travel_dude

When your needs run deep, you need to be pretty confident in your scouting (crazy year for talent evaluation). Teams ahead of us currently have as many needs as us, so I can't see any team passing on a top 6 player. A couple of teams could easily pick the top goalie. You may find a gem on D at 13. Likely not one of the top ones. I would be shuffed if we picked Cossa at 13. Or a 5'9" LW.

And you are being really silly. It's not realistic to think that the Flames do a re-tool to the extent of losing two seasons (which is what I was aying). I would say the chances of a rebuild is less than 5%. So that leaves a re-tool on the fly and a team impatient to improve. Not a two year lotto teams. We get it. Rebuild or bust. You want to load up on 1st rounders this and the next 2 year, at least one being a franchise altering player. Use one on a goalie. Whoops, then we have to use one 1st on a goalie, lessening what we get with the other(s). I guess the first part of the plan is to find teams that offer 1st rounders over the next three drafts for a limited bunch of players. Have to be teams that are not going to make the playoffs, but whoops we traded them something to help them make it. Balance that with the NTC's we have to limit the trades to playof likely teams. Even getting lucky and getting one of two franchise altering players leaves you with a bunch of possible Zary's or Valimaki's. Or Poirier's and Klimchuk's and Kylingtons. 5 years from now we are closer to Buffalo than Colorado.

I wouldn't even say EDM is a top 2 on paper. They won games when 2 guys scored and they got enough PP's. Or when a 38 year old goalie was fully rested and had a rennaisance season. On paper they had little depth beyond about 4 players up front and 2-3 in the back. They will need to get Seattle to take Koskinen to be able to afford their RFA's and replacements. And find a new starter. If we did nothing, we would still have better depth, which is sad.

It's a given that about half won't be back. Okay, maybe a third. Without even getting into the core players, Nesterov, Stone, Ritchie, Simon, Leivo, Nordstrom, Froese, Robinson and Domingue won't all be here. Stone, Nordstrom and Ritchie were okay for what we expected them to be. Leivo was a slow starter. Those are not names that win you games. Fine if you want to bring back a couple as extras. But that's $6m committed to marginal players as it stands. The core has problems. Some of them just can't raise their game when we need it. No Playoff Same Bennett TM, no sacrifice to win a game players (except maybe one or two D). Plenty of skill, just only a small handful of players that can strap others to their backs and drag them into the fight. And do the things we need done.

I think the issue with Markstrom was injury. He was good to start, when we were not a good defensive team. He was good to finish, when we were better but couldn't score. The middle was poor defensive play but he was concussed and took time to overcome it. One thing not mentioned was the Flames shooting themselves in the foot so often. A simple mistake in the net. That is not a goalie problem and is about as unlucky as you can find. Many of them were a combo of miscues. Blowing games we should have won. That's really what the numbers show. We are not the only team to deal with it, but we didn't help the cause by scoring our way out of it.

I think we have some players that we need and should keep. I also see about half a lineup that should not b here. Frustrated that we don't improve our D. We are not going anywhere with Gio. We need a top D like Seth Jones (just an example). Our bottom 6 is ineffective. Not that it should score half the goals, but we had a bottom line that barely got any. Lucic an necessary player, but expecting him to be a shutdown player is dumb. Backlund being wasted. Trade him to improve somewhee else and have a decent 3rd line C. Our best RW used as a #1C because... I don't know exactly what makes sense to re-tool. It's harder to come up with players that you don't want to keep to improve. Balance that with what gets you the most bang. Best trade assets: Guadreau, Tkachuk, Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Dube, Mangiapane, Valimaki, Ras, Tanev, Gio. Players that can improve your team by keeping them and surrounding them with good players: Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Valimaki, Ras, Tanev. I think it comes down to Monahan, Tkachuk, Backlund and Gio being the ones moved. Tkachuk would hurt the most out of that group, but it's either him or Gaudreau. Gaudreau can improve any player we bring is as a #1C.

The last 14 games mean very little to me. We have a chance and blow 3 of 5, 2 of which were to MTL. We played better in garbage games. Most of those against VAN. Mangiapane is a non-starter in any trade talk. Beyond that, there is a little that should not be on the table. And considering his comments, I think they are going to make hard decisions. I just hope they are the right ones and that we go after players that make this a better team.

Developed country or not, players in the playoffs are injured. Every year after a series eliminates a team, you hear about Seguin playing with a ..... Or Stamkos was ..... It's not unique to the Flames. Khaira playing a couple of days after concission, then getting another one. Markstrom should not have played after the Pearson hit. Teams are bypassing medical opinions with needs. Had we been in a playoff race, there is no question that Tanev is going to offer up as being okay to go. Was the injury one that could get progressively worse during playoffs? No idea. The fact that we were not makes this much more puzzling. Monahan needing hip surgery for how long? Yikes. Players have too much pride to admit that something is bothering them. If their play is not impacted, it makes it even harder. Monahan was pretty obvious and there is no excuse for that. Tanev was lights out all year, but there was no reason to continue as if we were a playoff team. There was nothing to be gained by playing our so-called core for meaninless games. We were not trying to get them records that they can look back on in the future. To make matters worse, we wasted free development games on UFA's we already had a book on or vets that had nothing but injuries to gain.

My thinking? I'm describing how ludicrous a double tank is with this particular team. Neither the rebuild I described nor the re-tool is inevitable. Those would be the worst case scenarior for both. This past season has to be one of those worse case scenarios, between career down years by top players and winning just enough. We aren't like to rebuild, so let's just drop that. As for a re-tool, no GM is about to do it just to end up the same or worse. So, that takes out basement doesn't it. Whether I agree with any of the moves or not, the owner/manager/scouts will make move to improve the team. Spending to the cap, trading top players for top players, signing UFA's, trading picks, whatever. They have a business to run and don't see long term, slow growth as being a win. Melnyk didn't tank to rebuild the team, he did it to save money then and now. Not every owner has that "vision".

It's much more difficult to set up to fail for two years. One year hard enough, but failing for the future or for two years? Almost impossible. The first year last place lotto win would result in immediate fire GM and coaches. Trades would consist of young players for vets with just enough juice to get a year close to the plyoffs or in. And that assumes you can even construct a lineup that fails so badly. Since a rebuild scorched earth is last possible scenario, re-tool brings back enough juice to win about half your games. That's solid 5th in a division. 4th in a weak division.

EDIT - not directed at you, just that you brought up good talking points. Markstrom is an interesting case study. Last year 43 games, 23 wins 16 losses and 4 OTL. 2.75 GAA, .918 This year 43 games, 22 wins 19 losses and 2 OTL. 2.68 GAA and .904 Start and end were the best parts of his season, middle was bad. I tend to agree that moving out one player doesn't drop us to bottom 3. Even without Tkachuk improving and Markstrom playing the same, we are still winning enough to keep out of the real basement. Since a rebuild is out, it has to be a deep re-tooling. We are too far from contender to just do adds and subtracts. The difference in opinion is which players need to be cut out. Tkachuk - are we fooling ourselves thinking he is the problem with the lineup or culture? Gaudreau - went from invisible with an injured Monahan to a high scoring player. Was that garbage games or impact of playing with healthy people. Monahan - is he a problem or the fact he was originally our only top 6 C the problem - did injuries cause the drop? Lindholm - are we that deep on RW that we can use our best RW at C? Dube - what is even the plan with him, do we try to use him with Lucic or a top 6 role? Is there enough patience to do it? Mangiapane - top 6 for sure, top 3 in even strength, yet he plays on a shutdown line? Lucic - is he a leader or a dissenting voice. While he found his scoring touch again, is that just a mirage? Is he high enough reward vs risk? Backlund - did he go on a pouter because he was dropped out of the top 6? Can we afford to keep him? Do we even have a next up player to take his spot? Ryan - well we lost Bennett, so are we okay in not re-signing him? Gio - is it time or do we simply need to scale back his minutes and use him to mentor? Do we need a Number 1 that has a long shelf life? Hanifin - is he more valuable as a trade chip or do we focus on building the defense around him. Ras - declined in overall play, but on the other hand he had a career season by points and goals per game. Insulate him a bit better? Valimaki - how do we even know what he is capable of. Kylington - see Valimaki. We know he can skate but don't know whether he can grow. Stone - as a depth player, about all you can ask for. That shouldn't mean we should only aspire to have him as part of the regular 6. I don't even know the right strategy to improve in a re-tool. The players we may decide to move out do not bring back enough to even be as good. So we have to use draft capital or include players not the problem to get players we need. And spend money on UFA's. Or simply trade players for picks and prospects and hope to get lucky.

His sound bites were always choice. Sutter is more like Torts for being annoyed or sarcastic.

BH? "We will do dat stuff we need to win duh game". "He play da hockey good".

Tanev wanted to play through his injuries, even in meaningless games. Monahan could have as well, and we let it happen. We decided to let them play. Eichel wants a risky surgery, Buffalo doesn't want that, they want what's best for the player. It seems like we let the players decide what to do about their health, not doing the most to protect their health.

So you are saying that a 25 year old Draisaitl is exiting his prime because math. McDavid has two good years left. Poor Crosby and Kane, too far over the hill to compete. Because math. Slow burning candles? Elite players are different? Far fewer exceptions over the norm? Sure, I get the argument. But you speak in absolutes. And your evidence is a Yost story? Stats can be used to prove any point. Maybe there is a connection between salary cap and younger players. The growth of the game in other countries has definitely had an impact on drafted players. Basement teams playing 18 year olds in their draft season. Big draft years players aging out of their primes (32+). D-men coming into the NHL at a much younger age. Lots of reasons, eh? If you want top talk about the Flames needing to change the team dynamics or get rid of certain players because you feel they are preventing us from getting to the next level, fine. If you feel that Gaudreau and Monahan have to be moved because they are too soft or too lazy to bring it, fine. The age argument doesn't fly.

Any player that wasn't in country by May 16th has to undergo 7 days quarantine. Mangiapane won't be able to play until May 28th, at least that is my understanding.

It comes down to UFA's getting two offers close to the same. For some it's not just the money, so sign where you see something you like. I don't know if there are that many players we targeted that didn't sign as UFA's. We didn't target Pietrangelo. Not seriously anyway. Panarin was between us and Chicago. Imagine a Russian not knowing anything about Canada and only hearing about Kane and Toews and Chicago (bang bang). Fox was a lifelong fan of NY teams, specifically NYR.

He took the blame for an ineffective PP. While he had a part in the failures, we are talking about a 5 man unit that struggled to generate high danger chances. Ras almost always passed off over taking even an indirect shot or shot pass. He was also used more right of center on the point, so his one-timer was not as available. When he got on the 2nd PP unit, he was used like Ovi or Laine. But Ovi also played much closer to the middle, so his shots way more direct. Also, when he plays the PP, he's being used like a forward. I think he does better when played with a more mobile rover type. Gio is almost always going to lead the offense, so not much chance there. And he's going to back down to Gio in those little conversations they have. The coaches need to get through to him and tell him he needs to skate and shoot more. He drives me crazy when he has a lane and he waits for other players to move, and that lane is gone.

We are building the NA version of the Swedish Elite League teams. Who is the person to point the finger at or is it organizational that we have players playing through injuries requiring surgery? What is being used as the measurement for keeping parts or all of this team together? Let's look at some of the recent history. BT speaks about lack of depth at C and we convert our best RW to C. The coach does it at the cost of the "2nd line". Replace him with crap players and expect some magic. Coach talks about giving Monahan more of an increased role and less on a offensive-only player. He plays about as tough as you might expect he would. Gets a hip injury requiring surgery. Plays through it. No regard to best interests long term, must win. Tkachuk gets fed up in a game against Toronto, but the end result is a players-only meeting and a less impactful Tkachuk. Tanev is injured and plays meaningless games after we are eliminated, yet we have two young players not getting any ice or limited games. Continued reliance on vets that weren't able to get the job done all season (Nesterov for example). Media plays out stories about Gaudreau not wanting to be here, the in room fight with Tkachuk over his antics, etc. Leadership never questioned, don't even bring it up. Lucic calls out certain players. Gio talks about being exposed as a "conversation among other things we need to have"; don't even know what that's supposed to mean We as fans question the work ethic, country club atmosphere, leadership, unwillingness to do what it takes to win, etc. Sutter has at times poofed that off, saying they lose because they miss details to win. I don't know if the culture sucks and players avoid it like the plague, but we do know that Gio and Lucic have a polarizing effect. Not everyone wants to play with them. Same is true of Tkachuk, not everyone would want to be on his team. Or is Gaudreau too much of a spoiled kid that has to play with one player? Or is the GM too cheap and every player knows it. There are far bigger tight wads out there that have good players.

I'm sure some bigger names will drop. Besides, we are getting #2 this year.

Yes, I think most of us remember. What I didn't like was he felt he needed to be a fighter to stay on the team. It cost him a concussion IIRC. Remember the game they had his parents on and his mom was freaking out? But she was realizing that was what he needed to be like. I never get the coaches here. Recalled players are lucky to get 8 minutes of a 4th line. And that's the one that actually get a chance.

Neal was a big part of the lineup that ended up being scratched. He was at worst 3rd line. Lucic brought in to replace him and played top 6 minutes a lot of nights. Hamonic playing top 4 minutes, then not playing at all last playoffs. Frolik a big part of the 3M line then traded. Janko and Hathaway were not major pieces last year, but they were replaced with PTO's and league minimum players. Overall, you are correct in that Gio, Hanifin and Ras were here last year. 3M line replaced by Tkachuk-Lindholm-Dube. Gaterade line replaced by Gaudreau-Monahan-Simon/Leivo/Ritchie Lucic-Bennett-Dube replace by Lucic-Backlund-Mangiapane Most of the same top 6 and top 4D. Different starter. I guess all I am really saying is that we had about 50% different players between years. Sure, the "core" players don't change much, but not the only reason why we don't go further. I harp on Gio and Backlund more than Gaudreau, since they have been so effective in the regular season, but shells in the playoffs. You need your top guys to produce, but you also have to adjust to strategies of playing best on best. It doesn't always work. Would we ever think about playing a Lomberg or Hathaway against Mackinnon or Benn? I doubt it. Circling back to my bolded point. We don't have a roster built for the playoffs. No #1C and #1D. No backup. No shutdown line that can handle every situation. Ineffective PP personnel or strategy. While I would love to see BT address that, it's not easy to do and painful to execute. It means trading a Backlund and a Gio to try and get back a #1D. It means trading a Tkachuk or Gaudreau or Monahan (or combo) to get a #1C. It means overpaying Hyman to be that wrench you need. It means using guys on ELC's to balance the other costs. And finding bargains.

Sillinger certainly played a lot in Canada for a Yank. For some reason, USHL players seem to become stars. Not all, but the learn how to score. His profile says his skating is choppy and not great, but his IQ and deception is off the chart.

To be faiur, he got top 6 icetime, just little PP time. And we felt we needed him to be a RW because Backlund was a more consistent C and Lucic needed to play LW.

I don't knwo the reason why we passed on Lombo. We let Hathaway go to FA, when we probably could have re-signed him for a similar rate. I don't get why we give up on younger players and sign PTO's that are useless. Hathaway give you 100% every game.