Fire Feaster!

[redfire11]

FACT: SEVERAL other GMs also submitted offer sheets to ROR.

FACT: ROR, His agent, AND the flames along with SEVERAL other teams misinterpreted this.

(but officer me and my buddys misinterpreted the law) Ya that goes a long ways

FACT: The Colorado Avalanche didn't even catch this, and it could have been a gold mine for them.

You admit it was a stupid offer (we will let the avs fans deal with their gms decision)

Do you really think the league would have let the flames look this idiotic and piss off their fanbase and their players this much given the lockout that just occurred? That would have been terrible for business.

How many horrible one sided trades have been made in the past that the league has stepped in to compensate the loser?

 

It would have been a toss up and could have gone either way. YOU have NO idea what would have happened, so their is no use condemning Feaster for it.

 

 

As I said earlier I hope Feaster learns from his mistakes. I can bet Feaster and his staff know the CBA by heart right now.(lets hope so as I feel he just stepped up a rung in the gm experience ladder(good for flames fans))

 

 

 

Okay. Instead of looking at it how you are, with glaring mistakes (different leagues, different ages, etc...) lets even the scales a little bit, shall we? Jankowski is 18 years old. So wouldn't it be fair to compare him to those players when they were 18?

 

To set the record straight I am stoked on Jankowski. He is 6.1 skates well, smart player with excellent upside playing in the NCAA (

NHL teams are afforded two more years with NCAA players before they have to make a decision regarding whether or not they will sign the player to an entry-level contract)

 

What I am not happy with is where we took him in the draft. That again is the debate (not acquiring Jankowski) but Feaster using a 1st round pick when a second round or possibly a third round would have got him. Were you not like me and thousands of others saying WTF when Calgary announced this 1st round pick. I gave 3 example of the next 3 centers taken after him with a couple of the 3 possibly playing center in the league this year or the next. (We could use a good center prospect during our rebuild next year)

Again I stress I cannot wait for this kid to mature. By the way thanks for the videos our future seems a little brighter.

 

So this topic is about Feaster being Fired.

My thoughts again. NO he should not and we should give him a chance.

 

I was pointing out mistakes I FELT he has made and was hoping that Feaster has learned from them. If so we now have a better educated gm going into this crucial draft. I could list all the good things feaster has done as Spafybox has truthfully stated but in life it is all about(what have you done for me lately)

 

 

 

[tachaudh]

People have repeatedly attempted to absolve Feaster of his mistake because apparently a number of other GMs and the player agent involved shared the same interpretation as Feaster. The problem is that prudent management can't base their assumptions off other people's assumptions. You have do your own due diligence, and they didn't do that.

 

A prudent GM would have identified the issue prior to making the offer sheet, contacted the league for clarification, and once getting that clarification, made the offer sheet official. That way you, when the whole firestorm erupts, you can say "actually, WE'RE RIGHT" and it all goes away.

 

It may have been a toss up. Maybe the NHL would have made it so that he wouldn't have to pass through waivers. But why get to that point of it being a toss up? That's risky and reckless and you can't absolve or excuse that under any circumstances.

[ScottMacMahon]

What I am not happy with is where we took him in the draft. That again is the debate (not acquiring Jankowski) but Feaster using a 1st round pick when a second round or possibly a third round would have got him. Were you not like me and thousands of others saying WTF when Calgary announced this 1st round pick. I gave 3 example of the next 3 centers taken after him with a couple of the 3 possibly playing center in the league this year or the next. (We could use a good center prospect during our rebuild next year)

 

Well then good sir, you are simply uneducated. Craig Button's 2012 Draft Rankings:

 

1. Nail Yakupov 1 Sarnia (OHL) 10/6/93 RW L 5'11/189 42 31 38 69 +15 

2. Mathew Dumba 2 Red Deer (WHL) 7/25/94 D R 5'11/183 69 20 37 57 -6 

3. Morgan Rielly 3 Moose Jaw (WHL) 3/9/94 D L 6'0/190 18 3 15 18 +6 

4. Alex Galchenyuk 4 Sarnia (OHL) 2/12/94 C L 6'1/197 2 0 0 0 -4 

5. Teuvo Teravainen 5 Jokerit (FIN) 9/11/94 RW L 5'11/165 40 11 7 18 -5 

6. Griffin Reinhart 6 Edmonton (WHL) 1/24/94 D L 6'3/202 58 12 24 36 +23 

7. Filip Forsberg 7 Leksands (SWE) 8/13/94 LW R 6'2/181 53 10 10 20 +1 

8. Malcolm Subban 8 Belleville (OHL) 12/21/93 G L 6'1/188 39 25 2.50 .923 3 

9. Matt Finn 9 Guelph (OHL) 2/24/94 D L 6'0/195 61 10 38 48 -13 

10. Hampus Lindholm 10 Rogle (SWE) 1/20/94 D L 6'2/196 36 2 7 9 +7 

11. Cody Ceci 11 Ottawa (OHL 12/21/93 D R 6'2/207 64 17 43 60 +21 

12. Jacob Trouba 13 USNTDP 2/26/94 D R 6'2/193 54 9 23 32 - 

13. Ryan Murray 12 Everett (WHL) 9/27/93 D L 6'0/205 46 9 22 31 E 

14. Mark Jankowski 14 Stanstead (Quebec Prep) 9/13/94 C L 6'2/170 57 53 40 93 +51 

 

Feaster stated that they believed him to be the BPA. Feaster stated that if they had tried to pick him up in a later round, then he would have been taken by then. They had to take him when they did or else they would not have picked him up. Simple as that. Feaster took a risk by trading down in order to pick up a second rounder. But he thought that was worth the risk as they believed noone in the next couple of spots would have taken him.

 

 

 

People have repeatedly attempted to absolve Feaster of his mistake because apparently a number of other GMs and the player agent involved shared the same interpretation as Feaster. The problem is that prudent management can't base their assumptions off other people's assumptions. You have do your own due diligence, and they didn't do that.

 

A prudent GM would have identified the issue prior to making the offer sheet, contacted the league for clarification, and once getting that clarification, made the offer sheet official. That way you, when the whole firestorm erupts, you can say "actually, WE'RE RIGHT" and it all goes away.

 

It may have been a toss up. Maybe the NHL would have made it so that he wouldn't have to pass through waivers. But why get to that point of it being a toss up? That's risky and reckless and you can't absolve or excuse that under any circumstances.

 

Im not absolving him of that because other GMs and the player agent shared the same interpretation. Im just pointing out that he wasn't the only GM to make the same mistake. Should the Canucks GM be fired because he submitted an offer sheet as well? I believe i read that Feaster said that he was aware of the issue, talked to certain people within the league who clarified it with him, and so he proceeded with the offer sheet. He obviously didn't think it was a toss up and neither did anyone else, and he stated that had it come to that then they would have pursued legal action and was fairly confident of the outcome. This mistake wasn't even discovered for a full DAY after everything had occurred. Not by the league, not by anyone. I believe he can be absolved under these circumstances. Besides, nothing bad happened, did it? Actually something good happened. We forced a divisional rival to overpay to keep one of their key players.

[kehatch]

I think people are getting too hung up on the historical details.  Was O'Reilly his fault?  Did he get enough for Iginla? Was drafting Jankowki the right thing to do? Is it okay he made the contract offer to Richards? Who knows?  At this point who cares?

 

None of that matters.  The only real question is this: Is Feaster the best guy available to rebuild the Calgary Flames?  In my opinion he is not.  

 

Jay Feaster has said many times that if the Calgary Flames expect him to run a rebuild then they can find someone else.  Time for him to walk the talk (for once) and let them find someone else.

[Flyerfan52]

Okay. Instead of looking at it how you are, with glaring mistakes (different leagues, different ages, etc...) lets even the scales a little bit, shall we? Jankowski is 18 years old. So wouldn't it be fair to compare him to those players when they were 18?

 

Henrik Samuellson plays on a stacked oils king team. The OHL is an easier league then the NCAA. However, when he was 18 these were his point totals:

43 GP - 25 P

This is around a 0.5 ppg pace. The same as Janko had this year, at the same age, in a tougher league.

 

Stefan Matteau played in the USHL when he was 18 (same age as Janko). These are his points totals:

18 GP - 10 P

Again, this is around a 0.5 ppg pace. The same as Janko had this year, at the same age. Im not familiar with the toughness of the USHL so I won't comment on that. 

 

Brendan Gaunce played in the OHL (a significantly easier league then the NCAA). And his point totals when he was 18 were:

68 GP - 68 P. 

I won't lie, those are pretty good numbers. Thats 1.0 ppg pace, which is alot better then jankos. HOWEVER, this is in a MUCH easier league. Another thing to consider? Gaunce was only a PLUS FOUR on the year. Thats playing in front of one of the best goalies in the OHL - Malcolm Subban. The year before that? He was a  MINUS THIRTY ONE. Thats right. -31. That shows GLARING deficiencies in his defensive game.

 

Jankowski, in his rookie year, dealing with an injury, at only 18 years of age, in a MUCH tougher league put up 18 points in 34 games, in a lesser role on a defensive, underwhelming team. He was also an even plus minus. Thats pretty good IMO. We knew this kid was a long term project when we got him. There is no use writing him off as a failure now - let the kid prove what he's got. Have you even seen any of his highlights? The kid has great hands, is big, can skate well, and has fantastic hockey sense.

I have no problem with picking Jankowski where we did & watching his progress think he could be a heck of a good player down the road.

 

What I don't understand is the leap of logic when you state the NNCA is a superior league to the CHL (you mentioned the OHL twice but since the Oil Kings are in the WHL I'll assume that's what you meant).

The NCAA plays a 34 game season with tournaments, etc. bringing it as high as 45 games. The CHL teams play 68 & playoffs & the Memorial Cup tournament.

The CHL stills supplies approximately 1/2 the players in the NHL while the WWHA has climbed to about 1/3.

NNCA players usually need time in the AHL to adjust to the longer schedule while the sheer # of games isn't as intimidating for CHL grads.

The players from the NNCA are usually more physically mature then those taken from the CHL by the time they sign but due to different rules are less ready for the physicality of the NHL. Again, more need for time in the AHL.

 

Players are usually chosen from the CHL to be the players to add to the team now or in the next year or 2. The college players are generally viewed as the 1s added in the long term.

[ScottMacMahon]

I have no problem with picking Jankowski where we did & watching his progress think he could be a heck of a good player down the road.

 

What I don't understand is the leap of logic when you state the NNCA is a superior league to the CHL (you mentioned the OHL twice but since the Oil Kings are in the WHL I'll assume that's what you meant).

The NCAA plays a 34 game season with tournaments, etc. bringing it as high as 45 games. The CHL teams play 68 & playoffs & the Memorial Cup tournament.

The CHL stills supplies approximately 1/2 the players in the NHL while the WWHA has climbed to about 1/3.

NNCA players usually need time in the AHL to adjust to the longer schedule while the sheer # of games isn't as intimidating for CHL grads.

The players from the NNCA are usually more physically mature then those taken from the CHL by the time they sign but due to different rules are less ready for the physicality of the NHL. Again, more need for time in the AHL.

 

Players are usually chosen from the CHL to be the players to add to the team now or in the next year or 2. The college players are generally viewed as the 1s added in the long term.

 

I guess i used poor terminology in my comparison. I think that the NCAA prepares players better for the rigours of the NHL then the CHL does. Its a bigger, more physical league. It doesn't play as many games, sure. But I think that is more then over compensated by the increased size and physicality. 

 

I think if you took a top NCAA team and matched it up against a top CHL team the NCAA team would blow the CHL team away, and im not alone in that opinion: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=471038

[kehatch]

I guess i used poor terminology in my comparison. I think that the NCAA prepares players better for the rigours of the NHL then the CHL does. Its a bigger, more physical league. It doesn't play as many games, sure. But I think that is more then over compensated by the increased size and physicality. 

 

I think if you took a top NCAA team and matched it up against a top CHL team the NCAA team would blow the CHL team away, and im not alone in that opinion: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=471038

 

Your making a theoretical argument against the results.  Currently the most and the best players are coming from the CHL.  

[Carty]

The only real question is this: Is Feaster the best guy available to rebuild the Calgary Flames?  In my opinion he is not.  

 

Jay Feaster has said many times that if the Calgary Flames expect him to run a rebuild then they can find someone else.  Time for him to walk the talk (for once) and let them find someone else.

 

Agreed...

 

Fool me once?  

[The_People1]

Jay Feaster has said many times that if the Calgary Flames expect him to run a rebuild then they can find someone else.  Time for him to walk the talk (for once) and let them find someone else.

 

It's not a rebuild.  It's a retool.

 

[Carty]

It's not a rebuild.  It's a retool.

 

 

 

I think that we are past that point...

 

It's a rebuild...

 

 

[s4xon]

 

[Carty]

 

 

[The_People1]

I think that we are past that point...

 

It's a rebuild...

 

 

 

 

*Pssst, damn it, this member has figured out why we aren't using the word "rebuild". 

 

Everybody to their stations, execute operation Zh344Nsd-r1...* -Feaster

 

 

[cross16]

I guess i used poor terminology in my comparison. I think that the NCAA prepares players better for the rigours of the NHL then the CHL does. Its a bigger, more physical league. It doesn't play as many games, sure. But I think that is more then over compensated by the increased size and physicality. 

 

I think if you took a top NCAA team and matched it up against a top CHL team the NCAA team would blow the CHL team away, and im not alone in that opinion: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=471038

 

I respect your opinion but it flies in the face of fact. the CHL is regarded as a far better development league for prospects than the NCAA and for the most part NHL scouts prefer players from the CHL than the NCAA because it prepares them better for the NHL. The schedule is more of an NHL style schedule and the type of game that is played allows for skill development.

Not to say anything bad about the NCAA and sure the top NCAA might beat the top CHL team but only becasue you have to remember the majority of that CHL teams is going to be 18/19 and they are going to be playing 20-22 or more year olds. But i think if you asked scouts and they had a top prospect they would prefer him to go the CHL route not the NCAA route.

[ScottMacMahon]

I respect your opinion but it flies in the face of fact. the CHL is regarded as a far better development league for prospects than the NCAA and for the most part NHL scouts prefer players from the CHL than the NCAA because it prepares them better for the NHL. The schedule is more of an NHL style schedule and the type of game that is played allows for skill development.

Not to say anything bad about the NCAA and sure the top NCAA might beat the top CHL team but only becasue you have to remember the majority of that CHL teams is going to be 18/19 and they are going to be playing 20-22 or more year olds. But i think if you asked scouts and they had a top prospect they would prefer him to go the CHL route not the NCAA route.

 

I guess i can see your point of view. I do agree with the fact that the CHL is a better league for pure skill development and better for overall on ice development. Playing more games allows players to develop more, simple as that. I just believe that if a player already has the skill (eg. Johnny Gaudreau) and needs to work on size and developing physicality, playing against bigger opposition, etc... then the NCAA is superior. 

 

Guess I wasn't really articulating what i meant by saying that the NCAA is a "tougher" league. Should have said its a more physical league. I also think it has certain intangible developmental qualities that the CHL lacks.

 

I also think alot of it has to do with the fact that players with higher skill levels who really think they have a legitimate chance of making it in the NHL will go to the CHL, while players who want an education as well (as a fall back plan) go to the NCAA.

[robrob74]

Agreed...

 

Fool me once?  

I do agree with his "Fool me once" that he should have gone rebuild (retool) last year when it was a fool me twice situation and he sat on it. 

 

Personally, I am afraid that he doesn't get enough in the trades he's made and has over-payed for Wideman and maybe Hudler. But I am not upset with how Wideman plays, and you can see that he has talent. I do like him. Also, I think he could have got better prospects for the two deals this year and the Reghr deal when he made that. That's what scares me most. 

[The_People1]

I do agree with his "Fool me once" that he should have gone rebuild (retool) last year when it was a fool me twice situation and he sat on it. 

 

Personally, I am afraid that he doesn't get enough in the trades he's made and has over-payed for Wideman and maybe Hudler. But I am not upset with how Wideman plays, and you can see that he has talent. I do like him. Also, I think he could have got better prospects for the two deals this year and the Reghr deal when he made that. That's what scares me most. 

 

Do we believe that Feaster can learn from his mistakes? 

 

[SKscout]

Well with Murray Edwards demanding playoffs next year (link below), you "fire Feaster" folks just might get your wish.  My question is if Calgary is going to be revolving the GM chair so much who the hell is going to want to come here when a rebuild is obviously needed but the ownership is so delusional that they won't allow it to happen?

 

He didn't start this last year, or the year before, because Owners like Edwards wouldn't allow it to happen.  I gotta feel bad for the guy, yet respect him.  He's being asked to take Juno beach with 3 cub scouts and a pea shooter and still he hit the beach running. 

 

If this is true and they do fire him for not making the playoffs next year (and we won't unless a small miracle happens) we as fans are well and truly screwed.  They are forcing him to make decisions that should be made with an eye towards a 2-4 year payoff but instead need a 0 month payoff if he wants to keep his job.  Not only is that unfair it's downright boardinging stupid.

 

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/04/03/flames-playoff-goal-delusional

[The_People1]

Well with Murray Edwards demanding playoffs next year (link below), you "fire Feaster" folks just might get your wish.  My question is if Calgary is going to be revolving the GM chair so much who the hell is going to want to come here when a rebuild is obviously needed but the ownership is so delusional that they won't allow it to happen?

 

He didn't start this last year, or the year before, because Owners like Edwards wouldn't allow it to happen.  I gotta feel bad for the guy, yet respect him.  He's being asked to take Juno beach with 3 cub scouts and a pea shooter and still he hit the beach running. 

 

If this is true and they do fire him for not making the playoffs next year (and we won't unless a small miracle happens) we as fans are well and truly screwed.  They are forcing him to make decisions that should be made with an eye towards a 2-4 year payoff but instead need a 0 month payoff if he wants to keep his job.  Not only is that unfair it's downright boardinging stupid.

 

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/04/03/flames-playoff-goal-delusional

 

That's exactly what I was thinking too.  Edwards is somewhat setting Feaster up for failure.

 

At the same time though, I don't expect Edwards to demand anything less.  This puts Feaster in a tough spot.  He's said in the past that he's not here to rebuild the Flames.  He's said they will not target post-apex players.  He's said so many right things.

 

But being the lawyer that he is, he's not "rebuilding", he's "retooling".  He won't sign "post-apex" players.  He'll sign "veterans".  He's going to take the fans to law school and teach us a thing or two about semantics and things that he said, or didn't say.

[SKscout]

I don't mind they set a culture and expectations of winning and making the playoffs.  These are good things and needed things.  And I honestly think we have made some good strides towards cleaning that up, I mean look at the kids out there right now they are wanting to play and playing to win, they just don't have the skill level to do so and expect to make the playoffs.  Yet, it's coming but it's going to take some time.

 

What I DO mind is them putting Feaster's job on the line over it with a 1 year time table when then KNOW the cupboard isn't stocked very well (it's a lot better than it was but I would say it is still below average).  Forcing the guy to make immediate gratification types of decisions is just bad business.

 

It's the same as having a CEO who makes his decisions based on annual "share holder" targets and his own bonus that are unsustainable and have negative long term repercussions.

 

In the end it hurts you WAY worse than just getting the house in order would have.  I would have preferred if they had given Jay even a 2 year timeline where he HAD to make the playoffs. 

[redfire11]

But being the lawyer that he is, he's not "rebuilding", he's "retooling".  He won't sign "post-apex" players.  He'll sign "veterans".  He's going to take the fans to law school and teach us a thing or two about semantics and things that he said, or didn't say.

People1 you nailed the first part of this correctly.  being the lawyer that he is. what did he actually say

"Murray Edwards told me last evening that he expects to be in the playoffs next year, so there’s my marching order.”

We all have interpreted marching orders as Feaster being fired. Edwards, King have not said Feaster would be fired if we did not make the playoffs next year. What are marching orders? (direction we will take?) (how to prepare for a transition from a to b?) If we do or don't make the playoffs next year Feaster can interpret "Marching Orders" to best suit himself. (Actually one thumb up for the Lawyer)

I don't mind they set a culture and expectations of winning and making the playoffs.  These are good things and needed things.  And I honestly think we have made some good strides towards cleaning that up, I mean look at the kids out there right now they are wanting to play and playing to win, they just don't have the skill level to do so and expect to make the playoffs.  Yet, it's coming but it's going to take some time.

Agreed

What I DO mind is them putting Feaster's job on the line over it with a 1 year time table when then KNOW the cupboard isn't stocked very well (it's a lot better than it was but I would say it is still below average).  Forcing the guy to make immediate gratification types of decisions is just bad business.

Again Our interpretation of Feasters "Marching Orders"

It's the same as having a CEO who makes his decisions based on annual "share holder" targets and his own bonus that are unsustainable and have negative long term repercussions.

I see in your eyes with Feasters Marching Orders Rant his stock has gone up. I am am sure you are not the only one. (again good move Feaster)

I would have preferred if they had given Jay even a 2 year timeline where he HAD to make the playoffs. 

We don't know what time line he was given. But Feaster is now slowly protecting his butt; hopefully not for possible failure but for possible club direction.

[dijnn]

Feaster is making bold moves and taking some risks but at least his doing SOMETHING since our last run for the cup this team has been going down hill I hope by next two years we see a completely different Flames.... a team that can actually go for the cup.

[rocketdoctor]

Personally I think Feaster is obliquely showing that not everything is in his control.   Still believe that his remit 2 years ago was never to break the team up.  It has taken 2 more mediocre years for the management to wake up and give the scope to 'retool'

 

I would like to King get the boot not Feaster.

[DirtyDeeds]

One thing we might consider is the changes in Edmonton. It appears to me that the new Oiler 'Marching Orders" or whateveryou want to call it are now suspiciously similar to our marching orders.

 

I can hear you saying "How so DD?"

 

Okay let me go a tad deeper on that comment.

 

The Oiler needs are very similar to our needs in a number of ways.

1. We both now need to upgrade our D at just about all levels. We might have a slight edge in NHL ready callups but that is about it. I can see both Calgary and Edmonton getting aggressive on the same FA's or available cap trades.

2. Both teams have a size up front shortage. You might also include rugged or gritty players.

3. Same goes for down the middle. Small size is a concern for both teams.

4. Depending on how our huge basket full of goalie prospects turns out we may have need of a quality starting goaltender. Depending on how the Oilers look at Dubnyk will depend if things are different thaere or not. Both teams have aging goaltending that don't look to figure in long term plans.

 

Lots of similarities with the needs of both teams. Both teams will be looking to fill those similar needs from the same markets this summer. FA's, Trading in Cap tight market.

Feaster is making bold moves and taking some risks but at least his doing SOMETHING since our last run for the cup this team has been going down hill I hope by next two years we see a completely different Flames.... a team that can actually go for the cup.

I think everyone would like to see that too, but your 2 year turnaround and going for the cup sounds pretty optimistic to me. Most of our higher draft picks likely won't even be playing for the team by then.

[ScottMacMahon]

One thing we might consider is the changes in Edmonton. It appears to me that the new Oiler 'Marching Orders" or whateveryou want to call it are now suspiciously similar to our marching orders.

 

I can hear you saying "How so DD?"

 

Okay let me go a tad deeper on that comment.

 

The Oiler needs are very similar to our needs in a number of ways.

1. We both now need to upgrade our D at just about all levels. We might have a slight edge in NHL ready callups but that is about it. I can see both Calgary and Edmonton getting aggressive on the same FA's or available cap trades.

2. Both teams have a size up front shortage. You might also include rugged or gritty players.

3. Same goes for down the middle. Small size is a concern for both teams.

4. Depending on how our huge basket full of goalie prospects turns out we may have need of a quality starting goaltender. Depending on how the Oilers look at Dubnyk will depend if things are different thaere or not. Both teams have aging goaltending that don't look to figure in long term plans.

 

Lots of similarities with the needs of both teams. Both teams will be looking to fill those similar needs from the same markets this summer. FA's, Trading in Cap tight market.

 

I would agree... for the most part. Although I do think they are not quite as similar as you say, for the following reasons:

 

1. I think our defence is in a MUCH better situation than the Oilers is. Right now we are only really in need of a top 4 DMan. I think that everyone would agree that Brodie, Gio, and Wideman have all done decently this season. Our bottom pairing may need some work, but we have a plethora of them (Babchuk, Smith, Butler, Sarich) and im hoping that Cundari can come up and win a spot on the bottom pairing (he has 4 points and a fight in the last 2 games).

 

2. Both teams have size issues... but i think for the oilers its that they have too many skilled, small top 6 players (eberle, hall, nuge, yak, gagner). They need to move one of those players out and get a big top 6 player back. Whereas I think the flames need to UPGRADE their top six players AND add size. Right now, our lineup going into next year would look something like:

Cammy - ?? - ??

Baer - Backs - Stemps

GlenX - Reinhart - Hudler

McGrattan - Bouma - Hanowski

 

Thats leaving Cervenka, Horak, Stajan, Tanguay, Begin, and Jackman out. Im not sure what we are doing with them next season, but i don't think any of them are 1st line capable. I wouldn't mind putting Horak in there as he has shown some good things with cammy, and our top 5 pick could also slide in there... ANYWAYS, my point is that the oilers need to upgrade SIZE in the top 6, while the flames need to upgrade SIZE and SKILL in the top 6 IMO.

 

I think everyone would like to see that too, but your 2 year turnaround and going for the cup sounds pretty optimistic to me. Most of our higher draft picks likely won't even be playing for the team by then.

 

I think that a legitimate goal would be to make the playoffs in 2 years. I would have said 3 years, but with the way the rookies have stepped up at the end of this season... with good drafting this year, the use of cap space in FA and at the draft, and the continued development of our young guys, I could see the playoffs in 2 years.