travel_dude

The Flames in 2004 were a workhorse team with enough raw skill to take it to the SCF. That was the hardhat team if I recall. The 1989 team was a completely different beast from what the NHL is today. Even the 2004 teams were built on a lot of clutch and grab hockey. In either of those years there was no cap. There is no formula to being a contender unless you are fortunate to draft that perfect player at the right time. Then you manage to have the right players at the right time, in their careers or salary progression. And your goalie happens to peak at that right time. Tampa was able to add a bunch by giving up picks. They have to trim this year to get to the cap. Perfect combo for all of one year. PITTS and CHI managed a couple each. If you are going to critiquw the team, you need to look at what they are relative to the league this year. Teams like the 89 Flames and the 88 Oilers don't exist. The 19/20 TBL won't even be the same. A lot of teams stripped down, while others went full UFA craziness. Or traded for questionable players (Josh?) and went big term.. Some never replaced all that they lost. Others decided that their biggest problem was not a problem.

Looking at the top 9, I can't figue out what makes sense from a lines perspective. Nuge-Drai-Yam was their best line in the 2nd half. They have McD, Drai, Nuge, Yam, Kahun, Ennis, Neal, Turris, Kassian, Chaisson, Poolparty, Archibald. A deeper top 9, but they are banking on a turnaround by Turris and Poolparty. Neal only produces when he gets at least 3rd line plus top PP minutes. Pooly is not ready for top 6 yet (if ever). Kassian is only remotely worth his contract by playing with McD. 3rd line should by rights be Neal-Turris-Poolparty, but that means Kahun and Ennis on the top line. Or Kassian up there. No idea how they make it work. Even with two NHL top scorers, they still struggle. Load up the top line with Nuge-McD-Drai and the 2nd line has no C. Nuge-Drai-Yam was their best line but leaves McD with crap.

I find it difficult to find any version of the Flames where they were better than what we have seen the last two years. Kipper had one really good season where he won 45 games (08-09) but was only .903 SAA. That was also when Iggy and Cami were at their best with 1.0 p/gp, yet no one else was above 49 points. Our best year featured 5 players at 74 points or above. That with Smith below 900. I get your concern that we are a worse team in front of a good goalie, but we have been in front of a good goalie in years. We cycled out some players that I would call liabilities at times; Janko, Gus, Forbort, Stone, Hamonic. Even Frolik and Rieder had issues staying on the right side of the score. But we have arguably a better defense (less liabilities) but lost some offense there. Perhaps. We added some depth with middle 6 capable players. Marky Mark will be good for 4 years. That is about what you get from a 30's goalie at the top of their game. If we don't have a starter elsehwere by then, we have bigger issues than an aging goalie.

Aside from Kahun, what have they really accomplished? Kelfbom out, Barrie in. Kahun was a decent signing, but Rieder was a similar producer when they signed him. AA out, Poolparty in. How much better will he be than the last time he played as an Oiler. He was outscored by a defenseman in Liiga that has less than 25 NHL games Turris in. Last chance for him to really show he has anytihng left. An aging Smith replaces an aging Smith in nets. Scoring goals was not the issue there, scoring 5v5 was. McD and Drai on the ice accounted for a lot of goals against. They did well with Nuge-Drai-Yam but it meant that the top line had McD with Kassian and Ennis. I just don't think they did enough to fix the issues. Maybe a bit better 5v5 scoring. Less defensive ability. Pinning their hopes on a inconsistent tandem in nets.

It's entirely possible that our drafting, trades and performance over those years is completely different. We had Bennett at level 1 in the first playoffs. We expect him to increase his performance, but we had a coach that played Granlund at C. We make other trades possibly based on regular season performance by the whole team. Do we get Hammy or Hammer? Moderate regular season success makes GM do things. We make the playoffs with Hartley in McDavid's draft year. We trade for Hammy after we know we don't have 1st overall. Hammy means we get Lindholm and Hanifin later. Before that we get Hamonic. We were a couple points away from 3rd oiverall and 2nd overall the Tkachuk draft. We get 2nd we don't pick Tkachuk over Laine. We get Laine, maybe we don't go after Hamonic. A person could go crazy over this stuff. Which is why I just follow what we have and not worry about what could have been. I get PO'd when we trade a pick for trash like Smith and Lazar. A bit miffed over Hammer, but that should have been a better result. We got something we needed, but he declined even before he showed up. Poor pro scouting, more repulation based IMHO. He's a solid character guy that just didn't have it anymore.

There were games where our PP absolutely dominated. We were skating and moving the puck within a millisecond at times. We picked apart defense and scored. We also almost never repeated that look. I don't know if this was just with Gio on the PP regular season, but they were easy to read. Gio to Gaudreau. Gaudreau to Gio to Lindholm. Back to Gio if no shot. Players moved less than 6 feet during these passes. Very seldom a goal. With Gus, there was a lot of lateral movement and much more use of behind the net passes. Not great but mproved. Seems to be nothing invested in fixing the PP. Ward may or may not be a good coach, but lack of adjustments seemed to still be a problem.

Think you are mixing up Nylanders. Willie was drafted the Bennett draft; that was Burke calling the shots. Maybe it was a miss, but you pick Bennett 9/10 over Willie. He was just that kind of junior player. Alex was drafted the year we got Tkachuk. He may never get to Tkachuk levels. Right now he is playing well with decent linemates. He would not give us a better team in place of Tkachuk. Well, we might have had lotto picks with him being picked over Tkachuk.

On one hand, all picks by BT don't go back too far. One bad year where Burke was calling the shots (Kanzig etc). Look at last year's draft and the 2018 draft. Maybe even the 2017 draft. Look at what we drafted and see what was picked after us. Hint - from 2019 to 2017, Valimaki was the only player selected where later picks have had better careers to date. Robert Thomas was a good pick, but he wasn't available to us after we picked Valimaki. 2016, we picked Tkachuk - hard to argue we wasted that pick. 2nd Hint - 2016, our 2nd rounders were Parsons and Dube. Only 3 players have played more than 50 NHL games to date. Are they better than Dube? I get what you are saying, but realistically, but it's a bit early to declare our picks as being wrong. Bennett (2014) maybe. Lots of good players selected after him. Other than that, the results are not there. Pelletier may not seem like a good pick, but nobody from that draft picked 26th or later has played a single NHL game.

Ward is talking about it and BT is aware of it. He doesn't want a short term disaster. 5 games that are losses is more than they can spare if the idea is to be competitive in the season. BT doesn't replace Talbot and Hamonic to lose short term. That may still happen even without moving Lindy to C. There isn't even a long term strategy. Lindholm to C, then Bennett to LW or #4C. No top 6 RW replacement. Leivo is signed for one year. The only way you consider moving Lindholm to 3C (or Backlund to 3C) is you are moving Monahan for a RW. Or you are moving Gaudreau for a RW. All of that is fine, if you long term we get a top C and a top 3 RW. I just don't see it. Monahan for Kozens. Fine, we have a top 3 "capable" C. Still no RW to replace Lindy. Gaudreau for a top 3 RW. Fine assuming they have the same ceiling. Move Tkachuk to top line. Hope that Dube can move up to 2nd line.

We haven't gotten any top 6 RW since getting Lindholm. I have no issue keeping him on RW. Whether he plays top line or not, he fits the need. Using him on C is an option, but I don't get the need as much as a nice-to-have. The 3M line has been successful with three LHS. The Bennett line was good with Dube at RW. We picked up two guys that can play RW. Not sure about Nordstrom, but we do have some depth there. Using Lindholm is a mistake as a long term solution, IMHO, unless you are shipping out Monahan, Backlund or Bennett. Even then, we lose the top RHS RW that we have and are hoping that Leivo replaces him. More concerned about him seeing Lindholm as a natural C. Had a career year as a RW, so let's move him to C.

I can't really comment on how they rank players, because it obviously doesn't match the TSN or Cragg Button list. By the time #2 comes around, it's entirely possible that every "next" pick for the Flames is gone. Outside of the 1st round, I can't even name any picks other teams got that is super-impressive. I have to say, I am overall happy with the guys we got. Zary, Poirier and Francis stand out, but that's because they are easy to look at results. The Ruskie goalie is unbeaten in the MHJL and VHL and was called up to the KHL. That alone is a impressive. Just looking at numbers and available players, 4 RHS forwards and 2 RHS D were available when the Flames picked 2nd. I don't scout players, so I can't tell you the opinion on them or where the Flames ranked them. We can say it's a reach by picking one player, but then again we don't even know if they have issues or not. We end up draft others later that could be steals. BPA is always going to be contentious, because it doesn't match our BPA.

I think most times the lines listed Tkachuk as RW. He still had a productive year by all accounts. Mangiapane LW played with Ryan and Hathaway (IIRC), so we are talking over a year ago. We added two guys used to playing RW; Leivo and Simon. Leivo prefers LW even though he is a RHS. I would be fine with Mangiapane playing top line on RW. Or Leivo to see if he can handle it. Or Lindholm. Check them all out. If Leivo plays in the top 6, then it's likely that Mangiapane LW plays with Dube RW and Bennett C. Is that a bad thing? Otherwise, he probably fits best with Tkachuk and Backlund. I want to see the top 1-3 lines outscore opponents every game. Find me the trios for each that can do that on any given night. If only one line is clicking, then you may not win. 2/3 and you have a really good chance barring bad goaltending. 3/3 and you are almost unstoppable. So, what I am saying is you pick what should be most consistent in doing this. Have options when one, two or three lines not working. Line blender is fine if that has shown some success at some point or is well practiced. Otherwise it's just grasping at straws.

All in all, I think the top line will be fine. Doesn't mean they don't look at new looks. Or have better or different options come playoffs. We are talking about a top line that still produces at a first line level. Don't know how much BP impacted the scoring for the first part. No excuses, just pointing out the obvious. Backlund on the wing? Lucic buried to the point of wanting to retire? I worry less about the top 6 than I do the D pairs and the bottom 6. It's a delicate balance, and we are playing a first season without Brodie. To a lesser extent without Hamonic. I think we are deeper, but it will take some adjustments to work out. The bottom 6 has changed and we aren't sure of what the new lines will work into.

Other than scoring less than McDavid and other top line C's, the top line generally scored the most of any lines. So, we make up for lack of a so-called #1C by having 4 C's that can drive play. 5 if you count Lindholm as one of those. I have no real problem with regular season stats. Bit of a letdown last year, but it starrted with the D having bad seasons. Went from there. Even so, we made the playoffs with a reset after BP got outed. Really Backlund was misused (for at least a month) until January. This season should return to closer to 18/19 stats. So what did we do to change? Added Leivo, Simon, Nordstrom and Nesterov. Valimaki full time and no Hamonic to drag down anyone. At worst, we added grit and lost a few guys that didn't add a lot. Leivo or Simon ahould be capable of middle 6.

I don't mind moving players around to have different looks, but the net results has to be better or harder to play against. Swapping Mangiapane or Tkachuk for Lindholm makes sense to me. Tkachuk makes the top line tougher to handle. Mangiapane makes the top line a lot shiftier. Lindholm on the 2nd line gives them a decent shooter that can take strong side draws. One thing that might be interesting is to ues Leivo in the top 6. Whether it's Lindholm or Mangiapane moving to Bennett's line really doesn't matter. Dube-Bennett-Lindhom/Mangiapane. You're doing that to even out the top 9 minutes. Anyway, my preference is to set up alternative looks, not necessarily change for good. We had no answer to Dallas or Colorado. Because we had no other look. Once Tkachuk was out, we were cooked. PP neutered a bit. 2nd line stripped. Top line unable to generate much 5v5. As it stands, the top 6 as is is good enough to get us to the playoffs. But, they also need to be adjustable when they aren't clicking. Having players practiced with top 6 pairs would set us up for that. The D needs to be reactive too. It can't just default to Gio-Tanev or Hanifin-Andersson playing most minutes. Or whatever the main pairs are. Maybe Gio-Nesterov is the new thing. Valimaki becomes top LD. Whatever, as long as we don't just say Gio is Captain so he plays the most and is on PP1.

Wrong country. Wolfie is a Merc.

If I had to guess, I think it's entirely possible that they are looking at the 3C spot. Bennett was effective in the playoffs at everything except faceoffs. Perhaps they are thinking of possibly being able to mix up the lines a bit. I would break it down as such: Option 1 (little change except bumping down Lucic) Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm Mangiapane-Backlund-Tkachuk Dube-Bennett-Leivo Option 2 (using Lindholm as alternate C on Bennett's line) Gaudreau-Monahan-Mangiapane (Mangiapane is a workhorse) Tkachuk-Backlund-Leivo (use players on their strong side) Dube-Bennett-Lindholm (Can move Dube to RW and Bennett to LW with Lindholm as C) I tend to think that you want Bennett to have what Monahan has had for two years; a strong RHS C to take draws. Depending on the 3rd line deployment (draws only or permanent Lindholm at C) you can decide if you want to stick with Bennett at C. I guess it's possible that they are already planning for Ryan being gone. Having Lindholm available means you have 4 NHL vets at C if you trade or lose Ryan.

I like this move. He will have a leg up on others trying to make the NHL roster. Well, at least the AHL guys. As it stands today, Leivo, Simon and Norstrom are 11, 12 and 13th of available forwards. Rinaldo is a candidate for 14th F, but I'm not a fan. Putting him in the lineup is committing one forward to 5 minutes in a game. I am hopeful that the AHL is available, since having these guys idle is not a good thing. It's one thing to alternate Simon or Nordstrom, or use Rinaldo instead. Would rather not have Gawdin on the roster if he's not playing.

Yeah, I don't know why the Rags would even consider it. He's almost guranteed to play in the NHL opening night. Who cares if the season is delayed by a day or a week. He would be risking his NHL start for a meaningless tournament. Meaningless because he has already won Gold, used his perfformance to solidify his 1 OA status. Risking it on amateur competition that has no real benefit to the NHL club.

He'll get a game at least. He did last year. It wasn't a really strong showing. Honestly, you are probably right, but if it was me I would go with who was playing well in the camp and early games in the WJC. You can't just say he's our guy if he craps the bed.

He gets to the net similar to McDavid, but is too simplistic. He has one move to McDavid's 10.

I would say that Pelletier may have a strong case to play. Then again, they want fit not just skills and leadership.

Yeah, it all depends on their showing. Unfortunate for Wolf is the late start for the WHL. College not much better off, but maybe a few games to tune up (Knight). I mean Knight put up good numbers in the NCAA, but so did Gillies. Hard to say he's the real deal. Saying that, they will start Knight if he has a strong camp. If he doesn't, I don't know if they opt to use Wolfie.

That would be ideal. He hasn't played since the end of camp in the summer. This should be the year that he turns some heads, though he will have to impress in camp again.

I did not realize this, but he was the brother of a girl Gretzky was dating and Gretzky approached Sather about offering him a job. Must have been a dream come true for a hockey fan. For all the Oiler fans out there, he was genuine. Big loss to that team and their fans.