bottom 6 that is either creating good opportunities for them, or not. Which end is the faceoff in? Are you going on the PP or PK. Chipping in the odd goal or giving it up? The bottom 6 really drives the dynamic of the overall game. They'll put your stars in favourable positions, or unfavourable positions.
If your bottom 6 isn't rock solid, you're not going far in the playoff season. They're the wind in your sails, or sucking the life out of you. Even the best technicians aren't allowed onsite without their workboots. I love analogies. lol
definitely! It's why I loved Hathaway and we should have forked out the little extra, if that was why he left? He might have wanted closer to home anyway, but loved that guy. He was doing little things, creating in the way you're describing, causing penalties or leaving play in a good way.we look at the Flames, when the 4th line was getting 3-6 minutes, what does that say about the depth? The 4th isn't easy to fill with players that push a team over the jump.
We are the same...
my signing for '04 was Ville Nieminen. I think pests help too. Although, Simon and Gelinas were big too.
but I agree, Johnny got his points, Monny goals too, decent numbers, but a one or two line team can get stopped.
it's also why I'm afraid the Canucks can do some damage, I think a few signings this last summer put them where they're at.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, sak22 said:
Tanev
I like Tanev. He plays on that edge. I wonder if his health is overblown, or if he is injury prone?
I worry about the message playing injured sends. I don't mind playing through stuff, but nearly ruining a career over injury is a lot though. Calgary and maybe a lot teams might turn a blind eye or be quite ok...
some are good to put some on LTIR, and not be as injured though...
I think Calgary let a guy like Monahan play through it because they're not deep enough to make it without a top player...
-
58 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
What about Nashville? Tennessee/Georgia/Kentucky/Mrs Sippy aren't exactly hockey talent hotbeds I tell you what. Or is this purely for selfish reasons? lol
I think a dichotomy and both...I think JJ is saying, if more players come from the professional city town area, then the teams will create more development programs for kids and grow the sport that way...
though, the sport is a tough sell over football, baseball, or basketball, or other US sports.
tough.
-
30 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:
Except you forget Yegor plays all 3 forward positions including center ... Power play, and kills penalties .. does he need more experience at all 3, sure , but in the end he's not "just a winger"
But .. what is gonna happen , will happen..
I was highly relieved when Connie outlined just what the plan and blueprint is.. it is 100% NOT bottoming out .. it's getting better every year ..kids what played this year need to take a step next year ..
He named Dallas as the model..
Veteran core at all 5 positions ..so don't expect him to be shopping Markstrom.. if NJ wants to blow us away , maybe he listens ..but if that happens expect a vet quality starter to come back thru the door ( Talbot?) I don't rule it out cuz when asked about Markstrom he did say " we'll see"
Trades will be for ages 18-23
Free agency ..expect some reinforcements from there .. likely nothing long term or high ticket but significant adds
From there..need to hit on draft picks on all rounds .. expect him to be more frugal with trading any picks than his predecessors. Quantity gives you a higher chance of hitting quality
Again.. we can hope..we can wish all we want , but that is the blueprint in action straight from the source
my bet is, 18-26. Think you're right though, and they've already shown they're leaning that way. Maybe a pick and an underused player that is a few years previously developed.
my scouting fear is targeting UFA. We've had a few good hits lately, but some bad ones. Coleman, Markstrom good...
maybe some can add a few good UFA signings to ease the apprehension!?
-
23 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:
How many teams make the playoffs and go directly to the Cup though?
It usually takes some pain until you finally break through. It’s hard to win at this time of the year. Every little detail matters.
2018 Vegas is one example I can think of, but most of the time it takes multiple trips to
the playoffs to break through.
i think there are young teams that haven't reached prime ability. I guess you can call that playoff experience.
I also wonder, Vegas has done well at getting deeper into the playoffs than many lately, when they have made the playoffs... for me, even the most playoff experience can lose because it's such a hard task to win a cup.
i understand what you're saying though. And just think, some teams play to lose while others play to win. Maybe it is circumstance or coach philosophy.
we kept saying the Flames had bad playoff experience, yet Johnny and Monny made the playoffs early in their career. And they needed more playoff experience but looked similar every year.
I just think, either a player plays to win or they play tentatively and lose. The Leafs have plenty experience but play to lose.
Only one team wins, I think a team can have a good playoffs and still lose in the first round in heartbreak, it doesn't mean they're not a playoff team, just they played a really good team and pushed a really good team to their limit.
-
7 hours ago, jjgallow said:
It seems like there's two sides here which are far apart.
If I can be any help, I'd like to offer to unify you in a proposal that you can all disagree with.
Have a locale-weighted draft.
Cale Makar. Landon Dupont.
Come to mind.
I think that if a player comes from your city or territory, you should have some kind of advantage over everyone else in being able to draft them. I dunno what that looks like, but back in the day, guys just played for the closest team (I mean like, back, back, back in the day) and it was just fine.
When we talk about good organizations versus bad organizations, I like to think of more than team performance. I like to think of teams that give back to the community, help support new rink construction and upgrades, help kids play that otherwise wouldn't be able to.
In that sense, I think the Flames have actually done very, very well. They should be rewarded for it.
What's the arguement about this? Well it's that there's teams that need the top talent in order to promote the game and expand it.
No they don't. They need to give back to their community and help foster hockey locally. Then when their city develops NHL players they can have first shot at them.
Players get to play close to familly, means all sorts of less issues.
Fans have something way more powerful to cheer for.
So really what's the downside? Well yeah it's possible Toronto could run away with many cups, it's true. But maybe not. And, if they do, they would pick last in the draft and things would balance. Counter-balances could be put in place if they aren't already.
Point is....all these guys who wanna play for Toronto because that's where they grew up? Let em.
Calgary? Let em.To a point, of course. Maybe one player per draft. And maybe you pay a price if you have massive advantage.
But I think it would be cool.
would you have a salary cap in your system? If you're creating more stars, you fork out more money.
Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition
in Flames Talk
Posted
I wonder how much play style has to do with Huberdeau? The west isn't the east, and do the flames play his style of game?