kehatch
-
Posts
10,467 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by kehatch
-
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
Thanks kehatch for a NEW thread.lol
I voted rebuild if we have another year like last year.
But honestly, I think we have zoned in on some of the things that have really been hurting us.
Not much change to the core, but I'm not positive the core has been the problem.
A complete lack of 60 minutes of compete, no grit, no pushback, a team that always falls into a hole without the resilience to get out of it. When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging they say. The team's composition never did that. "Have Ritchie beat someone up"...never mattered.
I like the adds, as residual as they seem. It will be the bottom 6 that keeps the entire roster up. So this is a retool to me. We've retooled our bottom 6, which was god awful. Most think it doesn't need move the needle, but I see it differently. Our bottom 6 is no longer going to get completely outworked so that is going to be a big boost.
How the roster comes together is pretty exciting to me. Lots of parts and methods it seems. Pitlick, for me, is a nice add. He will chip in with secondary scoring. His career high is 15 goals playing with junk and doing it all by himself. Coleman always plays with a sense of urgency so that's a nice add for what has been a pretty vanilla team.
When Sutter calls someone out in the media, Lewis and Richardson can talk to the player. "Yes. This is what he does. Don't get mad at him, get mad at yourself. He's not lying".
Role players that know their role very well.
Size on D. No more stick checking. Punish. Nothing slows a forward down more than being aware that there's a heavy hitter on the ice.
As much as I don't see Gudbranson as a good add, I also have to wonder if Sutter has always been laughing at his usage. He wanted him here, so he likely sees something that I don't.
Finally, this team filled me full of spite last year with their pathetic levels of, "try".
Whining about it got tiring to the point that my give-a-crap-level was the same as theirs. But that's exhausting too.
So I've stopped whining and it's a new season to watch and hope that fixing the bottom 6, piling in Dmen and G prospects is a good start. Now our top 6 has a platform to stand on. If they falter, then it's time to address that.
I hope we've fixed a lot of the real problems now. Not long term solutions, but perhaps a better look at being a true 4 line team, built from the net out. Without skipping over the 3rd and 4th lines like we could just throw anyone there.
Call me 'skeptically intrigued' about this season.
On paper, we are worse. We lost our captain and top D and our response was to use the cap to rebuild our bottom lines and pairings. For a team with a lot of holes, and one where even the GM was promising core changes, that's lead to a big snicker across 31 fan bases (and a lot in fan base 32 as well).
But I agree with you. The rebuild of our depth was designed around a proven and elite coach who seems to have faith in the team. If last years team played like a proper Sutter team for the full season then we would have made the playoffs. The biggest issue with the Flames has been them underplaying and under achieving. The coach and additions may give us the identity we need to right that ship.
That said, a lot needs to go right. The coach and additions need to have that positive impact. A bunch of players need to rebound, including Markstrom, Monahan, and Tkachuk. A young D or two need to step up. And the Flames need to figure out where to find goals, because they certainly didn't bring any in this summer. We also need to deal with our best players expiring contract.
I really don't know what to expect from this team. Best guess is they make the playoffs as a low seed. But they could win the conference or be bottom 5 and neither would shock me.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, jjgallow said:
Historically we have gone into rebuilds after missing the playoffs more than one year in a row.
The Flames have only missed the playoffs in consecutive seasons twice since coming to Calgary. Both were long droughts of multi season misses. Last time, it took 4 seasons of missed playoffs, a mostly retired Kipper, and an expiring Iginla for ownership to rebuild. Even then, they avoided the term 'rebuild' as much as possible with Feaster using one of his made up words to make it sound like something else. With an arena on the way and a young core, I think it will take more then a second season of missing the playoffs for the Flames to rebuild. But who knows, if we lose Gaudreau, Tkachuk refuses to sign, and Monahan doesn't rebound that may fast track things.
-
33 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:
With only 4 playoff appearances in 10+ years and only one playoff round won since '04 is there any reason to think another disappointing season would change anything?
I think so.
I think there is about a 0% chance the Flames go full rebuild. Last time ownership agreed to a rebuild we were well on our way to a fourth consecutive playoff miss. Iginla was on an expiring contract, Kipper had all but retired, and they were out of options. This time our core is young, since Gaudreau made the team we have made the playoffs 4 out of 7 seasons, and two of those misses were while we were still building. With an arena on the way I can't see ownership agreeing to a rebuild unless something catastrophic comes up.
But I do think there will could be significant changes. Tkachuk, Mangiapane, and Gaudreau are all on expiring contracts, and Monahan only has one additional season. That is a big chunk of the core and a big chunk of potential cap. If the Flames have a poor season, they will almost certainly make some big changes. Especially if any of those guys aren't looking for a long term extension.
-
The Flames can likely trade Lucic next season if they want to. Most of his salary is a signing bonus next season. As of July 2 there will only be 1 million in actual salary owing.
-
5 hours ago, Horsman1 said:
if hanafin/tanev... zadorov/anderson are our top 2 lines.. and valamaki/stone are our next best.. and mackay is the seventh that leaves kylington/welenski/Gudbrunsen/as spares..or insurance playing for one way contracts on the farm
The head coach reached out to Gudbranson in July trying to get the player, and the GM just signed him to a 2-million dollar deal. He isn't going to the AHL. Also, Mackey is a young waiver eligible player. If he isn't in the top 6 then he will be in the AHL where he can get ice time and continue to develop. Based on your response to TD, I appreciate that isn't what you would do, which is fair. But that is what the Flames will do.
-
8 hours ago, jjgallow said:
Francis made "honorable mention" in the untouchables list from the hockeywriters,
https://thehockeywriters.com/calgary-flames-untouchable-prospects-2021-22/
Not a bad writeup, this year's picks of course excluded, I think Francis has a real shot of being one of our most valuable prospects with a strong season this year.
Hoping he brings it.
I always enjoy reading takes on prospects, so thanks for linking. I don't really agree with the write up though. First, Coronoto isn't listed, and neither is anyone else from the 2021 draft class. Strange for something written in August. I also have trouble listing Phillips and Ruzicka as untouchables. I know he is just taking a different approach to saying they are in our top 5 prospect list, but using the term untouchable? Phillips could very well be on waivers in a few weeks.
-
1 hour ago, cross16 said:
Sutters system will minimize the damage but imo this is now a below avg d core and a hard choice for Sutter. He either needs to pair a couple of boat anchors together, Zadarov and Gudbranson, so he can limit their minutes or he’s going to saddle to young dmen with them. This puts a ton of pressure on Rasmus Anderson to bounce back and it he doesn’t things could get ugly.
i hope I am wrong but for me the flames have gone the wrong direction with their d core this off season.I think (hope) if it comes down to Zadarov and Gudbranson sharing a pair that they are calling up Mackey or Stone!
The Gudbranson signings sort of feel like the Regher pick up in LA. Totally different situation given Regher's issues were related to age, but still similar in that he was struggling but performed pretty well under Sutter. As for Zadarov, he is more Warrener. He has a decent NHL resume, and a good chance to take it to the next level playing for Sutter.
I know it sounds like I am overvaluing the coach. Maybe I am, but I don't think so. The guy knows how to deploy these guys, and I think both will be fine under him.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, rocketdoctor said:
Yeah my pairings were based on thinking that both Zadorv and Gudbranson are at best 3rd line D men and I cannot see Sutter relying on Valimaki.
I did not realise Mackey was waiver exempt. Just seems weird siging a young guy to a one way contract and then sending him down.
I think the one way contract was a compromise to get the player signed for two seasons. It only impacts the owners payroll, not waivers or the cap. I also think Mackey will play 60 plus games in the NHL this season. He is NHL ready. The summer line ups always look congested, but injuries are going to happen as early as camp and he is the first up on the left side.
I think Mackey and Valamaki are going to take big steps forward this season. I am less certain about Andersson, but still hopeful. Kylington I have written off. But full disclosure, I wrote off Mangipane once upon a time ... Hopefully Kylington proves me wrong again.
-
1 hour ago, robrob74 said:
sutter is going to wonder why Valamaki isn’t good enough because he’s going to be covering for EG all the time and failing to do what what he’s good at, thus stifling his offensive side. Sure Valamaki needs to play good D, but…I guess we will see. Sutter isn't an idiot and can tell the difference between Valamaki making a mistake and Gudbrandson making a mistake. He is also a bit underrated as a development coach. There have been some very good players developed under his watch. Valamaki progressed a bunch under Sutter, and he spoke very positively about the experience.
Again, I am not in the Gudbrandson fan club. I am also certain that both Treliving and Sutter are more then aware of his short comings. But I get the desire to have a physical shut down guy on each pair. Would I have preferred someone with a better set of metrics and more offensive upside? Absolutely. But the Flames have a lot of young puck moving two way D men. The keywords being 'young' and 'puck moving'. Adding two more RH shot defensively focused D gives the team a lot more options, especially with Mackey primed to make an entrance.
There is also the question of intangibles. I am an analytics proponent, so I normally hate the word. But the Flames have a culture issue that needs to be solved. We need some more 'intangibles' and this guy brings them.
Call me cautiously optimistic, with a side dish of healthy skepticism.
-
Lets try and move onto something more positive. I think there are some (gasp) reasons for optimism right now. For a few reasons.
Almost every team is bad at drafting and developing goalies
I looked at each NHL teams drafted goalies from 2005 through 2014 drafts. This covers ten drafts over the cap era without getting into guys who are still developing. I considered any goalie with at least 100 NHL starts as a success.
207 goalies were drafted over those 10 years. 16% of them played 100 games or more. Remove the career back-ups and your at 11%. Remove the guys who broke out with another team and you are at 9%. A third of the league went 10 drafts without getting an NHL goalie, just like Calgary (though Brossoit will likely break the 100 game mark, just not with Calgary).
The point is, Calgary isn't unique in our lack of finding NHL goalies in the draft, and our struggles don't translate to a permanent curse. Tampa drafted and developed the best goalie in the NHL. They have drafted 28 goalies over the entire franchise and that was their only hit to date.
We have a number of prospects worth paying attention to
We have had prospects to get excited about in the past. I get the 'fool me once' tone, but its been a bit since we have had two AAA prospects and prospects across multiple levels.
- (NHL) Vlader was only moved due to to congestion in Boston's crease (sound familiar) and was moved versus losing him on waivers. He looked great 4 of the 5 NHL games he started for last season (and 5 was a throw away). His pro numbers are really good, and its tough to find many in the know who don't think this guy has NHL upside. A lot of Boston fans are really upset they lost him.
- (AHL/Junior) Wolf's numbers are insane. The Hockey Writers have him ranked as the 4 best goalie prospect in the NHL (one spot behind the guy who caused Vlader to be traded to Calgary), and that is pretty consistent across the league. Most prospect rankings have Wolf as our fourth best prospect, behind our three first round picks. If he wasn't a bit on the short side (for a goalie) he would be ranked higher. I know that height is an issue, but he isn't that short. Saros, Halak, Quick, Grubaur, etc are all similar height.
- (Others) Lets face it, the best goalies are often the ones we didn't expect. Sergeyev is a great dark horse prospect. He has passed every test handed to him, he just needs some tougher tests. Chechelev has put up some good numbers in Russia and is making his way to NA. Parsons was highly touted as a prospect before injury, but he rebounded well in the ECHL last season. I keep hearing good things about Werner even though his resume doesn't really scream future NHLer. I get that every team has these types of prospects, and most won't work out. But the Flames have a lot of bullets in this gun significantly improving the chance at a hit.
The point is we will have valid prospects at the NHL level, AHL level, and one representing each of the last three drafts. Two of those prospects are highly ranked, with one of them listed as one of the best goalie prospects in the NHL. Meanwhile, we have no need to rush any of them as we have a legitimate NHL starter in net.
Don't worry, be happy ....
I know enough not to overplay the goalie hand. Its possible none of the guys above work out. But I can't remember the last time Calgary was this flush in legitimate NHL players and prospect at the G position. The history is a concern, but as I said above, that isn't unique to Calgary and some of the best goalies in the league were drafted and developed by teams who historically struggle doing that.
I think goal tending prospects is an area of strength for the organization right now. It certainly isn't inline with the general tone of this thread.
-
7
-
4 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:
So we now have 9 D and only Kylington on a 2 way contract?
I expected Stone and happy to have him back as cover for injuries but
Hanafin Anderson
Tanev Mackey
Zadorov Gudbranson
Stone
Valimaki, Kylingtom
The balance looks all wrong to me.
Valimaki looks the odd one out here with Kylington being waived and sent to Stocketon again. But perhpas they run with 2 D in the press box and Mackey sits with Valimiki partnering Tanev.
Can see why the consipracy theroies are starting......
It doesn't look that bad Imo. Maybe it's how you have them paired?
1. Hanafin-Tanev
2. Zadarov-Andersson
3. Valamaki-Gubrandson
E. Mackey-Stone
A. Kylington-Welinksy
Kylington and Welinksy are going to provide depth from the AHL.
Mackey can also easily be sent down, his salary is small enough to fully bury and he is waiver exempt. Stone's salary also can be buried, he isn't waiver except though. I expect Mackey will be sent down and be the first call up if there are injuries.
-
6 hours ago, jjgallow said:
You're getting confused with what I was saying and mixing it up with what other people are saying.
I did not bring up Ortio. You are bringing him up, @conundrumed brought him up. It's okay, it's human nature to change the topic when faced with facts against one's arguement. And yeah, Ortio is a sore spot for me but you can't just tie him into an unrelated arguement and then ask me why I tied him into that arguement lol.
Let me know when you are done going off about Ortio who was by the way an excellent prospect at one time, and all here agreed.
Then we can discuss any number of goalies in our development system who went nowhere, including Riitich, and we can argue about how great they really were. I guess.
The Flames haven't been successful drafting and developing goalies. No question, I am not disputing that.
My point is that every team has their David Rittich's and other veteran goalies. And every team has their long list of Ortios and Brossoits and Gilles that didn't make it. Every team also has a dreadful hit percentage on drafted goalies.
You mentioned the Blues as a team strong at developing goalies. That's fair, they have had three starters through their system in the last two decades or so (and a whole bunch of failed attempts as well).
Looking at them though all shared starts with 30 something AHL vets and all were in their mid 20s (or later) when they broke into the NHL. Binnington spent 6 seasons splitting starts. Jake Allen went 4 seasons doing that. Bishop spent 9 seasons. Further Bishop never cracked the Blues line up, Allen is average, and Binnington has crashed to earth after his magical playoff run.
There isn't a secret recipe and there isn't one way to develop goalies. The Flames need to be better, absolutely. But their failures isn't because they are too old, or because they have taken shots on guys like Rittich/Ramo/Berra, or because there has been too much competition.
-
6 hours ago, cross16 said:
Stone is fine, depth and fine if he winds up in the press box.
Zero shock, but not happy about Gudbranson. I get Sutter wanted him and better hope and pray Sutter has some magic because Gudbranson is not very good. He and Zadarov on the same D core is looking very rough going into the season.
Gudbranson said today Sutter called him at the start of free agency saying he hoped he would consider Calgary. For me if they are just signing him now that would signal to me that they were awaiting a bigger move and are now out. That would line up with Friedman reporting yesterday that Buffalo re engaged with interested teams after meeting with Eichel a new reps
Gudbranson is a defensive D that struggles in his own end at times, and that's a tough package to sell. But he makes the Flames tougher to play against and, along with Zadarov, adds an element we didn't have.
I think he is going to fit nicely into a role this season. I won't be shocked if we are regretting the signing in December, but I actually expect we will be pleasantly surprised with him. I guess we will see.
As for the timing of the signing suggesting the Flames are out on Eichel, maybe. It could be a spend of the final cap space, and a sign they are done. But it could also be a sign they may be trading a D and wanted the depth. Most likely the two are unrelated and this is just adding some last off season depth.
-
6 hours ago, zima said:
Aww comon do you really want to part with these kids to grab a beat-up kid who in reality has not put up that many more points than Mony sure he is a R S but why would you want to drop Wolf a possible game breaker and a D who is just a baby and hasn't had the opportunity to play a full yr yet? I love trades but when it comes to the track record of the Flames management in the last 10 yrs or so we really should close the door . Eic is not the answer and given up such possible prospects that is not the way to go.
McDavid, McKinnon, Crosby, then maybe Draisaitl and Matthews are the best Cs in the league. Right below that you have a short group that includes Bergeron, Barkov, Schiefle, and a few others. Eichel is in that group when he is healthy, and he is 24 years old. Monahan is a strap drop below those guys. That's not a slight, I like Monahan. But he isn't Eichel.
If the Flames are confident in Eichel recovering, then yes I would give those players up for Eichel. If the Flames won the lottery and got the first overall pick we would be super fortunate to draft a player of that Caliber.
-
43 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
that is not what I said. People use Ortio against me because I supported him when most fans abandoned him. And because it's one of the very few predictions of the Many predictions I've made on here that didn't pan out like I'd expected.
Let's be honest, anyone on this thread who has ever supported any goalie in our development system since Kipper, has been proved "wrong".
In hindsight, you're just comparing one failure with another. Both Ortio and Riitch were failed developments. They both took up top development minutes and resources and we got very little back. The difference is that Ortio had the potential for more, and Riitich came to us with is potential almost maxed out.
If even a single one of our prospects panned out and became a starter, then I would say I was probably wrong about Ortio. That's not the case. It doesn't mean I was right either. IMHO it means I was wrong about our development system (back then, I had only positive things to say about our development). Ortio came to us with very strong skills, almost fully developed, and proceeded to regress almost immediately upon entering our system. Fine. Ok.
Then every other prospect did the exact same thing too, except for Riittich who as already a professional veteran on arrival.
The general mood on here when you read this thread now is that we are all okay with the idea of none of our goalie prospects being anything more than support players as their career. People are literally afraid to anticipate more than that now. Me included. But I'm not okay with it.
Before drafting Vasilevskiy in the first round, the Lightning drafted 16 goalies the previous 12 years. Of them one played more then 100 NHL games, and that was Kari Ramo. Vasilevskiy himself went on to play two seasons in the KHL, the first as a back-up and in the second he shared starts. His following two seasons he bounced between the AHL and NHL, and finally got the net following a Ben Bishop injury in the 2016-17 season.
I appreciate the Flames haven't been stellar at drafting and developing goalies. But the suggestion that Rittich playing 43 games over two seasons in the AHL 'clogged up' the system or impacted Ortio's development is insane. They didn't even play in the AHL at the same time. The suggestion that Ortio screams a missed opportunity is also a little bonkers. He had one strong year in the AHL in his D+5 season. He was rewarded with 9 NHL starts. The Flames gave him 6 then 22 NHL starts the following two seasons. The net was his to take and he fell short. Finally, the doom and gloom around the Flames is silly. There are MANY NHL teams (see Tampa) that struggle in this area. The odds just aren't good due to the delay in goalie development and the importance of the position. Their failure to date doesn't exclude success tomorrow (again, see Tampa).
The Flames have a number of good options in the pipeline right now. That is good news.
-
After missing the playoffs the past three seasons, the Flames traded Iginla kicking off a rebuild they had been procrastinating for far too long. The following off season the Flames draft Sean Monahan, and over the next 5 seasons the Flames continued to rebuild their core. This included signing their top prospect (Gaudreau), drafting Tkachuk, and adding both Lindholm and Hanafin in a trade.
In the first season following the Lindholm / Hanafin acquisition the Flames won the Western Conference. Unfortunately, they were embarrassed in the first round of the playoffs. The following season they squeaked into the Playoffs, and were again ousted in the first round. Last season the Flames were 3 wins shy of making the playoffs in what was arguably the worst division in modern NHL history.
Most fans, myself included, thought the Flames were in for a busy off season with changes to the core. However, the Flames instead opted to take one more kick at it with the current core, likely due to the influence of the new head coach Daryll Sutter. Instead of making sweeping changes Treliving instead focused on depth players in an effort to make the Flames more difficult to play against (and more Sutter like).
Both Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Mangiapane are due an extension next season, and Monahan the season after that.
If the Flames falter this season do they continue to stay the course? Do they finally make some changes to the teams core? Or do we see the team enter into a full rebuild?
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Kek, exactly what I was thinking. Except BUF wants RD because they have Dahlin, Power, Hagg, and Samuelsson, they lack a top pair RHS RD. Besides, we need to clear the cap space. Valimaki doesn't clear enough.
Your not wrong. I doubt Calgary wants to move Andersson though given the lack of top 4 options. But if it's for Eichel I am sure they would consider it.
-
1 hour ago, sak22 said:
I don't recall anything regarding this over the past year. I know it was something he mentioned contemplating retiring during the previous season, but also pinpointed more towards Peters than anything, also stated he was rejuvenated after Peters left.
Agree. Everything I have heard and read points to Lucic loving being on the Flames. He had a good season, best in a long while, so I don't think he wants out.
The rest of what he says is bang on though. Richardson signing isn't about points, it's about a style of play and culture.
-
9 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Welcome back Stone. An obvious signing as I felt he did well under Sutter and Sutter liked to use him.
And welcome Gudbranson I guess. The guy who cheapshotted Dillon Dube in his first NHL game.
Stone makes a lot of sense. Like you said, he played well under Sutter.
Gudbranson I am less thrilled about. It's a case of getting an average player because he is a known quantity versus playing a younger player who is an unknown quantity.
That said, the deal is fine and he adds physicality that we need.
Between all of the depth lately, particularly and goal and D, is it possible the Flames are gearing up for an Eichel move with Wolf and Valamki part of the package? Conspiracy theory for sure, but goal and D are getting awfully crowded.
That said, Treliving stockpiles D every season and both additions follow the "build a Sutter team" theme so I think there is a simpler explanation.
-
1
-
-
30 year old Ortio who never played well in the AHL or NHL (maxed out at 37 games) is the missed opportunity because he is in the KHL, but 29 year old Rittich with 134 games in the NHL (and counting) was wasted development? And your big move is to drag up a post from 2013 because someone was impressed with a showing?
I hear you re the frustration of the Flames development record in net. But the reality is Gilles and Ortio had opportunities and didn't make it. They weren't the next Vasilevski except for ruined development caused by Rittich who had two 20 game seasons in the AHL. Ortio was never very good and Gilles had his development derailed by poorly timed injuries.
-
1 hour ago, jjgallow said:
He is a 30 year old NHL backup at very best on a league minimum two way contract as he drifts from team to team and his skills diminish.
We completely clogged up our development pipeline for two years for him, preventing Gillies, Parsons, from having a chance and for that matter preventing us from acquiring a legitimate prospect and developing them which is what we should have done. It cost us two prospects that had value at the time, whatever you think of them now, and prevented us from getting the right prospect.
We appear to be doing the same with Wolf. Forcing him to win the job from guys who have 2-4 years on him. This isn't good asset management, sorry. This isn't hedging our bet. It is impatience.
And yes. It's the most important position in the game, we need legitimate prospects. Sometimes you get what you pay for. There's a reason all these goalies we're acquiring are both free and too old to actually be prospects.
If the position was Center and we were loading the AHL up with older drifters, taking minutes away from Zary/Pelletier, people would be furious.
We think that's ok in net, we think that's ok on defence. That's why we're in for a really rough ride.
I don't disagree with you on what Rittich is now, but he had some decent NHL season. He didn't clutter up the development system though. He played 43 games over two seasons in the AHL and played behind Gilles who played 78 AHL games over the same period.
-
I don't agree with you JJ, but I hear what your saying. The D is a big question mark going into next season, no question.
But the Flames have one of the youngest D in the NHL and it shouldn't be a shock to see any of them step up into big roles.
Do I think they are going to end next season with the best top 4 in the league? No. But I am much more comfortable they will find impact players at D then I am they will at C.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, bosn111 said:
Chechelev signed AHL contract with Stockton. Adds more intrigue to the depth and who plays where.
It does for sure, but the simple answer is probably a loan out to another NHL club. I also won't be surprise to see the Flames move Parsons to give him an opportunity somewhere else.
-
There will be more additions. A big surprise move still wouldn't shock me, but we will almost definitely see some depth additions.
At forward, right now the top 13 is pretty obvious, but below that you have a few kids with 10 NHL games between them. None of them that have historically made a case for full time NHL duty. Camp may change minds but right now I think Treliving and Sutter probably want a bit more depth.
At defense the top 5 is pretty clear, with Kylington, Mackey, and Welinski in the running for spot 6 and 7 (and probably 8). There isn't much depth in the AHL right now though, and the Flames have a SUPER young D with only two players that don't have some question marks. It will be interesting to see if Treliving trusts the youth, but my guess is that we see at least a couple of PTOs, AHLS vets, or an outright NHL vet signing at the position. In fact, I won't be surprised to see Treliving flip one of the young D and another asset for a proven top 4 D to help stabilize things.
Is this the final run?
in Flames Talk
Posted
Our D is average, with the potential to be good.
Tanev was one of the best shut down D in the league last season. Hanafin is a good 3D already, but had the potential to grow. Andersson had a belated sophomore slump but I expect to see him take a step forward. Valamaki really responded to Sutter in the final 10 games. Zadarov will be good under Sutter. I think Mackey raises some eye brows this season (in a good way).
We are missing that elite number 1 guy and I am not convinced any of the young guys will become that type of player. But the D is deep and well balanced.