cccsberg

Absolutely true. Sure he plays an aggressive style, but the issue is inequality in the reffing. Seems like he is getting singled out.

Yeah, if the Flames could accurately predict the future they'd be winning Stanley Cups almost every year. Unfortunately they can't, but they do the best they can and last year that was #2 overall in the league. As far as drafting, how about all those (5+) 2013 1st rounders? We finally got 2 good ones, Monahan and Lindholm, but I believe we drafted/acquired 3-4 others.... And "missing out on a first line C".... how do you think Boston feels with three straight missed high-end first rounders? Yikes!

Agree, it is sad to see but realistically this happens all the time with players just not quite good enough. The Flames certainly have given him lots of chances. I'm sure a change of scenery would do him a world of good.

There is no question Gaudreau has size issues, but it’s also true he’s your best player and you want him ( or better) there with you in the battle. The challenge is to personally improve with more tenacity (the players), to put them in better positions to succeed (the coaches) as well as needing a little more luck (the fans’ prayers?). There are maybe a handful or two players you might potentially trade for Gaudreau and even stay level, much less improve, but if that’s the requirement good luck trying. The best and easiest option is #1, and hopefully both BT and BP are taking to heart option #2.

Making it being something like 100 games in the NHL.

I'd say Zavgorodny and Pospisil are going to make it, along with Pelletier and Parsons and 1 of the defensemen, let's go with Yelesin. I'd also say 3-4 of the remainder will also make it in lower, but important roles, let's say Pettersson and Tuulola/Ruzicka/Gawdin/Phillips/Wolf/Robinson/Lomberg/Lerby/Koumontzis/Nikolayev/Roman.... That would mean 5-9 of our current "prospects" make it, in addition to Anderson, Valimaki, Kylington, Mangiapanne, Dube, Jankowski, Quine, Czarnik and Rittich, 9 additional prospects who have "made it" within the past 2 years. I'd say that's pretty outstanding prospect development and pipeline. If the Flames can continue to bring in 2-3 players per year, or more that will easily keep them going at a high level. Consider that in the past 5 years we've also added top level to elite players Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Hamilton/Hanifin, Ferland/Lindholm and Bennett.... we are doing well. The only thing about the current crop is outside of 3-4 just "graduated" we don't have any obvious blue-chipper elite guys in the system. If they get there they'll have to battle the naysayers who think everything is apparent with 16-17 year olds.... Ha!

So true. Plus, when Lucic speaks I expect people will listen.

Complaining about goalies seems like a fool's errand. We have not had great success over the past decade or so, though we have had some great goaltending in that time. The problem is in the position itself. There are extremely few elite-level goalies that consistently stay there year after year. Even guys like Price and Lundquist and Bobrovsky have bad years and fluctuate. I'm betting you complainers would even complain about them, and then where do we go? The other issue is who do you pick-up? The only elite guy we passed on recently is Bobrovsky, and for $10mm/year+ (way plus+++ to get him to even consider Calgary) even you guys were not hot to go get him. Goaltenders are in many ways like Forwards and D, predicting future success is fraught with problems. Hey, we picked up a solid, consistent, agitating playoff-performing scorer last year and look how his first year here was. Not as predicted. Who has succeeded at Goalie recently? Binnington, some 3rd-string nobody who came out of nowhere?..... Fleury, well yeah, a first-overall no brainer with something to prove..... and.....? BT has been after a top-level goalie for years..... aforementioned Fleury..... Bishop, 3 times..... probably others. He has also brought in multiple guys succeeding in the KHL/Europe (e.g. Rittich) and drafted some multiple elite-looking prospects. This is a team game. Outside of Elliot a couple years ago I don't think goalies killed our playoffs recently. Certainly not Smith this past Spring. If it makes you guys feel better venting/complaining/negativity, hey..... But personally I think the combo of Rittich (top5 goalie last year before injured)/Talbot (top3 goalie before Oiler reality caved his early career)/ and multiple previously elite-looking prospects still developing and waiting is pretty much a home run for the team, especially considering Cap, contracts, age and availability. Will that be enough? We'll have to see what else happens. Many-a-team hit a home run or three and still lose their game. Could happen here but at least BT has given the team a chance.

Many good points. Many are frustrated here and too often fans rush to judgement, a la Rittich not even a year ago. Personally I would like to see Gillies as backup before jettisoning him after all these years. He and Rittich formed a good combo in the AHL, pushing each other, and perhaps they can do the same here? If they bring in Talbot, who I believe would also be ok, they should move Gillies. After all, how many times do you tell a guy he is not good enough before you move on?

No, still reasonable post. Results matter, but opportunity matters as well. I would certainly agree our prospects haven’t blown the door down, but I still believe in them and it would be nice to find a way to get them in.

Thanks for the reasonable post. Unfortunately it is almost impossible to pinpoint if the goalie coach(es) are the problem or whether it’s the goalies themselves. As for our current situation, the odd thing is our goalie coach has survived intact a couple of coaching purges, with continuing mixed results so it makes you wonder what goes on. Personally I think the lack of real opportunity and trust from management plays as much in the goalies minds as any coaching. That would be tough, but, hey there definitely is something to say about proving yourself first. Not an easy problem. Going forward, I’m with Rittich. He was basically the starter last year and one of the top handful of NHL goalies before his injury. It affected him and he never got back to the same level. We don’t have the funds for a top name goalie, and I doubt whether Rittich isn’t already better. I’d like to see Gillies as backup, but Talbot I like too. Problem is, as I mentioned above....bringing in a new guy from outside doesn’t do much to enhance the minds of the other 4 guys we already have. If we sign Talbot BT should trade Gillies to give him a fresh start elsewhere.

I agree. After the disappointment of the playoffs and no significant changes since, many are on edge, me included. Personally I’m avoiding most threads, but occasionally a post making outrageous/false claims, or someone posturing as a 20/20 rear view know-it-all just requires a response. With the combination of a hugely dampened trade market on the one hand because of a lowered Cap via expectation, and a pile of greedy RFAs looking to set new precedent for first new contracts, which will upset the Cap situation even more.... on top of the frustration of needing two separate teams for playoff success due to arbitrary reffing changes... it’s a hard time to be a fan. Looking forward to putting aside hockey for a few months after another week or so...

Your memory is defective, just like your opinions. Gillies first NHL games I believe were on a critical California road trip. The results were just the opposite of your claim. Why don’t you educate yourself before trying to pass yourself off as some expert.....

Rittich & Gillies-NHL Parsons & Zagidulin-AHL Schneider-ECHL ...dealt with.

Crazy. We already have 4 goalies signed, not including Rittich. Where are they all going to go? Talk about not backing your own guys.....

Like it. I’m hoping BT does at least this much this off-season as some serious shake up is required.

Tuulola?

BPA is a fantasy supported by scouts and reporters and lots of fans to justify their jobs and favourites but with little reality in actual fact. Even if we drafted thirty two 25 year old pros there would be no fully consensus BPA list everyone would agree on. Not even close. If you think of it that way it exposes the BPA problems and the issues about team needs. Heck, even if you tried to get a BPA for top player in the league between the "supposed" top 5 you would get a lot of arguments. It all depends on how you value different skills and abilities versus someone else. Would a goalie be in that list, the most important player on any team? If you set a rigid criteria, like Goals scored, then fine, Ovechkin wins every year, but as you broaden the terms it quickly becomes muddy. The exact same thing happens for 17 year old kids. On top of that, the player who might have been 100% the correct pick at 17 years old may not develop any further and become a bomb at 20 or 23 years old.... Bennett anyone? Since most teams are drafting for those years down the road, developmental projections are critical and if they don't happen you look like a fool. Take Hunter Smith for example. The guy had size, toughness and was just starting to score and put it together at 17, all things a team needed at the draft at that time, functional toughness, which today is hardly needed, or so it seems. Unfortunately the skating and scoring never evolved enough to make him a player at the next level. Also look at McDonald versus Demko. Do you pick proven track record or pick burgeoning potential? Because it won't become critical till 4-5 years later it's a very difficult choice.

Very thoughtful summary. I don’t disagree with your preferences, lower risk and all. The thing is, these are not always available, and certainly not equally so. Although you could possibly make a case that you can perfectly identify when the risky events occur, I believe that most of the time they are happenstance, i.e unpredictable primarily based on the defender’s movements, puck bouncing and ice condition. If that is the case, at least the majority of the time, then he went in thinking it a “safe” play and, whoops, turned out to be more dangerous. How do you criticize that? Regardless, even with the dangerous cases, he”s only been burnt by a goal against 2-3 times that I recall, versus the dozens of time it didn’t. Again, I contend pretty good odds......

Honestly, TD, you're seeming more and more like a negative Nancy that can find something to nitpick no matter the situation. To say Smith has "a lot more that result in turnovers" versus setting up the D is so far from reality it's laughable. Sure it happens a handful of times a game but far, far from most likely. If you want to seek out "bad" goals, we can easily find them for both of the goalies. We can also find many exceptional stops. We now have both goalies playing well. I'm not seeing a problem here.

Both are currently playing well. Why not sit back and enjoy it?

Most of what you say is right on. But when you say we don't have another Mony or JH in the ranks you make me laugh. Neither one of those guys ever made the farm team, skipping right into the NHL. If we had more they'd do the same. Down the road, though we COULD have several Top6 forwards from guys we've already drafted, we'll have to wait and see how they develop.

Against his old team, Arizona sounds about right. See if he can get back to playing well. If not, back to Rittich for 4-5 games. Hey, even IF we accept and put Rittich into a "starters" role, you don't want to overplay him. Whoever is starting, it needs to be a 3:1 or 4:1 split, at worse to keep them both fresh.

Good one. Unfortunately, the US is swirling down the toilet pretty fast and even the Trump “revolution” is straining to turn the tides. Not as desirable as it once was.... but, nice thinking outside the box.... not sure if that impacts the Olympics bid though.

But only for 2yrs so doubt Soros available because he is the future.