robrob1974
-
Posts
3,151 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob1974
-
-
I watched all 3 vids on their exits. Hiller was pissed he couldn't finish the Ducks series, Ramo is confident in abilities and would be happy here, but is confident moving to another location. Ortio, he knows that he has to earn a spot next season.
I found Ramo more positive about the team and the culture than Hiller. By letting Ramo walk you now assume one of the goalies we have in the system will be equal or better than what we lose in Ramo. Largest part of our success this year was improved goal tending, I shudder to think what would have been with out it.
Goal tending was or strongest asset last year. So my question is why would anyone want now make moves to create a weakness where there wasn't one.
I know I don't want to. I like Ramo, and prefer him over Hiller. Treliving definitely makes me unsure because he seems to eluded to the one net and no talks yet.
Ramo wasn't his guy, Hiller was. Depends on how married you are to your own decisions?
-
Something about Ramo's exit interviews. It just feels like they haven't said much, and although he's not concerned because things are going to fall where they're supposed to, he said a lot when he said nothing.
-
1
-
-
I have a feeling they're going to let Ramo walk. Nothing really informed, just a gut. As much as I like Ramo, I think he's the odd man out.
-
1
-
-
I cannot buy into the system of always trading players before the contract ends. Sometimes you get a lot even in the laat season, since it can help your prospects or rookies to develop and that is priceless. If you sell them for other prospects, can you be sure of the off ice development?
Good teams don't have to sell their vets at the end of contracts because they've already developed a good roster. They make little moves to improve your team.
I have a problem with selling your vets at their contract end as well.
I don't think you're showing true commitment to someone you're going to trade just at the end of their contract. If we developed properly, wouldn't everyone have wanted to see Iginla retire a Flame? It's the same with the Sundin thing in Toronto.
Detroit doesn't do that.
-
I think he's one they'd have to be patient with. How does he compare to Breen?
Not that you can really compare them just yet.
-
Lumping Engelland in with other big D-men is not really fair. If Russell was bigger than 5'10", he might have had an easier time with the Maroon/Getzlaf/Perry line. He has the heart of a lion, but he can't take out a guy 5 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier 20+ minutes per game.
I would take a combo of Brodie's skills, Gio's toughness and Kanzig's size every day. Vancouver's biggest guy is Edler (6'3" 215 pounds, not exactly bruiser size) and is not a fierce player. They were afraid of taking hits. If Big Buff or Ferland or Chara is coming at your D-men, do you want to have a Kanzig size player or a Russell size player?
If Kanzig had Russell's speed and skill, of course. You're arguing for a guy who hasn't proved anything, has skating issues so far and really may only amount to toughness. He is irrelevant so far.
Honestly I think you are gunna overpay on the free agent market for beachumin and jackman.
A trade for a player like luke schenn or mark pysyk who have some potential next season and for a few years down the road fits the rebuild more in my opinion then a 35 year old player.
Beauchemin is an Anahiem boy through and through. He's not going anywhere. He was horrible in Toronto.
-
Ramo held Anahiem to two goals for the most part, in regular time. He was 2nd star two games in a row, and you can't win if you're only scoring 2 goals no matter how much Ramo let in.
Game 5, Ramo held them to two goals up until OT. He gave the Flames an excellent chance to win.
Although, I think when he is calm he is more effective. Send him to Phoenix and he becomes the next Dubnyk as proper coaching could be key to his technique.
I see more upside in Ramo.
I think not signing him could bite us in the behind.
-
Ray Ferraro kept saying on the radio how the Gio injury would hurt us in the series. Wow, He's a big loss, but gotta give these guys credit for stepping up in his absence. kudos!
-
I think if they went Hiller and Ramo as a duo over the next few years, it wouldn't be terrible. Why it worked so well was Hartley silenced all attempts at trying to make the goaltending controversy.
-
And Ramo did squat!?
JJ? Are you even a Flames fan or do you watch the games with some sort of blinders on?
Hiller and Ramo have been pretty much equally as good as each other and without both, the playoffs wouldn't be in our cards.
-
I think it'd be great to find Schlemko a guy to pair him on the 3rd pair.
I can't see him top4 and that's no slight on him. We could use a decently mobile big D with him for that pair.
-
Although, I've been quite impressed with the D we have as well. I feel like we lack very much in size and it's the playoffs where you see it the most. We don't have guys to punish the other team and wear them down.
Something we haven't done in this series is activate our D enough. We're not getting enough zone time to play our game. Vancouver is very active in their D coverage.
With that said, we need to be active in ours as well, from our forwards.
In the LA game, every player was on another guy right away. I am not seeing that in this series. I didn't see game 1 so I am not sure if it was that way or not?
Back to my main point. I think it's where we need improvements, getting a size D that can play top4. Keith and Seabrook are a perfect example of a perfect pair.
I know Gio has decent size and can hit. It really is too bad he had that tear on that really unfortunate play that would never usually result in an injury. -
I wonder if Bennett ends up a LWer. We maybe "deeper" at C now, but you still never know. With Bennett's size right now, he could be better a winger.
I am rooting for him to be a C though.
Something about Backlund is, he's been the ultimate team guy and playing a defensive role that doesn't get as much credit on the score sheet and in the long term that's what a player is judged on.
We haven't really given Backlund guys to play with to put up numbers.
-
I kind of thought the same, but then I wondered if the follow through was up for too long?
Possible the ref only caught the tail end when the player skated directly into the stick
-
How noticeable was Ramage? The fact he wasn't is a good thing. I liked his game best out of all defense in rookie tourney because he was always in the right place and not anything else but solid positionaly.
-
I agree with Travel_Dude, it's more the watching over the years, like I said earlier, when other teams check him, he has nothing to offer. He can skate circles in the offensive end, but then after how many laps he takes a weak shot from the perimeter and then the play is dead. Sometimes he gets the pass, skates up the ice and suddenly the puck just leaves his stick and is 5 strides ahead of him. It's all of those things on top of the not checking hard.
Like on yesterday's goal, he weakly tried to push the Jets kid into the board and he just easily skated passed him. He has chances to finish checks and lay guys into the boards, but that's not in his DNA. He's just too easy to play against and too easy to stop.
When checking he just sort of does a drive by…
-
Ortio haters out in force, Prior to this game he was solid for us and everyone loved him for the 5 games he played.
He literally just came back from a injury 2 weeks early, and thrown into a game where we rested basically our top 4-5 players.
On a side note, Congrats to Gillies for capturing the NCAA Championship today.
I wasn't like that. I was one who said he goes down to early, and for a shorter goalie by today's standards he leaves the top corners wide open. NHL players are too good to not capitalize on that.
-
For me, even without Gaudreau I didn't want Raymond. I cringed at the thought of him. To me, he always was exactly what he is today. He shows signs early in the season with a goal scoring touch and when things get tight and harder he can't play.
-
I don't know. I don't think Sven was given the same time that Raymond gets. I thought the need wasn't there. We already have a really small soft team. We needed guys to stand up to other teams. That was why we got Bollig. We could have used the Raymond money on someone else who could do that.
Raymond's signing is the only one I really didn't like. Seto was a chance signing, show me contract. Engelland, well, I didn't like it that much, but we needed D. Bollig we needed size and grit who could play. Can he play? Sometimes. But I was sour on the Raymond signing from the get-go and was one who always talked against it when we were debating it on these forums.
I almost wonder if Sven would do just as good as Raymond had he been given the chance to consistently play with a guy like Backlund or Colborne, instead of 4th line fodder like Bollig.
4th liners are crash and bangers, energy guys. Baertschi is not that.
-
I agree with Kehatch on Raymond, and he's always been that kind of player.
-
Wideman is exactly what we paid for; an offensive D-man that isn't much of a liability. Not much different than a Yandle or Franson. These guys are not Norris material.
Brodie, on the other hand, is Norris calibre. He made Gio a better player. He is a smooth-skating guy in the mold of J-Bow, but a little tougher to play against. Compare him to a Duncan Keith in the early days of his career.
It's just too bad that they chose to play Engelland with Brodie instead. I know that Wideman and Russell were too good a pair to break up, but if they played Brodie with someone better than Engelland, it could have boosted Brodie's numbers to boost his chance.
-
don't get me wrong I really like the season Wideman has had but Norris conversation is a bit much. he's been good, but not great. he has been great offensively, but he is not dominant enough on either side of the ice to qualify for the Norris IMO. he still struggles at times in his own zone.
I do like Morrison and think that was a wicked signing but I would hold off on the Dekeyser comparisons. The big thing with Dekeyser was how polished his game was and how NHL ready he was and from what I've heard about Morrison is he is a bit more of a project. Good upside, which is why I love the signing but I think we should just manage expectation and comparable. He defiantly makes Potter irrelevant though which is great because Potter is a terrible NHL dman. He was awful last night and I really think the only reason they signed him was to have some RH shot depth in the organization and I do support that mentality but Morrison takes care of that.
I think you're underrating Wideman. But I think a lot are. I don't mind that as, if it allows him to do what he does, because a lot are underrating him, then better for us.
-
I would rather grade him after he has more years in and puts a big stamp on the team.
-
I think Wideman should be in the running for the Norris. He has quietly gone about his business and played a great year, stepping up in Gio's absence. 56 points is huge. I dunno. I think he should be in the conversation.
Goaltending
in Flames Talk
Posted
I don't think they need a big return. He's a guy we didn't develop. He's a guy we signed as a UFA and I wouldn't be concerned with what we get.