Carty Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 aaaaaaaaaah... all of this discussion........ Why the hell did we let Jokinen go? Feaster shot himself in the foot. Even though he most likely could not see it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 With jokers contract it would mean Sven would not have a chance to play, or we don't get Cervenka, or we don't sign Hudler, or we don't get Wideman. Every says we need to get younger, so we insert Sven, Cervenka and Hudler. We all want a better D, Wideman is an upgrade. Yet some would rather have an older #2 center instead of one of those peices. Common If Sven earns a spot the $s involved in an EL contract wouldn't keep him off the roster. Don't state it as a given! Cervenka would be in the mix as he was signed May 2. Alternately there are other re-signings Feaster might not have done if he'd retained Joker. We might or might not have signed Wiseman &/or Hudler but Wideman was signed before he re-upped Sarich, Stempniak & Jones. Later Hudler preceded the Street, Byron, Aliu & Backlund deals. If you are going to claim things as facts offer evidence. If they are just your suppositions state that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobieit Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 If Sven earns a spot the $s involved in an EL contract wouldn't keep him off the roster. Don't state it as a given! where would he play was my point not the money, want him on the fourth line? Cervenka would be in the mix as he was signed May 2 ]You think management didn't know they were going to let Joker walk by that time? Alternately there are other re-signings Feaster might not have done if he'd retained Joker. We might or might not have signed Wiseman &/or Hudler but Wideman was signed before he re-upped Sarich, Stempniak & Jones. Later Hudler preceded the Street, Byron, Aliu & Backlund deals. If Feaster had of resigned Joker then it means Hudler would not have been signed but since Feaster decided not to resign Jokinen, Hudler is exactly what the flames need a young forward who can play behind Iggy, or would u rather Stempy plays there? If you are going to claim things as facts offer evidence. If they are just your suppositions state that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis23 Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 He underperformed two of the last three years and we under performed all three. Regardless of who's fault big changes were needed and he was the scapegoat. Please name a few centreman who have put up an average of 55 pts and were paid only 3M. Jokinen overperformed at this price, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 Please name a few centreman who have put up an average of 55 pts and were paid only 3M. Jokinen overperformed at this price, actually. Sadly for the Flames, that is a fact... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_worthy Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 Please name a few centreman who have put up an average of 55 pts and were paid only 3M. Jokinen overperformed at this price, actually. True, but the issue isn't how many points did he get last year and at what price. The issue is how many points is he going to get over the next two years and at what price? THAT is what the Flames had to decide on and eventually replace. And Jokinen will turn 35 next season (not this upcoming one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokernHockey Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 EDIT: Cworthy beat me 2 it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CastleMania Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 He underperformed two of the last three years and we under performed all three. Regardless of who's fault big changes were needed and he was the scapegoat. What year did he underperform exactly? I have defended against this statement so many times over the past two seasons, and no one has made a credible response. He hasn't underperformed at all in the past two seasons, and the season before that he still wasn't underperforming in comparison to other players in the league. I wish people would stop spewing this BS. Because that's all it is--crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 What year did he underperform exactly? I have defended against this statement so many times over the past two seasons, and no one has made a credible response. He hasn't underperformed at all in the past two seasons, and the season before that he still wasn't underperforming in comparison to other players in the league. I wish people would stop spewing this BS. Because that's all it is--crap. It's posters trying to justify losing our best center. Since Feaster/Flames decided to proceed without him I'm glad he's improving the Jets rather then joining a current rival (he'd be redundant on the Flyers so I didn't mention wanting him in O&. *I wasn't a Joker fan 1n his 1st go round as a Flame but he's proven himself to me.* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 What year did he underperform exactly? I have defended against this statement so many times over the past two seasons, and no one has made a credible response. He hasn't underperformed at all in the past two seasons, and the season before that he still wasn't underperforming in comparison to other players in the league. I wish people would stop spewing this BS. Because that's all it is--crap. I wish I could +1 you. I have been saying this for ages too. -Improved each of last 2 seasons for us. -19th overall for centers last year and better results than many true #1C centers like Getzlaf. -He was a steal at the 3m he cost us and a big bargain for the Jets. Odd that C_W chooses to use the wording he will be 35 "next year not this year"to make him appear like he is old and aging. - HE IS 33 YEARS OLD RIGHT NOW. If you want him to appear getting old then how about in 20 years he will be 53? - Joker appears to be rugged as he has only missed 3 games in last 3 seasons. - those who say he doesn't perform in the playoffs are wrong. He in fact performed at a higher pace than any of his seasons with us How can his skills be declining that much if his stats have improved each year since 2009? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 The only issue I ever had with Jokinen was what he would sign for and at 2 years 4.5 it should have been a no brainer. I even think you could have done 4 mill for those two years to keep him in Calgary so I have to agree feaster made a mistake. Only way to fix it is to have one of cervrnka, Backund, or Stajan put up close to 60 points. That's very optimistic thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted July 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 A lot of my concern about not having Jokinen is not having a safety net for Cervenka. I think it establishes Cammalleri HAS to be a 1C unless Cervenka is an allstar. But looking at it from the standpoint of our top 6 to start last year, outting Jokinen, Bourque, Stajan/Backlund for Cammalleri, Cervenka and Hudler, I like the possible improvement and remain hopeful. If Bartschi pulls down #2 LW from Glencross I'd be happy. I'm a big Glencross fan, if he's our #3 I'm happy. #1 PK LW and checking line. I believe Glencross is a great opportunistic goal scorer which fits in perfect with that role. It's also an opportunity for Glencross to step up and "own" his own line so to speak. Get Stemps and Stajan to play with your fire. We've always put a lot of players visibly "out of role" due to no Top 6. It broke Bourque, a great 3rd line RW. I don't want to see that with Glencross, he has consistency issues, as Bourque did. Expectations above abilities while constantly swapping 1st through 3rd duty. I'd like to see a cheap vet or 2 in the bottom 6 though, for playoff fight (or fight for the playoffs) background. Unfortunately, I can't stop spewing Arnott is our guy. The arguments against are obviously his age. I'm not looking for a 30-40 70 pt Arnott though, 15-25 40 pt is all I want, cheap! If you're going to double-shift Iggy (and you are) it's not a bad idea to lean on a vet down on the 3rd/4th line. Also, Arnott knows how to score from the Center position, and our Centers need that advice, I believe. Outside of that, I'm really relying on Backlund to come in and give us the what for!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL44 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 The only issue I ever had with Jokinen was what he would sign for and at 2 years 4.5 it should have been a no brainer. I even think you could have done 4 mill for those two years to keep him in Calgary so I have to agree feaster made a mistake. Only way to fix it is to have one of cervrnka, Backund, or Stajan put up close to 60 points. That's very optimistic thinking. It.wasn't a 'mistake'... It was a calculated cost saving measure. They deemed they could be alright with the cheaper center depth they have. And Cammy at 6 and Stajan at 3.5 are pricey... and then to up Jokinen at $4.5 on top would be toomuch.. con laid out how they're hoping it works out.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 A lot of my concern about not having Jokinen is not having a safety net for Cervenka. I think it establishes Cammalleri HAS to be a 1C unless Cervenka is an allstar. But looking at it from the standpoint of our top 6 to start last year, outting Jokinen, Bourque, Stajan/Backlund for Cammalleri, Cervenka and Hudler, I like the possible improvement and remain hopeful. If Bartschi pulls down #2 LW from Glencross I'd be happy. I'm a big Glencross fan, if he's our #3 I'm happy. #1 PK LW and checking line. I believe Glencross is a great opportunistic goal scorer which fits in perfect with that role. It's also an opportunity for Glencross to step up and "own" his own line so to speak. Get Stemps and Stajan to play with your fire. We've always put a lot of players visibly "out of role" due to no Top 6. It broke Bourque, a great 3rd line RW. I don't want to see that with Glencross, he has consistency issues, as Bourque did. Expectations above abilities while constantly swapping 1st through 3rd duty. I'd like to see a cheap vet or 2 in the bottom 6 though, for playoff fight (or fight for the playoffs) background. Unfortunately, I can't stop spewing Arnott is our guy. The arguments against are obviously his age. I'm not looking for a 30-40 70 pt Arnott though, 15-25 40 pt is all I want, cheap! If you're going to double-shift Iggy (and you are) it's not a bad idea to lean on a vet down on the 3rd/4th line. Also, Arnott knows how to score from the Center position, and our Centers need that advice, I believe. Outside of that, I'm really relying on Backlund to come in and give us the what for!! I hope we see all those upsides. I just like to hedge my bets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_Mysterious_Vistor Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I would keep him on the LW, so he can utilize his shot, you guys are in dire need of a center, maybe you should formulate some kind of an offer for Stastny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 It.wasn't a 'mistake'... It was a calculated cost saving measure. They deemed they could be alright with the cheaper center depth they have. And Cammy at 6 and Stajan at 3.5 are pricey... and then to up Jokinen at $4.5 on top would be toomuch.. con laid out how they're hoping it works out.. this is such horsenavajo fry bread. it was not a calculated move, it was a stupid move. Feaster caved to the pressure of fans that we need change for the sake of change and in the process he stripped this team of their only top 6 center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 it was not a calculated move, it was a stupid move. You can make calculated moves that are stupid. Darryl's return for Phaneuf, for one. Am I happy to see him go? Not particularly. But at the same time, he's not getting any younger, and we already have some veteran presence up front. He isn't a core member of this team. He is a stopgap who can play a decent top 6 role. You're mad because he was the ONLY top 6 guy we had in the middle, but management obviously felt he could be replaced. Which is true. Resigning Jokinen could have been a risk; he might fall back and revert back to average Joker, or even worse drop to average NHLer, period. We're taking a risk and hoping that our team can replace him by spreading out his minutes and hoping that one of our guys steps up. But really, everything in hockey is a risk. Iggy is a risk. He could get a career-ending injury. Kipper is a risk. He could choose this year to show his age. I'm not averse to change if it benefits us both now and in the future. Jokinen benefits us now, but I don't know whether he can do the same down the road. Whereas here we have 2 young guys who get a chance to prove themselves, and may prove to be part of the equation moving forward. It doesn't benefit us as much now unless they light it up, but overall it just gives us a chance to see what's down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 It.wasn't a 'mistake'... It was a calculated cost saving measure. They deemed they could be alright with the cheaper center depth they have. And Cammy at 6 and Stajan at 3.5 are pricey... and then to up Jokinen at $4.5 on top would be toomuch.. con laid out how they're hoping it works out.. I'm well aware how it works DL, but IMO it was a mistake and the only way it can not be deemed a mistake is if one of the 3 work out. As of right now, it's a mistake in my books becuase I think its ridiculous to use a cost savings meausre down the middle when you suck there already and then go and spend the money to get a winger you don't need? Sure it's calculated, but doesn't mean its a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLDABEAST Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 A lot of my concern about not having Jokinen is not having a safety net for Cervenka. I think it establishes Cammalleri HAS to be a 1C unless Cervenka is an allstar. But looking at it from the standpoint of our top 6 to start last year, outting Jokinen, Bourque, Stajan/Backlund for Cammalleri, Cervenka and Hudler, I like the possible improvement and remain hopeful. If Bartschi pulls down #2 LW from Glencross I'd be happy. I'm a big Glencross fan, if he's our #3 I'm happy. #1 PK LW and checking line. I believe Glencross is a great opportunistic goal scorer which fits in perfect with that role. It's also an opportunity for Glencross to step up and "own" his own line so to speak. Get Stemps and Stajan to play with your fire. We've always put a lot of players visibly "out of role" due to no Top 6. It broke Bourque, a great 3rd line RW. I don't want to see that with Glencross, he has consistency issues, as Bourque did. Expectations above abilities while constantly swapping 1st through 3rd duty. I'd like to see a cheap vet or 2 in the bottom 6 though, for playoff fight (or fight for the playoffs) background. Unfortunately, I can't stop spewing Arnott is our guy. The arguments against are obviously his age. I'm not looking for a 30-40 70 pt Arnott though, 15-25 40 pt is all I want, cheap! If you're going to double-shift Iggy (and you are) it's not a bad idea to lean on a vet down on the 3rd/4th line. Also, Arnott knows how to score from the Center position, and our Centers need that advice, I believe. Outside of that, I'm really relying on Backlund to come in and give us the what for!! What does arnott bring that you cant find anywhere else? Honestly he isnt going to help this team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 What does arnott bring that you cant find anywhere else? Honestly he isnt going to help this team Seeing as you asked: 1. He would bring a winning faceoff % with him. 2. He would bring a big center who would not require trading any assets to get him. 3. He would bring veteran leadership. 4. He would likely bring something like 30 points (Half what Joker brought)and a positive +/-. He wouldn't be my first choice but even at his age he could help us down the middle for a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLDABEAST Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Seeing as you asked: 1. He would bring a winning faceoff % with him. 2. He would bring a big center who would not require trading any assets to get him. 3. He would bring veteran leadership. 4. He would likely bring something like 30 points (Half what Joker brought)and a positive +/-. He wouldn't be my first choice but even at his age he could help us down the middle for a year. If our fourth line was the problem he would be the solution... Having arnott center a 4rt line doesnt improve our top lines draw percentage nor improve their points... Also those 30 points are against other teams bottom lines where as we need a center who can score against top lines... Also arnott would steal time from younger prospects whom we may want to try or guys on lower lines who have potential as a winger but could possibly contribute as a converted center... In my mind arnotts not a great checking line center and his offense isnt enough to actually help... On a contending team he makes a great 4rth line guy whom can fill in some on special teams but those teams already have a well built team and arent concerned about prospects or rebuilding and they wont need him to do to much... On our team he doesnt help... In fact i think it might hurt us to have him taking time away from younger guys and or being used to fill in top roles that he just cant do anymore... Think of it this way... If there was a championship puzzle arnott would be that piece in the middle of the puzzle... We havent even pieced together the edges of the puzzle yet so how can we expect him to help us solve things? Lets not get ahead of ourselves and work the middle of the puzzle with the arnotts and langenbrunners of the hockey world... Otherwise our puzzle becomes a mess... I like arnott as much as the next guy and I'd love to see him here but reality is it just doesnt make sense... If we decided we had to go the veteran route we should look into someone with a little more speed who can actually contribute as a checking line center... That would be somewhat useful but still not ideal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 You can make calculated moves that are stupid. Darryl's return for Phaneuf, for one. Am I happy to see him go? Not particularly. But at the same time, he's not getting any younger, and we already have some veteran presence up front. He isn't a core member of this team. He is a stopgap who can play a decent top 6 role. You're mad because he was the ONLY top 6 guy we had in the middle, but management obviously felt he could be replaced. Which is true. Resigning Jokinen could have been a risk; he might fall back and revert back to average Joker, or even worse drop to average NHLer, period. We're taking a risk and hoping that our team can replace him by spreading out his minutes and hoping that one of our guys steps up. But really, everything in hockey is a risk. Iggy is a risk. He could get a career-ending injury. Kipper is a risk. He could choose this year to show his age. I'm not averse to change if it benefits us both now and in the future. Jokinen benefits us now, but I don't know whether he can do the same down the road. Whereas here we have 2 young guys who get a chance to prove themselves, and may prove to be part of the equation moving forward. It doesn't benefit us as much now unless they light it up, but overall it just gives us a chance to see what's down the line. I don't believe the Phaneuf deal was calculated at all, not even a little. It was a reactionary trade through and through. Sutter panicked because we were on a losing streak (9 games?) and called Burke because he had inquired about Dion earlier in the season (Burke said as much in his press conference). And since other GMs have spoken out saying they never knew Dion was available, this just verifies earlier that the Phaneuf trade was not calculated whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 If our fourth line was the problem he would be the solution... Having arnott center a 4rt line doesnt improve our top lines draw percentage nor improve their points... Also those 30 points are against other teams bottom lines where as we need a center who can score against top lines... Also arnott would steal time from younger prospects whom we may want to try or guys on lower lines who have potential as a winger but could possibly contribute as a converted center... In my mind arnotts not a great checking line center and his offense isnt enough to actually help... On a contending team he makes a great 4rth line guy whom can fill in some on special teams but those teams already have a well built team and arent concerned about prospects or rebuilding and they wont need him to do to much... On our team he doesnt help... In fact i think it might hurt us to have him taking time away from younger guys and or being used to fill in top roles that he just cant do anymore... Think of it this way... If there was a championship puzzle arnott would be that piece in the middle of the puzzle... We havent even pieced together the edges of the puzzle yet so how can we expect him to help us solve things? Lets not get ahead of ourselves and work the middle of the puzzle with the arnotts and langenbrunners of the hockey world... Otherwise our puzzle becomes a mess... I like arnott as much as the next guy and I'd love to see him here but reality is it just doesnt make sense... If we decided we had to go the veteran route we should look into someone with a little more speed who can actually contribute as a checking line center... That would be somewhat useful but still not ideal... Your ideas don't make a lot of sense. We haven't started the ground burning go with our rookies and live with the consequences Oiler theory yet. All the other remaining speedy centers who have upside and can win faceoffs and score are long gone. They likely would have scoffed at our meager offering anyway because everyone is scooping up the Centers and the Dmen and paying top dollars for them. Who is left? I understand what you want, but that guy isn't out there waiting on our offer. Langkow & BMo is still available too, after that it is slim pickings for centers. The idea would be to add flexibility not stifle development. BMo was a veteran who filled in on any line most positions, quite well his first season here. The ability to put a veteran like Arnott anywhere would be the plus and you aren't taking away from the rookies if they are earning their spots. What are we going to do if we run into another string of injuries like last season? We are weaker down the middle especially top 2 Centers. When was the last time that Cammy(who most are slotting in as our #1C) played a full season?(He hasn't ever btw) Are we then going to then double shift Stajan on the first two lines if Cervenka struggles at center? Backs didn't show anything when he played with Iggy and Tangs last year. People in this thread are trying to say just about every center(including the wings we have slotted into center position) are going to have to have really good years. When was the last time we had a good overperforming bunch of centermen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool17 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Your ideas don't make a lot of sense. We haven't started the ground burning go with our rookies and live with the consequences Oiler theory yet. All the other remaining speedy centers who have upside and can win faceoffs and score are long gone. They likely would have scoffed at our meager offering anyway because everyone is scooping up the Centers and the Dmen and paying top dollars for them. Who is left? I understand what you want, but that guy isn't out there waiting on our offer. Langkow & BMo is still available too, after that it is slim pickings for centers. The idea would be to add flexibility not stifle development. BMo was a veteran who filled in on any line most positions, quite well his first season here. The ability to put a veteran like Arnott anywhere would be the plus and you aren't taking away from the rookies if they are earning their spots. What are we going to do if we run into another string of injuries like last season? We are weaker down the middle especially top 2 Centers. When was the last time that Cammy(who most are slotting in as our #1C) played a full season?(He hasn't ever btw) Are we then going to then double shift Stajan on the first two lines if Cervenka struggles at center? Backs didn't show anything when he played with Iggy and Tangs last year. People in this thread are trying to say just about every center(including the wings we have slotted into center position) are going to have to have really good years. When was the last time we had a good overperforming bunch of centermen? Lol about 2004 ish? When a brand new coach with a system that emphasized our players strengths took over and got our guys to play with heart and like heroes. I think a guy like Arnott would add toughness and depth, and we need both. Especially if Backs ends up being a bust(which between him and Cervenka that's where my uncertainty lies. Call me crazy but I firmly believe Cammy will do very well and Stajan will actually step up) That said if there has been a year for hoping for surprises and overachieving this would be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartbreaker Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 The really good news: He's listed as #13 again. And as a centre. Love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.