C_worthy Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 You insult people you agree with a lot? Glad I didn't post something you disagreed with. I didn't say that every team passed on him because they suck at drafting. I said that WE passed on him because we suck at drafting. Obviously Benn was a risk in 2007. Other teams took risks, and lost. Dallas took a risk, and won. We refused to take any risk at all, because we suck at drafting. We stuck to players with low ceilings and high likelihood of playing in the AHL. We Ensured for ourselves that there was No chance of drafting a player like this. And no...not every team in the NHL did this. 1) I never insulted anyone 2) you keep saying "it's a lot to pay for a 5th rounder". You need to get past the notion of where he was drafted. A draft is a snapshot in time. Several years later, the players are what they are. Benn is a star in the league - the fact that he was a 5th rounder several years ago is as relevant as whether he was a bed-wetter, i.e. not at all. 3) my comment about passing on him was that every team passed on him 4 or 5 times, including Dallas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLDABEAST Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 So what, your just going to cry about Oli all season long? the guy didnt help this team get anywhere, time to move on and try something else. I would rather try an unknown commodity then stick with a player that has only seen playoff hockey once in over a decade of hockey. Oli is not a winner, and the flames have not been a better team with him the last 3 years! Better the devil you know than the devil you dont know... Not that your wrong because i agree with you... I just wanted to use that old saying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLDABEAST Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 You insult people you agree with a lot? Glad I didn't post something you disagreed with. I didn't say that every team passed on him because they suck at drafting. I said that WE passed on him because we suck at drafting. Obviously Benn was a risk in 2007. Other teams took risks, and lost. Dallas took a risk, and won. We refused to take any risk at all, because we suck at drafting. We stuck to players with low ceilings and high likelihood of playing in the AHL. We Ensured for ourselves that there was No chance of drafting a player like this. And no...not every team in the NHL did this. I dont think you took the time to think over what he was saying and thus took it as an insult... He was merely pointing out the fact that many teams passed over benn... Just as many great players get passed over and go late in drafts... Simply passing over benn didn't prove anything about the scouting department because nobody not even dallas had any idea benn would be this good... It becomes 90% luck late in drafts like that... Judge drafts by all the picks that were made and not by one or two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
successfulblackman Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 this whole talk of acquiring jamie benn is f-ed. Dallas can match any offer sheet we throw at him, and considering we have less then 4 million dollars of cap space, there is no way we could get him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geos Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 So what, your just going to cry about Oli all season long? the guy didnt help this team get anywhere Wrong. His 61 points (second the time) were a big part of us not hanging out with the Oilers at the bottom of the pit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrippinVdUb Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Wrong. His 61 points (second the time) were a big part of us not hanging out with the Oilers at the bottom of the pit. Wrong? hahaha you cant just dismiss my opinion because it doesnt fall in line with yours! I view Oli like a woman I was dating. Sure we had some great times and allot of things in common but I knew in my gut she wasn't the one. There always seemed to be something missing or maybe just out of place not to mention a real lack of chemistry. Even though it was hard to move on I knew that she wasnt the girl I wanted to spend my life with, so there was no reason to carry on a relationship that wasn't going anywhere, why waste anymore time on something that was really doomed from the start! (and it didn't help that she was a bad cook) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 I view Oli like a woman I was dating. Sure we had some great times and allot of things in common but I knew in my gut she wasn't the one. There always seemed to be something missing or maybe just out of place not to mention a real lack of chemistry. Even though it was hard to move on I knew that she wasnt the girl I wanted to spend my life with, so there was no reason to carry on a relationship that wasn't going anywhere, why waste anymore time on something that was really doomed from the start! (and it didn't help that she was a bad cook) There's always McDonald's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 There's always McDonald's. ?... http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mcdonalds-brothel-/213646825319689 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 So what, your just going to cry about Oli all season long? the guy didnt help this team get anywhere, time to move on and try something else. I would rather try an unknown commodity then stick with a player that has only seen playoff hockey once in over a decade of hockey. Oli is not a winner, and the flames have not been a better team with him the last 3 years! I am so sick of narrow minded posts like this.Jokinen was one of the few bright spots for the Flames the last 2 years. Good teams move out the problem players, not the ones playing well. That is how you make your team better. Going a new direction for the sake of changing direction is not a good move. Good teams also make moves with upgrades in mind. So the Flames let their top center, a 60 point, 2-way center walk as a free agent. Their solution(s)/option(s) to replacing that player are: - A 30 year old winger who has never taken a regular shift as a centerman in the NHL (Cammalleri) - A 26 year old rookie who has never played a pro game in North America (Cervenka) - A 23 year old center that is good defensively but is less offensive than children's music (Backlund) - A 28 year old center than is coming off the worst statistical season of his career (Stajan) - A 28 year old winger who has never taken a regular shift as a centerman in the NHL (Hudler) How anyone thinks these are better options than retaining Jokinen is beyond me. Sure its a new direction, but its pretty clear that direction is backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Tribal Chief Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 I dont Agree The only time Olli Helped the flames Ever was when he was At the laat year of his contract untill that time he was a useless pilon any other and we dont need players that only Play there best cause there contract is ending at the end of the year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool17 Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 I am so sick of narrow minded posts like this. Jokinen was one of the few bright spots for the Flames the last 2 years. Good teams move out the problem players, not the ones playing well. That is how you make your team better. Going a new direction for the sake of changing direction is not a good move. Good teams also make moves with upgrades in mind. So the Flames let their top center, a 60 point, 2-way center walk as a free agent. Their solution(s)/option(s) to replacing that player are: - A 30 year old winger who has never taken a regular shift as a centerman in the NHL (Cammalleri) - A 26 year old rookie who has never played a pro game in North America (Cervenka) - A 23 year old center that is good defensively but is less offensive than children's music (Backlund) - A 28 year old center than is coming off the worst statistical season of his career (Stajan) - A 28 year old winger who has never taken a regular shift as a centerman in the NHL (Hudler) How anyone thinks these are better options than retaining Jokinen is beyond me. Sure its a new direction, but its pretty clear that direction is backwards. Are you his agent? Seriously, you accuse everyone of being narrow minded yet you refuse to acknowledge any possibility that the changes could work. You are adamanant that he helped the team but there are entire cities of people that say he isn't good enough. I know people who created drinking games based on Jokinens turnovers. Just because you fear change and are an eternal pessimist doesn't mean your right, or for that matter smarter than everyone else for being able to spot the problems in every scenario except the ones you deem correct without ever offering an idea or solution. For someone making statements and attacking others for being narrow minded and ignorant you really need to look in the mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Are you his agent? Seriously, you accuse everyone of being narrow minded yet you refuse to acknowledge any possibility that the changes could work. You are adamanant that he helped the team but there are entire cities of people that say he isn't good enough. I know people who created drinking games based on Jokinens turnovers. Just because you fear change and are an eternal pessimist doesn't mean your right, or for that matter smarter than everyone else for being able to spot the problems in every scenario except the ones you deem correct without ever offering an idea or solution. For someone making statements and attacking others for being narrow minded and ignorant you really need to look in the mirror. entire cities of people saying he wasn't good enough? yeah ok, And no I will not acknowledge these change will work, because the odds are very much against it. You don't take career long veterans and move them out of their natural positions and expect them to excel. You don't sign 26 year old rookies and expect them to jump into a top 6 role. For the Flames to be better down the middle than they were last year will take nothing short of a miracle. Yeah Jokinen was credited with alot of turnovers, but so was every other Flames forward that played alot of minutes. Jokinen was in the same territory as Iginla. If you prorate Glencross's turnovers he is in that neighborhood too, and Tanguay would be worse if prorated. But it's funny you spicy orange duck about giveaways without bringing up takeaways, of which Jokinen was the best on the team. Maybe you should consider that people that create drinking game, have alcoholic tendencies and aren't people you should take seriously since they are likely watching the game loaded anyways. I don't fear change, not even a little. I just think making change for the sake of change is stupid and doesn't work. If Feaster actually had a half assed plan to get a legitimate top 6 center then I would have been fine letting Jokinen walk, but instead it appears his plan is moving a 9 year veteran to center ice and relying on a kid with no NHL experience. Feaster letting a #1 center walk away for nothing in a year in which there was no top 6 centers to be found was stupid. There is no getting around that. But of course Cammalleri and his 2 off years is suddenly going to bounce back to his previous Flames form and look like a star again right? That seems to be what everyone is banking on, pardon me for thinking that is irresponsible of a so call ed prefessional GM to do that. Our biggest weakness got worse. I see no reason to be optimistic about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s4xon Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 But it's funny you spicy orange duck about giveaways without bringing up takeaways, of which Jokinen was the best on the team. Maybe you should consider that people that create drinking game, have alcoholic tendencies and aren't people you should take seriously since they are likely watching the game loaded anyways. You lost me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 You lost me what part lost you? that creating games to drink is an alcoholic tendency? or the swear filter that changed another word for complain to "spicy orange duck" which for the record is pretty awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool17 Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 what part lost you? that creating games to drink is an alcoholic tendency? or the swear filter that changed another word for complain to "spicy orange duck" which for the record is pretty awesome Hahaha that is pretty awesome. I gotta see if I can implement that in everyday conversation..... For the record the drinking game was an ongoing joke about how much Jokinen over handled the puck and, and they ate definitly not alchoholics. It was satirical. Jokinen was a good player, but he was not the difference maker in a playoff vs. not playoff team. He himself is PROOF that you can train a player to player better defensively, you can coach a player to be more physical and buy into a system. He wasn't a standout in the face off dot, he wasnt Great fit. And if we are going to settle for mediocrity we dont deserve to make playoffs. The difference between Jokinen and Cervenka, Cammy Hudler etc is age, potential ceiling and the very REAL possibility they could turn out AS good as Joker. As always I agree we should've kept him. It would've been nicer to stack our hands before discarding players but it's not tht simple, and we don't know what went on between Joker and Feaster. We can spicy orange duck (:-D) all day about it but it's not going to change anything an every GM makes mistakes. It really is time to move on, and rather than focus on negative, suggest what moves can make us better. "you can't keep living in the past and looking backwards if you expect to survive in the future" "great risks equal great rewards. A ship at dock is usually safe but that is not what a ship is meant for" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Hahaha that is pretty awesome. I gotta see if I can implement that in everyday conversation..... For the record the drinking game was an ongoing joke about how much Jokinen over handled the puck and, and they ate definitly not alchoholics. It was satirical. Jokinen was a good player, but he was not the difference maker in a playoff vs. not playoff team. He himself is PROOF that you can train a player to player better defensively, you can coach a player to be more physical and buy into a system. He wasn't a standout in the face off dot, he wasnt Great fit. And if we are going to settle for mediocrity we dont deserve to make playoffs. The difference between Jokinen and Cervenka, Cammy Hudler etc is age, potential ceiling and the very REAL possibility they could turn out AS good as Joker. As always I agree we should've kept him. It would've been nicer to stack our hands before discarding players but it's not tht simple, and we don't know what went on between Joker and Feaster. We can spicy orange duck (:-D) all day about it but it's not going to change anything an every GM makes mistakes. It really is time to move on, and rather than focus on negative, suggest what moves can make us better. "you can't keep living in the past and looking backwards if you expect to survive in the future" "great risks equal great rewards. A ship at dock is usually safe but that is not what a ship is meant for" great risks can all see you dead or homeless. and if you don't recognize the past you are going to make the same mistakes. Jokinen being in the past doesn't make Feaster less of an idiot. and it doesn't mean the future doesn't look like strawberry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
successfulblackman Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 entire cities of people saying he wasn't good enough? yeah ok, And no I will not acknowledge these change will work, because the odds are very much against it. You don't take career long veterans and move them out of their natural positions and expect them to excel. You don't sign 26 year old rookies and expect them to jump into a top 6 role. For the Flames to be better down the middle than they were last year will take nothing short of a miracle. Yeah Jokinen was credited with alot of turnovers, but so was every other Flames forward that played alot of minutes. Jokinen was in the same territory as Iginla. If you prorate Glencross's turnovers he is in that neighborhood too, and Tanguay would be worse if prorated. But it's funny you spicy orange duck about giveaways without bringing up takeaways, of which Jokinen was the best on the team. Maybe you should consider that people that create drinking game, have alcoholic tendencies and aren't people you should take seriously since they are likely watching the game loaded anyways. I don't fear change, not even a little. I just think making change for the sake of change is stupid and doesn't work. If Feaster actually had a half assed plan to get a legitimate top 6 center then I would have been fine letting Jokinen walk, but instead it appears his plan is moving a 9 year veteran to center ice and relying on a kid with no NHL experience. Feaster letting a #1 center walk away for nothing in a year in which there was no top 6 centers to be found was stupid. There is no getting around that. But of course Cammalleri and his 2 off years is suddenly going to bounce back to his previous Flames form and look like a star again right? That seems to be what everyone is banking on, pardon me for thinking that is irresponsible of a so call ed prefessional GM to do that. Our biggest weakness got worse. I see no reason to be optimistic about that. I don't usually agree with ding dong, but he's right. there is no way these new additions to the team our going to fix our number one centre problem. Like I have said before I have no problem with the brass not resigning the joker, but the fact they have no suitable replacement for him is beyond me. This was the worst face off team in the nhl last year, and our GM made no moves to fix it. Our only hope is that backland and cervanka will end up tailing over a hundred points all together, and we know that's not going to happen. Our new coaching staff wants to create a new strategic plan that dictates offence, but how can you dictate offense if you can't win face offs??? jay has 2 months to make it right otherwise we're f-ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
successfulblackman Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 entire cities of people saying he wasn't good enough? yeah ok, And no I will not acknowledge these change will work, because the odds are very much against it. You don't take career long veterans and move them out of their natural positions and expect them to excel. You don't sign 26 year old rookies and expect them to jump into a top 6 role. For the Flames to be better down the middle than they were last year will take nothing short of a miracle. Yeah Jokinen was credited with alot of turnovers, but so was every other Flames forward that played alot of minutes. Jokinen was in the same territory as Iginla. If you prorate Glencross's turnovers he is in that neighborhood too, and Tanguay would be worse if prorated. But it's funny you spicy orange duck about giveaways without bringing up takeaways, of which Jokinen was the best on the team. Maybe you should consider that people that create drinking game, have alcoholic tendencies and aren't people you should take seriously since they are likely watching the game loaded anyways. I don't fear change, not even a little. I just think making change for the sake of change is stupid and doesn't work. If Feaster actually had a half assed plan to get a legitimate top 6 center then I would have been fine letting Jokinen walk, but instead it appears his plan is moving a 9 year veteran to center ice and relying on a kid with no NHL experience. Feaster letting a #1 center walk away for nothing in a year in which there was no top 6 centers to be found was stupid. There is no getting around that. But of course Cammalleri and his 2 off years is suddenly going to bounce back to his previous Flames form and look like a star again right? That seems to be what everyone is banking on, pardon me for thinking that is irresponsible of a so call ed prefessional GM to do that. Our biggest weakness got worse. I see no reason to be optimistic about that. I don't usually agree with ding dong, but he's right. there is no way these new additions to the team are going to fix our number one centre problem. Like I have said before I have no problem with the brass not resigning the joker, but the fact they have no suitable replacement for him is beyond me. This was the worst face off team in the nhl last year, and our GM made no moves to fix it. Our only hope is that backland and cervanka will end up tailing over a hundred points all together, and we know that's not going to happen. Our new coaching staff wants to create a new strategic plan that dictates offence, but how can you dictate offense if you can't win face offs??? jay has 2 months to make it right otherwise we're f-ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Are you his agent? Seriously, you accuse everyone of being narrow minded yet you refuse to acknowledge any possibility that the changes could work. You are adamanant that he helped the team but there are entire cities of people that say he isn't good enough. I know people who created drinking games based on Jokinens turnovers. Just because you fear change and are an eternal pessimist doesn't mean your right, or for that matter smarter than everyone else for being able to spot the problems in every scenario except the ones you deem correct without ever offering an idea or solution. For someone making statements and attacking others for being narrow minded and ignorant you really need to look in the mirror. The Jets have a # of natural centers but (like many teams) no true #1C. They recognized Joker as ideally a #2C but better then what they had so (rather then try to move a winger like Wheeler or Kane in to fill the spot) signed the best 2C available. If you want low success changes that might work we might as well move Babchuk to center. He has that boomer shot (& is useless as a D ). Tanguay had the best +/- on the team & we've got lots of LWs so maybe we could trade Kipper & use Tangs in net. Ridiculous? Yes! Letting your best center walk for 0 & hoping converted wingers will save the day isn't far behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Tanguay had the best +/- on the team & we've got lots of LWs so maybe we could trade Kipper & use Tangs in net. Ridiculous? Yes! Letting your best center walk for 0 & hoping converted wingers will save the day isn't far behind. I agree. We didn't replace him before we let him walk away for nothing. If you truly run this as a business, sign him for 4.0-4.5m for 2 years, and trade him later if we find the right piece. If he happened to fit as #1C or wasn't replaced by a better option on the top 6, then keep him until the drafted ones are able to come in andd outperform him. I may be the only ones that feels this way, but I think that both agent and management had their #'s and couldn't agree, so we moved on. The Jets signed him for less than market value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 I agree. We didn't replace him before we let him walk away for nothing. If you truly run this as a business, sign him for 4.0-4.5m for 2 years, and trade him later if we find the right piece. If he happened to fit as #1C or wasn't replaced by a better option on the top 6, then keep him until the drafted ones are able to come in andd outperform him. I may be the only ones that feels this way, but I think that both agent and management had their #'s and couldn't agree, so we moved on. The Jets signed him for less than market value. Bingo... That is the same damn thing I have already said myself, as have others... It's like deciding you want to sell your car because it is not quite what you had hoped for, and then either getting a new one lined up ahead of time... Or giving it away for nothing, and then thinking about it while you are either riding the bus or hoofing it down the street... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Bingo... That is the same damn thing I have already said myself, as have others... It's like deciding you want to sell your car because it is not quite what you had hoped for, and then either getting a new one lined up ahead of time... Or giving it away for nothing, and then thinking about it while you are either riding the bus or hoofing it down the street... but but but its time for a change cervenka lit up the khl so he will get 50+ points in the NHL backlund is going to break out cammalleri is just as good as jokinen blah blah blah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Barman... Tequila... Todo lo que tiene... Rápido!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Bingo... That is the same damn thing I have already said myself, as have others... It's like deciding you want to sell your car because it is not quite what you had hoped for, and then either getting a new one lined up ahead of time... Or giving it away for nothing, and then thinking about it while you are either riding the bus or hoofing it down the street... I would be surprised if I wasn't repeating what others had said. Sometimes the same point gets made many times, and the argument goes in circles again when a desenting view is expressed. Olli was liked by some, tolerated by some, and hated by others. Whether he fit with the long-term plans of the team or not, his production and bald head will be missed. I hope he shaves again; I couldn't get used to the hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 I may be the only ones that feels this way, but I think that both agent and management had their #'s and couldn't agree, so we moved on. The Jets signed him for less than market value. As you see, you're far from alone. I'm just glad he joined my hometown Jets rather then a Flames rival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.