kehatch

Jury is still out for me on Conroy. I like what he says. Specifically on not losing assets for nothing, injecting youth in the line up, not trading futures. But its easier to say then do if you want to stay competitive in this league. I am pretty meh on the coaching hires. Its tough for fans to weigh in too much as we don't have the perspective. But I am not a huge fan of Huska or Sigalet. I get why they didn't hire Love as an assistant under Huska, but I would have preferred to either give Love the HC position or hire an outside HC and bring Love in as an assistant. Huska is fine, just a bit too safe. The draft was ... fine. I would have preferred they swung a bit harder in the first round given what was available, and there are a few flags given the priority they gave to size, but overall I thought they each pick was defensible. I haven't loved the summer so far. The Toffoli trade was just okay. I don't like the extension for Sharangovich at all. Most of all its the lack of movement. I get that the Lindholm decision makes things harder and that he is holding out for a great return on Hanafin. But its feeling a bit like he is waiting too long and teams are moving on. Vladar at a minimum should have been traded if for a poor return. I might be proven wrong and he gets a big return on some guys. But its getting late in the day. At this point we may end up into the season with these guys on our roster. Conroy talks too much. He is more rooted, but he still reminds me of Feaster. For example, he made a big deal about not wanting to lose assets for nothing, alluding to the 1-year contracts. Now if he can't move these guys we have a big distraction come camp.

I disagree with the direction as well. But I don't make the trades or sign the checks. The mandate is be competitive and you can't expect to do that if you lose Lindholm. Conroy will try and sign him until Lindholm makes it clear he won't sign an extension. I wouldn't be surprised to see this go into the season in hopes that we are competitive out of the gate and that results in an extension.

Rebuilding teams don't make money. Owners don't sign off on plans that lose money. Especially not with nearly a quarter of a billion dollars invested in long term "win now" contracts. Especially not in the middle of an arena deal. We may not like it, but teams that are in the running to make the playoffs make money, at least in a good market. If the objective is to win the cup then rebuilding is the right move. You can't lose Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan, Bennett, Giordano, Hanafin, etc over a few seasons and expect to win a cup. Not with a marginal prospect pool. But if the objective is to make money over the short term a rebuild isn't the right answer. At least not until they naturally stop being in the playoffs running.

The mandate in Calgary is make the playoffs. They can't make the playoffs without Lindholm. Therefore priority 1 is to sign Lindholm to an extension. To do that you need to show Lindholm we can be competitive despite last season and despite the number of departures / expected departures. That requires Conroy to make a trade for a big time player, preferably at RW. That is a tough ask given our lack of cap space and an understandable reluctance to trade futures. It is possible Conroy pulls off a Nylander level trade. But without taking futures or taking on cap I think that type of trade might be too difficult to pull off. I expect more Sharangovich level moves once its clear the big fish are off the table.

Really nice road trip. There are a few things not to like. The Flames let some teams back in after taking big leads, a few guys are struggling a bit, and game 5 was a bit sloppy. But that's being nit-picky. Gaudreau looks awesome, as do a large portion of the forwards. The D is playing pretty well top to bottom, and that includes guys like Kylington and Gudbranson who had flags. Markstrom has been playing very well. The coach still has the classic Sutter style that made him successful, but he has also evolved in a few areas. Most of all, I love the structure and compete. There is still most of a season left so they need to keep it up. But it's an encouraging start for sure.

At this rate even Monahan and Lewis might get a point.

The Heat are a pretty young team. Pelletier and Wolf are only a year older then Francis and they are leading the team at the moment. Zary and Pettersson got key opportunities at important time last season. So did Mackey (not young, but was a rookie.) Any player trying to make it in the AHL is going to be competing against tweeners. A young guy getting third line minutes doesn't necessarily reflect a failure to provide opportunities. More often then not it reflects the play and readiness of the young guy. And sometimes the prospect doesn't turn out, and for 5 round picks that is more common then not. I am not saying that will be the case for Francis, but it's a reasonable possibility. I suggest a bit of patience JJ. Prospect development is a bumpy and usually long road. Preseason is too early for "told you so" and 4 games is too early for "failing to provide opportunities." Mangiapane was in a similar situation in his +2 season. Going up against tweeners and adults, smaller player picked late in the draft. I don't recall his first 4 games, but he had some challenges at points that season. He turned out okay.

I think people are being to hard on the Gudbranson pick up. Treliving is generally pretty frugal with his depth signings so obviously there was a market for the player. If a PTO or minimum wage contract was in the cards then that would have been the signing. The Flames were in a tough spot. We lost Gio and didn't have a lot of great options to fill the gap. Sometimes the only strategy is to throw mud at the wall, and when your doing that you want to load up on a lot of mud. You have some young guys that might turn out, but picking up Zadarov and Gudbranson just gives you a few options. And the coach was advocating for the player. Right now it's "no harm no foul". If he is your 7 D that's fine. If he is put in the AHL no biggie. It's some wasted cap, but having extra depth isn't a bad thing. Now if they choose to play him and lose a young D on waivers or something in favor of playing Gud then I won't be happy. But that hasn't happened.

Hanafin-Tanev was good in the preseason as well as last season. No reason not to stick with that. That leaves Zadorov, Kylington, or Valamaki to play with Andersson. I agree it's a bit tough to find a spot for Zadarov. I think he is a good player, but he is what he is. He is big, mean, and focused on a shut down game. He isn't super slow, but he isn't fast either and he has very little offensive game. Ideally you would play him with a guy like Hanafin, but our right side is Tanev, Andersson, Gudbranson, and Stone. None of them compliment Zadarov all that well. Andersson is the closest, but he still isn't a great match. The Flames might be better off to put either Valamaki or Kylington with Andersson. Then whichever of those two left with Zadarov. I believe Zadarov can play the right side. I don't mind Hanafin-Tanev / Kylington-Andersson / Valamaki-Zadorov / Stone. It's not a rock star D, but the Flames were always going to need a young guy or two to elevate to put together a competent D. Of course if they insist on playing Gudbranson then they are really stuck. Then you pretty much have to play Zadorov with Andersson because he can't play with Tanev or Gud.

Tavev and Zadorov shouldn't be on a pairing. Not enough foot speed. They got stuck with a guy behind them multiple times last night, and they didn't look good the two games they played together.

Nice to see them sticking with Gaudreau on the top line. I am really curious to see what they do with the bottom pair. The right thing to do would be to waive Gudbranson, but I doubt they do that. The next best thing is to move Stone down. They won't waive Valamaki, and I hope they don't send Kylington down.

I don't care. If you want to be the team nobody messes with then you have to pay that price occasionally.

I meant to say Monahan. Mangiapane is fine.

I think Sutter strategy has been to build offensively and defensively oriented lines. We saw it on D with Zadorov-Taven / Hanafin-Andersson. I think it is/was similar with the top 6 forwards. Tkachuk-Lindholm-Coleman give you a strong defensive (and offensive) line, while Gaudreau-Monahan-Mangiapane is a line you can start in the offensive zone. But I agree with you. I liked those three together last season, and last night. I curious to see if Monahan can get his offensive game going again without Gaudreau though. If he doesn't the Flames don't have the depth down the middle to compensate.

Agree on call counts. I liked the top line last night, but not too many squads are going to let them play keep away like that. But Gaudreau looked really good with those two.

I have to wonder if the Coleman scratch, and resulting new top line, causes Sutter to shuffle things a bit. That top line looked good, albeit for one preseason game against the Canucks C squad. A simple swap of Gaudreau and Coleman could happen? Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman

Nice to see the Flames play with pace and energy. Good forecheck, physical play, and they worked. You aren't getting away with that dipsy doodling against a full NHL team though. Not too often anyway.

Sutter is really sticking to his lines. It looks like the top six, top four, and goalies are set. Tkachuk-Lindholm-Coleman Gaudreau-Monahan-Mangiapane Hanifin-Tanev Zadorov-Andersson Markstrom/Vlader However, Sutter keeps tweaking the depth a bit. Tonight he has swapped Ritchie with Pitlick on the Dube/Backlund line. Sutter seems to like Ritchie. He has also tried Dube at C with some success. The fourth line is consistently Lucic and Lewis on wing, but he has mixed up the C. The bottom pairing has been interesting too. Mackey hasn't impressed, but Kylington has looked good. Valamaki has been between Stone and Gudbranson. Overall I am curious to see who ends up on Backlunds RW, who Cs the fourth line, and who makes up the bottom pair. I am really interested to see if Kylington can keep it up. I haven't had much faith in him. Hope he proves me wrong.

Zadarov-Gubrandson would be a terrible pairing in my opinion. I also don't think you can put Valimaki on the top pair with Tanev, he hasn't shown he is ready for that and It think that derails him much more then putting him on a third pairing with Gud. If Valamaki shows up in camp and forces the coach to him more minutes then that changes things, but right now I think its Valamaki-Gud / Valimak-Stone and some combination of Tanev, Andersson, Hanafin, and probably Zadorov.

Lines have been really consistent so far, with just one change on D. We will see if they last the first few preseason games, but it's interesting to see Sutter stick with it through the first week. Tkachuk-Lindholm-Coleman: This line should match up better then the Monahan line against top competition. Interesting to see Sutter stick with Lindholm at C. Gaudreau-Monahan-Mangiapane: I am a bit surprised to see Sutter put a small player with Gaudreau/Monahan. But Mangiapane should handle the skill, he has the D game, and the work effort should be a good fit. Dube-Backlund-Pitlick: I don't love this line due to a lack of offense. If Dube takes a step they might generate some points, but barring that this line will struggle to score. They should be strong defensively though. Lucic-Richardson-Lewis: Good fourth line as long as they don't get mismatched with a high speed line. Lots of size, energy, and decent defensively. Ritchie: Obvious 13 forward. I just hope he doesn't end back up on the top line. Hanifin-Tanev: I like this much better then when Zadarov was with Tanev. It's a proven top 4 pairing and out best shot of having a legitimate top pairing option. Zadorov-Andersson: Unless these guys take a jump forward this line might struggle. It lacks speed overall. I do like the match if defense / offense. Hopefully both guys take it to another level this season. Valimaki-Gudbranson: This one is fine if they don't get caught against the top lines. Hopefully it clicks because Valamaki needs to find another level this season. Otherwise hopefully Sutter is ready to sit Gudbranson and bring up Stone (who was great with Valamaki last season) Kylington-Stone: Both are good 7D options.

The ownership still has a bunch of moves left before they have to rebuild. This season they are giving Sutter the types of players they want to see what he can do with this core. If that doesn't work they can fire the GM, or they can trade a core player or two in a hockey trade. Sure, if none of that works and they can't extend Gaudreau / Monahan doesn't recover from his surgery / Tkachuk refuses to sign or falls off / the young D doesn't materialize then maybe we see a string of three or four seasons of missed playoffs and ownership is forced into a rebuild. But these things aren't particularly likely, and even if they occur a rebuild isn't going to start overnight. For now this is a mid 20s team that is in the playoff mix every season, and there is very little reason to believe that won't continue to occur for at least the next few seasons.

I didn't suggest that finishing 20 is fine, or that the Flames are the youngest team in the league. I said that there isn't anything to indicate the Flames are all of a sudden going to have a steep drop off and start picking bottom 5. Not while they are spending to the cap and still have a core in their 20s. And as long as the Flames continue to be in that scenario, ownership won't sign off on a rebuild. Especially this ownership who have shown the reluctance to rebuild previously.

I think as fans, we like to put simple explanations forward to keep things easy. "You need to have a first overall to win the cup" or "You need X number of ELCs" or "You need X caliber player as X,Y, and Z positions". I have done it. You have done it. Its how we set up context for an argument or discussion. But the reality is, you need the best players and the best team to win and there isn't a specific recipe to achieving that. That said, we all know that the best place to get the best players is the draft. The best way to get the best players in the draft is to draft higher and more often. And the best way to get the highest and most picks is to rebuild. I agree with you that the top SC teams had a lot of great players to complement the other great players they got in top spots of the drafts. But those teams still had the great players they got in the top spots of the draft. The issue with the Flames is we don't have the strong base the consistently great teams do. We don't have the top players at any position, and the two we have that can occasionally be in the conversation are at the least important position (LW). Could we find those players outside of a top 3 draft pick? Possibly. Its why people like me are advocating for Eichel. But its a lot harder. Some fans look at it like this. Are we good enough to be legitimate SC contenders with the base we have? No, then lets rebuild. Its that simple, and it leads to a lot of the arguments describe at the paragraph "The only way too ..." or "If we don't then terrible thing X,Y will occur". The owners don't look at it like that though. Playoffs and big name players is where you make your money. When you don't have those two things, then you rebuild to get those two things, but certainly not before. For coaches and GMs, if you can make the playoffs you might be the next 04 Flames, 06 Oilers, 20 Canadians, or even better 19 Blues. The GM and coaches aren't going to have a job through a rebuild.

12 isn't a doom or gloom scenario, and is pretty consistent to where the Flames could pick. Since 2016-17 we have finished 16, 20, 2, 19, 20. Outside of the 2018/19 anomoly, we have been pretty consistent. To this point, the Flames haven't done anything to get significantly worse, and the team is young. It's a big leap to "catch up" to the bottom teams whom are actively rebuilding, especially for more then one season. As long as the Flames spend to the cap and maintain their young core we will be in the mix for a playoff spot and will most likely continue to finish in the 20-10 range.

I don't get the doom and gloom to be honest. The Flames weren't a bottom 10 team last season and I don't think they should have a big drop off this season. Will they be better then mediocre? Maybe not. But I don't think they are going to be terrible.