Jump to content

s4xon

Recommended Posts

Oh my goodness....

 

This has nothing to do with Calgary versus Arizona.    2018 is shaping out to be an extremely strong draft year.   If things shape up after 82 games the way they are now, which all of  y'all seem to be certain of, Arizona will get a superstar and we will not.  

 

I suppose it's good everyone is rushing out to support him.   Just remember, y'all supported Elliot last year too, and even attributed him with getting us into the playoffs.   A few short games later he was enemy number one.

 

If you're going to stand by a 35 year old goalie as a great move and such, ok.    But then be prepared to admit you were wrong when the inevitable happens that happens every year when we bring in older vets, overplay them in the regular season, have zero backup plan, and they let us down when we need them the most.   Rather than doing what you're doing now, and pretending that none of you ever liked Elliot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Rittich had a 36 shot shutout tonight.  Not a kid, but has shown a lot in the last year as a "prospect".

 

 

To be fair, Gillies first game was nothing short of phenomenal.

 

https://theahl.com/stats/player/6064

 

They both had very strong starts.    Gillies followed up with a stinker.    But, stinkers do happen and it was back to back games.   And he has 2 years on Rittich.

 

Gillies needs to have a strong year this year, with less tinkers.   But his first game definitely showcased an improved goalie.   I still see Rittich as an odd addition at the age of 25, but if he keeps getting shutouts then we'd have to give him the callup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

To be fair, Gillies first game was nothing short of phenomenal.

 

https://theahl.com/stats/player/6064

 

They both had very strong starts.    Gillies followed up with a stinker.    But, stinkers do happen and it was back to back games.   And he has 2 years on Rittich.

 

Gillies needs to have a strong year this year, with less tinkers.   But his first game definitely showcased an improved goalie.   I still see Rittich as an odd addition at the age of 25, but if he keeps getting shutouts then we'd have to give him the callup.

 

Ya know, it's all well and good to have faith in the "kids", but we aren't there yet.  Elliott stunk out the joint last year in the early going.  He was a better goalie than he showed us fans.  He got better as the season went on.  This year we had a strong start by a goalie.  He's not Price or whatever, he is a legit starter that will give us no more than one or two years of this.  Defense needs to learn how to play in front and limit shots.  Forwards need to learn how to play without the puck.  

 

Lack is the odd man here.  I think he's an insurance policy only.  He may only get one or two games in the early season, unless he shows like an all star.  Either way, he's holding the backup spot until Rittich or Gillies really shows strongly.  

 

Looking at goalie's performances to date, some of the options we looked at aren't looking too good.  Small sample, but Talbot is getting killed by the other teams and the media/fans.  Sound familiar.  

 

Whatever you think about our goalie situation, please don't start talking about lotto odds or the next one.  Teams are going to show their true colors as the season goes on.  COL is not a playoff team.  VGK is not gong to make the playoffs.  TOR is not going to win the cup....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Ya know, it's all well and good to have faith in the "kids", but we aren't there yet.  Elliott stunk out the joint last year in the early going.  He was a better goalie than he showed us fans.  He got better as the season went on.  This year we had a strong start by a goalie.  He's not Price or whatever, he is a legit starter that will give us no more than one or two years of this.  Defense needs to learn how to play in front and limit shots.  Forwards need to learn how to play without the puck.  

 

Lack is the odd man here.  I think he's an insurance policy only.  He may only get one or two games in the early season, unless he shows like an all star.  Either way, he's holding the backup spot until Rittich or Gillies really shows strongly.  

 

Looking at goalie's performances to date, some of the options we looked at aren't looking too good.  Small sample, but Talbot is getting killed by the other teams and the media/fans.  Sound familiar.  

 

Whatever you think about our goalie situation, please don't start talking about lotto odds or the next one.  Teams are going to show their true colors as the season goes on.  COL is not a playoff team.  VGK is not gong to make the playoffs.  TOR is not going to win the cup....

Back up goalies serve a purpose, they are here to rest the regular or step in when the regular slumps. Lack will be fine as a back up and I don't see him being replaced by Gilles or Rittich any time to soon, maybe way later I the season on a look see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Ya know, it's all well and good to have faith in the "kids", but we aren't there yet.

 

If you're referring to our prospects, we've been saying that for decades now and we should be close enough that we can at least talk about it.   Be intellectually honest.  Because there's no excuse for not being there yet.   Brossoit just got a shutout to start of his season.

 

54 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 Elliott stunk out the joint last year in the early going. 

 

And life happens.   

 

So, Mike Smith stunk out the joint two games ago (full admission, so did the rest of the team).   Not a word about it on this thread.

 

Good.  That's exactly how it should be.   It means almost nothing for a vet like Smith.

 

Next game, he plays well.   All of a sudden everyone's on here, "We made the right trade", and all this jazz.

 

Elliot had an even better game the same night.   So what?

 

Slow down kids.   Smith will do what he does.    Brossoit will do what he does, and we should not ignore it just because it might be painful.   It's called learning and it's healthy.  Gillies will do what he does.  He had a fantastic first night.   And so did Parsons.

 

We can make this thread all about our aging starter, like we do every year, and we can get burned, like we do every year.    I'm ok with that.   But I'm going to point it out, and I'm going to get myself burned talking about the Ortio of the day.   Because the next time we win a cup, it's going to be with one of those goalies.   Not with a seasoned vet transplant brought in to appease current ticket holders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

Oh my goodness....

 

This has nothing to do with Calgary versus Arizona.  

It COULD have implications on Chayko"s or BT's job next year

 

  2018 is shaping out to be an extremely strong draft year.   If things shape up after 82 games the way they are now, which all of  y'all seem to be certain of, Arizona will get a superstar and we will not.  

So let's sell all our players for 1st rnd draft choices (AHH NOT) but we will be in the playoffs and Arizona won't.

 

I suppose it's good everyone is rushing out to support him.   Just remember, y'all supported Elliot last year too, and even attributed him with getting us into the playoffs.   A few short games later he was enemy number one.

Elliot had the potential to make the Flames a better team ( but didn't)

If you're going to stand by a 35 year old goalie as a great move and such, ok.    But then be prepared to admit you were wrong when the inevitable happens that happens every year when we bring in older vets, overplay them in the regular season, have zero backup plan, and they let us down when we need them the most.  

Deal !!  But then you need to be prepared to admit you were wrong when we make the playoffs.

Rather than doing what you're doing now, and pretending that none of you ever liked Elliot.

I early on liked the idea of Elliot on our team and supported at the beginning but then he crapped the bed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

If you're referring to our prospects, we've been saying that for decades now and we should be close enough that we can at least talk about it.   Be intellectually honest.  Because there's no excuse for not being there yet.   Brossoit just got a shutout to start of his season.

 

 

And life happens.   

 

So, Mike Smith stunk out the joint two games ago (full admission, so did the rest of the team).   Not a word about it on this thread.

 

Good.  That's exactly how it should be.   It means almost nothing for a vet like Smith.

 

Next game, he plays well.   All of a sudden everyone's on here, "We made the right trade", and all this jazz.

 

Elliot had an even better game the same night.   So what?

 

Slow down kids.   Smith will do what he does.    Brossoit will do what he does, and we should not ignore it just because it might be painful.   It's called learning and it's healthy.  Gillies will do what he does.  He had a fantastic first night.   And so did Parsons.

 

We can make this thread all about our aging starter, like we do every year, and we can get burned, like we do every year.    I'm ok with that.   But I'm going to point it out, and I'm going to get myself burned talking about the Ortio of the day.   Because the next time we win a cup, it's going to be with one of those goalies.   Not with a seasoned vet transplant brought in to appease current ticket holders.

 

Ignoring the previous decade of goalie mishandling, how has Gillies or Rittich shown that they are ready right now.  A good game by each of them early in this season.  Great. How does that help us this year?  Neither is ready to be a starter.  Neither has had a consistent enough effort to be ready to sit on the bench for 4/5 games.  We only saw NHL games from them in meaningless games last year.  I would rather that one of them have a consistent 1/2 season and take the job from Lack.  

 

I don't think the Oilers are feeling very good about their tandem this year.  Talbot has looked shaky.  Brossoit had 1/2 a game against the Nucks where they had already won the game.  Stopped 6/8 shots against the SENS.    Maybe he is their future, but they gave up a lot for Talbot; the guy that brought them to the 2nd round.  

 

Do we bother to come in here and critique every game that Smith plays?  No.  Those are in the GDT.  He stunk against the SENS.  He was bad against Connor McDavid, letting in a breakaway and a tap in on a second opportunity.  Many of us spent a lot of thread space criticizing the Smith trade.  It's at least fair to give him some props for facing 40 shots a night.  Will he win us the cup this year?  Anybody's guess.  The problems this team has won't be solved this year in nets.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like JJ is saying we paid a steep price for goalies and are not getting a go at drafting a kid who could push us over the top. 

 

We have an offensive minded D, but are showing that we could be better defensively, plus we also need to keep stocking the cupboards of fresh young talent who can possibly turn elite. 

 

I like what I've seen of Smith, we should've went for him a few years ago. 

 

Our next wave wave of youth is close, but not really busting out. 

 

I dont think our goalies are a sure thing either. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I feel like JJ is saying we paid a steep price for goalies and are not getting a go at drafting a kid who could push us over the top. 

 

To take things down a notch, that's the idea, yes.  In an extremely strong draft, too.   

 

28 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

We have an offensive minded D, but are showing that we could be better defensively, plus we also need to keep stocking the cupboards of fresh young talent who can possibly turn elite. 

 

We talk about goalies to defencemen on here at a ratio of approximately 4 to 1.    But there's no getting around that fact that our problems likely have far more to do with defence.   While we have offensive D-men, our actual defensive ability is vastly over-rated.  We have needs on D.   Defensive needs.

 

28 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I like what I've seen of Smith, we should've went for him a few years ago. 

 

Our next wave wave of youth is close, but not really busting out. 

 

I dont think our goalies are a sure thing either. 

 

Our goalies are absolutely no sure thing, and we were never in any position to trade away Brossoit.    I'm hoping that one of Gillies or Parsons emerges.   I don't think we're in a position to give up on any of them at this point.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Ignoring the previous decade of goalie mishandling, how has Gillies or Rittich shown that they are ready right now.  

 

Or LB....

 

See I don't understand why we would ignore the previous decade when we're doing the exact same things now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I feel like JJ is saying we paid a steep price for goalies and are not getting a go at drafting a kid who could push us over the top. 

 

 

20 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

To take things down a notch, that's the idea, yes.  In an extremely strong draft, too.   

 

 

In 2012 we took Gillies as 7th overall goalie in the 3rd round.

In 2014 we took McDonald as the 1st overall goalie in the 2nd round.

In 2016 we took Parsons as the 2nd overall goalie in the 2nd round.

Technically, we should only be drafting goalies every 4 years because there is only so many spots for them in the system.

Your arguments don’t hold water.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

 

 

In 2012 we took Gillies as 7th overall goalie in the 3rd round.

In 2014 we took McDonald as the 1st overall goalie in the 2nd round.

In 2016 we took Parsons as the 2nd overall goalie in the 2nd round.

Technically, we should only be drafting goalies every 4 years because there is only so many spots for them in the system.

Your arguments don’t hold water.   

 

I am saying a kid at other positions to push us over the top. We gave up how many picks for goalies and D? 

 

Ive been pushing for Hamonic, and now like Hamilton enough... 

 

just saying i can see where JJ is coming from.

i think we could've tanked better and went for a Matthews? But we have to work with some good players, just not elite...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I am saying a kid at other positions to push us over the top. We gave up how many picks for goalies and D? 

 

Ive been pushing for Hamonic, and now like Hamilton enough... 

 

just saying i can see where JJ is coming from.

i think we could've tanked better and went for a Matthews? But we have to work with some good players, just not elite...

Sorry robrob, I thought we were talking about the Flames attempt at filling the goaltender position. 

Tanking is a different topic, some teams tank for a year before getting a Matthews in a lottery.  Other teams tank for 10 years before getting a McDavid in a lottery.  Tanking isn’t what it used to be, now you have to tank then win the lottery to get the best young players at the draft.

Yes we gave up some 2nd rounders for Elliott, Smith, Stone, Ham and Ham.  Will never know what those 2nd round picks may have been.  Today our goaltending and defense are solid because of those trades. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gilles has one great save (in an otherwise poor camp) and Smith has one bad game (in an otherwise great start) and out comes the naysayer. 

 

We all want a kid to step up and take the reigns. But you need a kid to step up and take the reigns first. That is a distinction that JJ and a few others can't seem to grasp. 

 

Until that happens let the rest of us enjoy the good goaltending we are getting from Smith. Let's not jump up out for the gutter everytime there is a bad game. Overall Smith had been great. Good on him. 

 

Meanwhile Gilles, Rittich, and Parsons have had a decent start to the season. The reigns are still hear for them WHEN one of them is ready. The great thing about an older goalie on a short term deal is that they will be available when one of the kids gets a hold of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Ignoring the previous decade of goalie mishandling, how has Gillies or Rittich shown that they are ready right now.  A good game by each of them early in this season.  Great. How does that help us this year?  Neither is ready to be a starter.  Neither has had a consistent enough effort to be ready to sit on the bench for 4/5 games.  We only saw NHL games from them in meaningless games last year.  I would rather that one of them have a consistent 1/2 season and take the job from Lack.  

 

I don't think the Oilers are feeling very good about their tandem this year.  Talbot has looked shaky.  Brossoit had 1/2 a game against the Nucks where they had already won the game.  Stopped 6/8 shots against the SENS.    Maybe he is their future, but they gave up a lot for Talbot; the guy that brought them to the 2nd round.  

 

Do we bother to come in here and critique every game that Smith plays?  No.  Those are in the GDT.  He stunk against the SENS.  He was bad against Connor McDavid, letting in a breakaway and a tap in on a second opportunity.  Many of us spent a lot of thread space criticizing the Smith trade.  It's at least fair to give him some props for facing 40 shots a night.  Will he win us the cup this year?  Anybody's guess.  The problems this team has won't be solved this year in nets.     

Nice discussion about kids, but you’re making me laugh saying Smith stunk against McDavid and Ottawa.  Let’s see, he stopped 2 of three breakaways against McDavid, and let in zero stinkers against Ottawa.  Sometimes, when you let great shooters, like Hoffman and Stone and McDavid have wide-open point blank shots they score, and the “fault”doesn’t actually belong to the goalie but to the players in front of him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I am saying a kid at other positions to push us over the top. We gave up how many picks for goalies and D? 

 

Ive been pushing for Hamonic, and now like Hamilton enough... 

 

just saying i can see where JJ is coming from.

i think we could've tanked better and went for a Matthews? But we have to work with some good players, just not elite...

I don't think any of these decisions are done in isolation of the team's situation. I see a GM doing his best to nurture a young forward core by supporting them from the net out and spotting them with seasoned veterans so they learn. I honestly think the picture becomes clearer in 2018/19 as the core has the maturity to take over from the vets as the true leaders. We may not have one elite players but we should have 6 or 8 solid players emerge on both defense and with our forwards. I see this strategy as to why BT spent the picks now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Nice discussion about kids, but you’re making me laugh saying Smith stunk against McDavid and Ottawa.  Let’s see, he stopped 2 of three breakaways against McDavid, and let in zero stinkers against Ottawa.  Sometimes, when you let great shooters, like Hoffman and Stone and McDavid have wide-open point blank shots they score, and the “fault”doesn’t actually belong to the goalie but to the players in front of him.  

 

You ignored my previous responses to JJ.  I talked about him having to face 40+ shots per night and said we need to give him props for that.

 

You must see a little bit of sarcasm in the comment about letting McDavid score twice.  :)

Yes, a breakaway and a tap in goal.  Bad goalie!!

As for Ottawa, it was a loss.  Not entirely on him, but he is not without fault in it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To win a cup it starts with having the best players.  That is on drafting and development. (A draft lottery win or two certainly helps, but it isn't required).  Then you need to surround them with good players.  Drafting a development is still key, but now your GM comes in as well.  Next they need to play well on the ice.  Hello coaching staff.  Throw in a lot of luck and you are on your way to a cup.  

 

But that doesn't have much to do with goal tending.  Goalies are strange.  Fleury was a first overall and started in the NHL, but ended up back in junior and played in the AHL before coming in as a poor/mediocre starter (until he found his legs). Meanwhile Murray was a 3-round pick who played his full four years in junior and two in the AHL before getting an injury call up where he was able to unexpectedly win the starters job.  Crawford was a second round pick and was up and down between the AHL/NHL for years before breaking in.  He has won cups as both a young and older goalie.  Quick was a third round pick but broke into the league very quickly, moving from the ECHL to the AHL to the NHL in a single season.  

 

Anyone telling you there is only one path to success when it comes to goalies is speaking out of the wrong hole.  They are all different.  The only consistent trend for just about all goalies is really strong play in the AHL before making it to the NHL.  The Flames haven't had that from any of their goalies which is why they haven't had any young goalies in net.  This idea that being young qualifies you for an NHL position is ridiculous.  It really really is.  You need to play well in the developing league first then you move to the NHL.  The day that a goalie is playing well in the AHL but doesn't get the bump is the day I join the naysayers.

 

Until then Mike Smith is 4-2 and is top 10 in both save percentage and goals against (among starters).  That is despite seeing more shots then any other goalie.  He isn't giving people any valid reasons to complain about how we are managing our net.  Hopefully it stays that way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you look past the save % and GAA while Smith was in Arizona you will see that he was a very good goalie on a very bad team.

 

So when JJ says that Smith will do what he does, I agree 100%, which is to say that he will continue to give well above average to borderline elite goaltending, just like he did in Arizona. Even an elite goaltender can only make so many saves.

 

At this point we don't have a goaltending prospect that is ready for NHL duty, and we certainly don't have any goalies that are capable of giving us what Smith is doing for us now and will continue to do all season. We haven't had a goalie or prospect capable of that since Kipper left.

 

Elliott was bad from the day 1 and really only had a 10 game stretch where he played like a starting goalie, so for me it wasn't a few games, it was that he just isn't that good of a goalie.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I talk about the kids making the team, it's going to have to be based on at least half a season of killin' it in the AHL.

Even then, they would only be considered as ready for the BU role, and that is assuming that Lack just doesn't cut it and/or we have a major injury.  We have no idea at this point what version of Lack we have.  The only real action was against Ottawa.  Wasn't bad.  Wasn't that great, but he was brought in during a whitewash.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, kehatch said:

Gilles has one great save (in an otherwise poor camp) and Smith has one bad game (in an otherwise great start) and out comes the naysayer. 

 

 

More accurately, we've been failing in goal and defensively since 2006, consistently, every year.   And every time it becomes obvious, someone rushes to the Flames defense as if it were a one-time event, ignoring the highly repetitive nature of events which unfolds predictably in net here each year.

 

For you information, if you had any interest in basing your post on reallity, there were exactly ZERO messages in this thread following Smith's bad game.  Zero.    After his (good) recovery game, multiple people came on here effectively saying that we made a great trade and our problems in net were solved.   What happened on here is actually the Exact opposite of what you said.  I agree with your point about over-evaluating one game.   You've just completely confused your conclusion with your own bias, rather than taking the time to understand what actually happened on this thread.

 

P.S....   Gillies had a great save, good enough that it might be worth spelling his name right at least.   Nobody actually suggested that save on its own was enough.   That was only in your head, taking a joke the wrong way.   That said, there is substantial data behind some of the concerns on this thread, and problems which repeat themselves year in, and year out, which you have to completely ignore to not comprehend the scope of conversation on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...