kehatch
-
Posts
10,467 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by kehatch
-
I understand the skepticism and I am not trying to start a debate about the hire. The point is, that hire painted a target on Treliving that could cost him his job and future opportunities. But he had a plan and he stuck with it. Same thing with the Hamilton trade. He got rid of one of the big "feathers in his cap" when he traded Hamilton to Carolina. It's nice to have a GM that doesn't just talk about "bold moves" but actually makes them. It helps that his bold moves aren't the caliber of trading Hall for Larsson.
-
What I appreciate about Treliving is how level he is. He went after Gulutzan, a new age analytics coach without a lot of NHL success. It would have been really easy to bring him back. It would have been really easy to go out and get a veteran coach. He could have got Sutter, Vigneault, maybe Trotz. Instead he fires Gulutzan and goes out and gets another new age analytics coach without a lot of NHL success, putting a target on his own back in the process. A lot of people hate that. But I respect someone who sticks to their guns and follows the plans despite the optics.
-
I agree we need to think about beyond this season. But it's a gamble to think it's Gilles. Smith is pretty much guaranteed an injury and I don't want Gilles / Parsons being my only option when it happens. I also don't want Gilles sitting back up 3 out of 4 games. Ideally I would like to acquire a young goalie with proven starts to backup Smith. Gilles still has room to develop in Stockton and would get some NHL starts when Smith gets hurt. It gives us two chances to find a starter. That said, I don't know who that might be. Chances are we see Rittich take on that role. Unfortunately I agree with you that he doesn't have starter potential.
-
You never know. Him and Hamonic actually looked pretty good together in limited time. I am not a big fan of rolling the dice usually, but the Flames have a lot of guys potentially capable of play on that 4/5 spot. My best guess is they keep Brodie, but it is almost a coin flip they trade him for a first + instead. If they do that, the Flames have the depth to cover the spot (probably).
-
I agree. I think when you pay the same price for him as you did for Hamilton people are going to compare the two. I also think it is fair to say if Treliving tried to move him now he isn't going to get the same value as he gave up. But Hamonic is a quality player on a REALLY good contract and he fills a spot that is tough to fill. I have no concerns with the trade or the player.
-
No, your point wasn't that the GMs clock is ticking. It was apparently because Smith got injured that we need a new GM, new ownership, and we can't win a cup until Gaudreau and Monahan are in their mid 30s (after we go through another rebuild). I get frustration. But the entire "until you face the reality of my irrational hyperbole we will never win a cup" rant is way over the top. How about acknowledging that Gaudreau and Monahan had career years and are now on budget contracts. That Tkachuk looks like the real deal and could be the best of the bunch. That Hamilton and Giordano are one of the leagues top pairings. That the new coaches are a great fit with the team. That despite a lack of picks we have quietly put together a strong prospect pool, especially on D. That the bulk of our bad contracts are off the books and we are in a great cap situation going forward. Etc, etc, etc. The sky isn't falling. The Flames are in good shape.
-
I agree that is likely. Plus, I don't see Rittich as a future starter. With this being Smiths last season I would prefer someone with starter upside was under him.
-
It really comes down to the last line. What is the Flames assessment of Gilles and Rittich. If they think they have potential starters that are ready for a 1B/Back Up role this year then you absolutely stick with them. If they don't then they need to look outside.
-
Smith was great last season until he was injured. Whether it was being overplayed or just an injury we don't know, but he wasn't great later. But his age is a fair concern. On the others I don't agree. My assessment of Rittich comes from my own review of his ability, but also from people that know there stuff when it comes to goalies. He is steady and smart, but he doesn't have the high level skill of am NHL goalie and that will be exposed as he gets more time. In the league. As for Gilles, he had a strong development season last year for sure. But I am not sold he has it between the ears to be a starter. The Flames are closer to him though and will have a better assessment. He definitely has the skills to do the job. But I didn't see anything to suggest he is ready to play 1B behind an aging Smith. He isn't waiver eligible yet and another year in the AHL wouldn't be terrible, especially since he is likely to get called up when Smith is injured again.
-
Normally I agree with the premise of trying to develop your own goalies. But it isn't the only way and it may not be the best way for the Flames. First, a good chunk of the best goalies in the league were not developed by their current team (Anderson, Dubnyk, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Talbot, Fleury, Varlamov, etc). Some of these guys were acquired cheap. Second, I don't like the Flames options. Parsons might be good, but he isn't ready. Gilles doesn't have the head space and Rittich doesn't have the ability. Smith is back regardless, so that buys a year for Parsons. But I wouldn't mind having a plan B in the backup role. Both as security for Parsons, but also for security for Smith if age catches up to him or he gets injured again.
-
I understand the frustration. But let's try and be at least a little rational. The GM has made a reasonable effort to bring on a starter. Smith was one of the top goalies in the league before he got hurt. Parsons was a steal in the second round. Rittich was a free pick up. I am as sick of the revolving goalie situation as anyone, but I am not seeing a bunch of lost opportunities that another GM would have capatilized on. The sky isn't falling. The Flames are still in good shape with good young pieces up front, great pieces at D, and a decent set of kids and prospects (Anderson, Jankowski, Valimaki, Foz, Foo, Dube, Kylington, Phillips, Mangiapane, Parsons, etc). This entire fire the GM, management, get new ownership, we won't win a cup until Gaudreau has grey hair, etc dialogue is an irrational rant that is pretty tough to take seriously.
-
We will give Parsons a couple of weeks before calling him an AHLer (instead of one game)? How generous of us The Flames are getting top end goal tending in the NHL right now from both goalies, one of which is 25. Gilles has turned a corner and Parsons is still a top prospect. Bottom line with goalies is: 1) You measure their progress over years not weeks, and 2) Chances are your best starter is coming from somewhere you didn't expect. Sure there are exceptions to the rules, but they ARE exceptions. Given Smiths age we definitely need to find a long term option. I also agree adding a prospect or two won't hurt. But I like the goalies from top to bottom and I definitely think it is WAY to early to be coming to conclusions on Rittich, Parsons, or Gilles.
-
The Flames are getting strong tending at every level. Yet this post is still full of complaints about the goalie coaching, goalie development, the recent trades, the schedule, the performance on the ice, etc. I direct anyone who feels they need to complain about goal tending at this point in time here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
-
Trade Backlund and kiss the season good bye. He is the reason that Monahan and Gaudreau get the offensive assignments. And we are still a two line team and Backlund drives one of those lines. Smith is fine. I have zero issues seeing what we have in Gilles / Rittich for a game or two while he gets better. If they aren't ready you can get a back up for a lot less then Backlund. I agree with others that Lack was a miss. He hasn't shown anything regular or preseason that suggests he is a good option in the NHL. The sooner they pull the chute on Lack the better.
-
With the way the Flames are playing they don't have the luxury to start their back up. Hopefully that won't be the case forever. I am not saying never start Lack. I just don't think the fact he hasn't started yet is a problem.
-
Nobody is suggesting anything as dramatic as playing 81 games in a row. I also don't think this has been an ongoing problem for the Flames. The last goalie to play more then 52 games in a season was Kipper. That was in 11/12. The Flames have had a light schedule work wise and Smith isn't overplayed. Giving him a chance to rebound when he was playing so well (especially of Lack wasn't ready) isn't a problem. Especially before a 4 day break.
-
It's not about getting Lack starts. It's about getting Smith rest. And so far he hasn't needed it. I get the school of thought of getting the back up starts. But when you starter is hot and rested you play him. Also, it sounds like the coach didn't feel Lack was showing well in practice until a couple of practices ago. If true, that factors in as well.
-
Rumor is some in the organization think he has a better shot at bring an NHL starter then Gilles. He was a bit of a low chance / high reward pick up and so far he is showing he might make the NHL. My guess he is the first call up if we are looking for a goalie, but the season is early yet so that may change.
-
I think it was the right call. Smith is the starter. He had been playing very well for us until one bad game where he was pulled. If you start with Lack the game after it is the wrong message. Let Smith get back on the horse. Lack will get his chance soon I am sure.
-
To win a cup it starts with having the best players. That is on drafting and development. (A draft lottery win or two certainly helps, but it isn't required). Then you need to surround them with good players. Drafting a development is still key, but now your GM comes in as well. Next they need to play well on the ice. Hello coaching staff. Throw in a lot of luck and you are on your way to a cup. But that doesn't have much to do with goal tending. Goalies are strange. Fleury was a first overall and started in the NHL, but ended up back in junior and played in the AHL before coming in as a poor/mediocre starter (until he found his legs). Meanwhile Murray was a 3-round pick who played his full four years in junior and two in the AHL before getting an injury call up where he was able to unexpectedly win the starters job. Crawford was a second round pick and was up and down between the AHL/NHL for years before breaking in. He has won cups as both a young and older goalie. Quick was a third round pick but broke into the league very quickly, moving from the ECHL to the AHL to the NHL in a single season. Anyone telling you there is only one path to success when it comes to goalies is speaking out of the wrong hole. They are all different. The only consistent trend for just about all goalies is really strong play in the AHL before making it to the NHL. The Flames haven't had that from any of their goalies which is why they haven't had any young goalies in net. This idea that being young qualifies you for an NHL position is ridiculous. It really really is. You need to play well in the developing league first then you move to the NHL. The day that a goalie is playing well in the AHL but doesn't get the bump is the day I join the naysayers. Until then Mike Smith is 4-2 and is top 10 in both save percentage and goals against (among starters). That is despite seeing more shots then any other goalie. He isn't giving people any valid reasons to complain about how we are managing our net. Hopefully it stays that way.
-
Gilles has one great save (in an otherwise poor camp) and Smith has one bad game (in an otherwise great start) and out comes the naysayer. We all want a kid to step up and take the reigns. But you need a kid to step up and take the reigns first. That is a distinction that JJ and a few others can't seem to grasp. Until that happens let the rest of us enjoy the good goaltending we are getting from Smith. Let's not jump up out for the gutter everytime there is a bad game. Overall Smith had been great. Good on him. Meanwhile Gilles, Rittich, and Parsons have had a decent start to the season. The reigns are still hear for them WHEN one of them is ready. The great thing about an older goalie on a short term deal is that they will be available when one of the kids gets a hold of them.
-
Back at you
-
Agreed. But if it were that simple then why hasn't the long list of head coaches and GMs not fired him? Which tells me it isn't that simple.
-
It is really tough to judge a goalie coach since we are so far removed from them. On one hand, I agree with you. Goal tending in Calgary has been underwhelming for so long you have to question the coach. On the other hand, this guy has been with the organization since 2011 and has survived multiple GM and coaching changes. Something about him has kept him with the organization despite the results and the many opportunities to fire him. It kind of reminds be of Tod Button. The Flames had poor results in the drafting department but this guy survived Sutter, Feaster, Burke, and Treliving. Now they have terrific results in drafting.
-
The league average for SV% last season was .913. Smith was .914. Elliot was .909. When you dig into the advanced goalie analytics the trend continues. Smith was a slightly above average goalie last season while Elliott was a slightly below average goalie last season. You can make a case for Elliott. Before last season he was one of the better goalies in the NHL by the analytics, at least for some seasons. Was it the increased workload last season that caused him to fall off? The adjustment to a new team? Just an off year for a goalie that has struggled with consistency from year to year? Who knows? Who cares? That ship has sailed. What we do know is that IF Smith stays healthy and IF age doesn't catch up to him he should be at least as good in Calgary as he was in Arizona. Probably better. We know his game to game consistency is much better then Elliott/Hudler. We know he can carry a heavy workload and is a proven starter. We also know he is at the age where goalies often fall off and he has some injury history. We know Lack has been terrible and the Flames are banking on a rebound. Tough to predict a rebound, but the chances don't look great. We also have a couple of young goalies in the system that might be NHL ready if called upon. All in all there are still a lot of question marks in net. But the most likely outcome is us getting slightly above average goal tending that should be better and more consistent then last year.