Goaltending

[The_People1]

11 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I am cranky, yes, to put it midly.   I am making a conscious effort not to post too much or get overly involved, so as not to come across the wrong way.   I'm at that point.   

 

I don't see any solution outside of firing Brad Treliving and possibly hoping for new ownership.

 

So, I will spare you all an elaboration.

 

Eventually, I will get my wish.  And I'll be back with a better attitude at that time.

 

BT has been trying to get us a goalie though.  He's just 0/6 so far lol.

[cross16]

Tough to acquire good goalies, which Is why I don't blame Treliving for the current situation especially considering he had deals in place for both Jones and Anderson and those teams backed out. You need to develop a goalie and stop having to go to market all the time because goalies on the open market (free agency or trade) don't tend to work out very often.

 

Which is why I advocate them sticking with Giles and Rittich, and getting Parsons more time in the A and some steady time. Answer is going to have to come internally, not externally. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Tough to acquire good goalies, which Is why I don't blame Treliving for the current situation especially considering he had deals in place for both Jones and Anderson and those teams backed out. You need to develop a goalie and stop having to go to market all the time because goalies on the open market (free agency or trade) don't tend to work out very often.

 

Which is why I advocate them sticking with Giles and Rittich, and getting Parsons more time in the A and some steady time. Answer is going to have to come internally, not externally. 

 

Plus, I just feel like we’ve spent so many assets on goalies lately, I can’t fathom spending more. We don’t really have the assets to do that now without creating other big holes.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I am cranky, yes, to put it mildly.   I am making a conscious effort not to post too much or get overly involved, so as not to come across the wrong way.   I'm at that point.   

 

I don't see any solution outside of firing Brad Treliving and possibly hoping for new ownership.

 

So, I will spare you all an elaboration.

 

Eventually, I will get my wish.  And I'll be back with a better attitude at that time.

Breath, buddy.

We all wonder the same things.

Step back from the ledge. We get it.

 

For me, do players just play dumb hockey in Calgary, is it the altitude? WTF?

Outside of that, we're pretty much on par.

Outside of your extremist element, lol.

You don't strike me as an, "instant result" fan.

Then their you are, lol.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Love. 

[conundrumed]

Have you ever been biking and bsing with buddys only to enter the backseat of a parked car without using the doors?

Please god say it's not just me.

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

Tough to acquire good goalies, which Is why I don't blame Treliving for the current situation especially considering he had deals in place for both Jones and Anderson and those teams backed out. You need to develop a goalie and stop having to go to market all the time because goalies on the open market (free agency or trade) don't tend to work out very often.

 

Which is why I advocate them sticking with Giles and Rittich, and getting Parsons more time in the A and some steady time. Answer is going to have to come internally, not externally. 

 

Shoulda, woulda, coulda....

 

We have three potential starters in the wings but we are stuck with Smith, good or bad.

Last year should have been a development year for Rittich (or Gillies).  Instead we got an overplayed goalie that gets injured. 

Now what?

 

If we were going to get more of a 1a/1b setup with Smith and the backup, I wouldn't have as much an issue.

Or maybe you trade for a Grubauer/Saros now and trade Smith at the deadline.  Give up assets, but at least it's for a younger guy.

It gives you some additional time to develop Parsons and decide on Rittich or Gillies.

 

  

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Breath, buddy.

We all wonder the same things.

Step back from the ledge. We get it.

 

For me, do players just play dumb hockey in Calgary, is it the altitude? WTF?

Outside of that, we're pretty much on par.

Outside of your extremist element, lol.

You don't strike me as an, "instant result" fan.

Then their you are, lol.

 

 

Thanks, I think, lol,

 

I really, really just need to let things be for a while.

 

But the idea that the people literally steering the ship might somehow be held accountable for where the ship goes, is, unfortunately, not extreme outside of this forum.

 

Who is responsible?   The players.

 

Who put them there?  The GM.

 

Who gets punted, every time?   The coach.   Every time.  by the GM.  Even if they were coach of the year.

 

What does the GM do better next time?   Sells more of our future.

 

How is that allowed?   Owners.  Who spent all their energy on a failed and pointless redevelopment project (which was clear from the moment they started) and almost none on hockey.

 

 

And what was the #1 issue, at least on the surface?  Goaltending.

 

GM (who put them there):  " I think we have the right personnel "   

     Translation:   "I cannot undo the contractual disaster I have created, we cant trade them for anything now, and we have no first round pick left to play"

 

    And the goalie coaching:  The only Possibly suspect part of our whole coaching system, is the Only part that's safe.

 

 

It will correct itself.   But will be hard to watch.   

 

We will still win the Cup.  And I will be there all the way.  I'll be ready for the pain when the season opens.   But, our visions of Monahan and Gaudreau leading the charge to our Cup, have been dashed by management more concerned with buildings.     I hope those guys do win cups as Flames.  But it will be as older, grizzled veterans supporting a new front, in our next rebuild.   After we get a few years in of not giving up our picks.

 

That's just an honestly even I haven't fully accepted yet, but know is true.   When I accept it I'll be better.

[kehatch]

I understand the frustration. But let's try and be at least a little rational. 

 

The GM has made a reasonable effort to bring on a starter. Smith was one of the top goalies in the league before he got hurt. Parsons was a steal in the second round. Rittich was a free pick up. I am as sick of the revolving goalie situation as anyone, but I am not seeing a bunch of lost opportunities that another GM would have capatilized on. 

 

The sky isn't falling. The Flames are still in good shape with good young pieces up front, great pieces at D, and a decent set of kids and prospects (Anderson, Jankowski, Valimaki, Foz, Foo, Dube, Kylington, Phillips, Mangiapane, Parsons, etc). 

 

This entire fire the GM, management, get new ownership, we won't win a cup until Gaudreau has grey hair, etc dialogue is an irrational rant that is pretty tough to take seriously. 

[kehatch]

On 31/05/2018 at 3:28 PM, cross16 said:

Tough to acquire good goalies, which Is why I don't blame Treliving for the current situation especially considering he had deals in place for both Jones and Anderson and those teams backed out. You need to develop a goalie and stop having to go to market all the time because goalies on the open market (free agency or trade) don't tend to work out very often.

 

Which is why I advocate them sticking with Giles and Rittich, and getting Parsons more time in the A and some steady time. Answer is going to have to come internally, not externally. 

 

Normally I agree with the premise of trying to develop your own goalies. But it isn't the only way and it may not be the best way for the Flames.

 

First, a good chunk of the best goalies in the league were not developed by their current team (Anderson, Dubnyk, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Talbot, Fleury, Varlamov, etc). Some of these guys were acquired cheap. 

 

Second, I don't like the Flames options. Parsons might be good, but he isn't ready. Gilles doesn't have the head space and Rittich doesn't have the ability. 

 

Smith is back regardless, so that buys a year for Parsons. But I wouldn't mind having a plan B in the backup role. Both as security for Parsons, but also for security for Smith if age catches up to him or he gets injured again. 

[cccsberg]

5 hours ago, kehatch said:

I understand the frustration. But let's try and be at least a little rational. 

 

The GM has made a reasonable effort to bring on a starter. Smith was one of the top goalies in the league before he got hurt. Parsons was a steal in the second round. Rittich was a free pick up. I am as sick of the revolving goalie situation as anyone, but I am not seeing a bunch of lost opportunities that another GM would have capatilized on. 

 

The sky isn't falling. The Flames are still in good shape with good young pieces up front, great pieces at D, and a decent set of kids and prospects (Anderson, Jankowski, Valimaki, Foz, Foo, Dube, Kylington, Phillips, Mangiapane, Parsons, etc). 

 

This entire fire the GM, management, get new ownership, we won't win a cup until Gaudreau has grey hair, etc dialogue is an irrational rant that is pretty tough to take seriously. 

Exactly.  Look at a couple moves for RHS players, while moving out the lackadaisical, bring in the more ready prospects and install an attacking, in-your-face style that never gives up while having some smart, adaptive, inspirational coaching and full accountability across the board and they will do just fine.  

[cccsberg]

5 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Normally I agree with the premise of trying to develop your own goalies. But it isn't the only way and it may not be the best way for the Flames.

 

First, a good chunk of the best goalies in the league were not developed by their current team (Anderson, Dubnyk, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Talbot, Fleury, Varlamov, etc). Some of these guys were acquired cheap. 

 

Second, I don't like the Flames options. Parsons might be good, but he isn't ready. Gilles doesn't have the head space and Rittich doesn't have the ability. 

 

Smith is back regardless, so that buys a year for Parsons. But I wouldn't mind having a plan B in the backup role. Both as security for Parsons, but also for security for Smith if age catches up to him or he gets injured again. 

Your assessment of goalies is brutal.  They are all good.  Smith was top5 in the league for over half a season but then over-use and injury derailed his season.  Rittich was even better when played as an occasional back-up, but then folded under the pressure, like the whole team, when Smith got injured and the competition forced an "every game is the most important of the season" mentality with over 30 games left.  Gillies actually did quite well last year, developing, and in the past carried his team as the pressure starter all the way to a championship.  Parsons isn't ready, agreed, but multiple injuries derailed what should have been a good development year, and he too has carried multiple teams to championships as the pressure starter.  Instead of putting all the blame for team failure on the goalies and then tossing them aside as if they are no good, why don't you look at the complete picture and and assess all of the problems?  Looking at the Stockton Heat, with the Flames' mandate to develop and win secondarily, how do you think that impacts the goalie numbers?  Do you ever wonder why so many teams are able to get elite-level goalies via trade?  Too many teams do exactly what you are and give up on guys prematurely.    Going ahead with Smith, Gillies and Parsons is a solid plan, and Rittich has stepped up admirably as an alternative back-up, at the least.  The Flames have way worse problems than their goalies at the moment.  They've already addressed the coaching, and the new guys are just starting to work on a new plan going forward, check, check.  Still work to do elsewhere.  We await, though time is getting close.  In another month we'll pretty much know what they have to work with.

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

Your assessment of goalies is brutal.  They are all good.  Smith was top5 in the league for over half a season but then over-use and injury derailed his season.  Rittich was even better when played as an occasional back-up, but then folded under the pressure, like the whole team, when Smith got injured and the competition forced an "every game is the most important of the season" mentality with over 30 games left.  Gillies actually did quite well last year, developing, and in the past carried his team as the pressure starter all the way to a championship.  Parsons isn't ready, agreed, but multiple injuries derailed what should have been a good development year, and he too has carried multiple teams to championships as the pressure starter.  Instead of putting all the blame for team failure on the goalies and then tossing them aside as if they are no good, why don't you look at the complete picture and and assess all of the problems?  Looking at the Stockton Heat, with the Flames' mandate to develop and win secondarily, how do you think that impacts the goalie numbers?  Do you ever wonder why so many teams are able to get elite-level goalies via trade?  Too many teams do exactly what you are and give up on guys prematurely.    Going ahead with Smith, Gillies and Parsons is a solid plan, and Rittich has stepped up admirably as an alternative back-up, at the least.  The Flames have way worse problems than their goalies at the moment.  They've already addressed the coaching, and the new guys are just starting to work on a new plan going forward, check, check.  Still work to do elsewhere.  We await, though time is getting close.  In another month we'll pretty much know what they have to work with.

 

Smith was great last season until he was injured. Whether it was being overplayed or just an injury we don't know, but he wasn't great later. But his age is a fair concern. 

 

On the others I don't agree. My assessment of Rittich comes from my own review of his ability, but also from people that know there stuff when it comes to goalies. He is steady and smart, but he doesn't have the high level skill of am NHL goalie and that will be exposed as he gets more time. In the league.

 

As for Gilles, he had a strong development season last year for sure. But I am not sold he has it between the ears to be a starter. The Flames are closer to him though and will have a better assessment. He definitely has the skills to do the job. But I didn't see anything to suggest he is ready to play 1B behind an aging Smith. He isn't waiver eligible yet and another year in the AHL wouldn't be terrible, especially since he is likely to get called up when Smith is injured again. 

[cross16]

7 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Normally I agree with the premise of trying to develop your own goalies. But it isn't the only way and it may not be the best way for the Flames.

 

First, a good chunk of the best goalies in the league were not developed by their current team (Anderson, Dubnyk, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Talbot, Fleury, Varlamov, etc). Some of these guys were acquired cheap. 

 

Second, I don't like the Flames options. Parsons might be good, but he isn't ready. Gilles doesn't have the head space and Rittich doesn't have the ability. 

 

Smith is back regardless, so that buys a year for Parsons. But I wouldn't mind having a plan B in the backup role. Both as security for Parsons, but also for security for Smith if age catches up to him or he gets injured again. 

 

Its not the only option, but when you've spent the last 6 season trying to figure it out, the market is thin, and you have no assets you should want to trade for a goalie, it's the best option currently. Never mind factoring in the asset you've already spent trying to address the position.  

 

I'm not against a trade I'm just not seeing one that makes sense, they are rolls of the dice just like Gilles or Rittich are. If the Caps want to talk about dealing Ilya samsonov and it's a fair price I'm all ears, if a current starter in a good age range is available I'm all ears. I'm just not seeing it, and the that's why I think it time to give the internal guys a chance for once. I don't agree on your assessment of them. 

[Cowtownguy]

If we do get another goalie, I sure hope that he is a true #1 contender. Spending more assets on half measures should not be an option.

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Its not the only option, but when you've spent the last 6 season trying to figure it out, the market is thin, and you have no assets you should want to trade for a goalie, it's the best option currently. Never mind factoring in the asset you've already spent trying to address the position.  

 

I'm not against a trade I'm just not seeing one that makes sense, they are rolls of the dice just like Gilles or Rittich are. If the Caps want to talk about dealing Ilya samsonov and it's a fair price I'm all ears, if a current starter in a good age range is available I'm all ears. I'm just not seeing it, and the that's why I think it time to give the internal guys a chance for once. I don't agree on your assessment of them. 

 

It really comes down to the last line. What is the Flames assessment of Gilles and Rittich. If they think they have potential starters that are ready for a 1B/Back Up role this year then you absolutely stick with them. If they don't then they need to look outside. 

[JTech780]

8 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

It really comes down to the last line. What is the Flames assessment of Gilles and Rittich. If they think they have potential starters that are ready for a 1B/Back Up role this year then you absolutely stick with them. If they don't then they need to look outside. 

 

I would say that Rittich can handle the backup role well enough, the problem for lies in when Smith inevitably goes down with injury I don't have faith that Rittich or Gillies can take the ball and run with it. I think the results will be eerily similar to what happened this year.

[kehatch]

8 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I would say that Rittich can handle the backup role well enough, the problem for lies in when Smith inevitably goes down with injury I don't have faith that Rittich or Gillies can take the ball and run with it. I think the results will be eerily similar to what happened this year.

 

I agree that is likely. Plus, I don't see Rittich as a future starter. With this being Smiths last season I would prefer someone with starter upside was under him. 

[jjgallow]

10 hours ago, kehatch said:

I understand the frustration. But let's try and be at least a little rational. 

 

I understand how firing the GM, or losing faith in the GM, might seem irrational, or one might "want" it to be irrational.

 

But, the fact is, 

 

The GM's clock is ticking.    You know, as well as I, that his days are numbered, and what I am talking about is nothing short of the inevitable.

 

And you are absolutely right, firing the GM isn't going to win us a cup fast.   That, is why I am so dissapointed.   

 

But we know it's coming.  And it's coming before the next Stanley cup.

 

You listed a lot of positives in your post.  None of them win us a cup in near term.   None of them make up for the aging of some of our key vets like Giordano, our goaltender.   Many in supporting roles.   Even Backlund, who plays a hard game.

 

There is, unfortunately, nothing irrational about foreseeing the GM's exit.   He might have 30 games left in him imho.  What can he do, fire another coach?

 

The only irrational thing about my post, is that it's not constructive right now.  Thus, why did I post it.  Out of frustration.   But it is also our reality, at some point we have to face it, and when we do, maybe we can start to see the light at the end of the tunnel.  Because there is light there, I just can't see it yet.    Need a few more weeks.

[phoenix66]

19 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I understand how firing the GM, or losing faith in the GM, might seem irrational, or one might "want" it to be irrational.

 

But, the fact is, 

 

The GM's clock is ticking.    You know, as well as I, that his days are numbered, and what I am talking about is nothing short of the inevitable.

 

And you are absolutely right, firing the GM isn't going to win us a cup fast.   That, is why I am so dissapointed.   

 

But we know it's coming.  And it's coming before the next Stanley cup.

 

You listed a lot of positives in your post.  None of them win us a cup in near term.   None of them make up for the aging of some of our key vets like Giordano, our goaltender.   Many in supporting roles.   Even Backlund, who plays a hard game.

 

There is, unfortunately, nothing irrational about foreseeing the GM's exit.   He might have 30 games left in him imho.  What can he do, fire another coach?

 

The only irrational thing about my post, is that it's not constructive right now.  Thus, why did I post it.  Out of frustration.   But it is also our reality, at some point we have to face it, and when we do, maybe we can start to see the light at the end of the tunnel.  Because there is light there, I just can't see it yet.    Need a few more weeks.

I get your frustration , but I disagree his days are numbered

I fully agree that he has definitely hitched his wagon to this coaching staff.. he's all in , if they fall on their face totally , good chance he goes with them , no argument there .

I do believe hes on the right track tho .. and we should also be careful what we wish for because I'd be willing to guarantee, 100%  if BT goes?  his replacement is already in house. and his name is Don Maloney 

 

You've used the example a number of times, that "he fired the coach of the year "  but yet the fact is he fired him a year later after he dropped off a cliff.. nobody is bemoaning trading Lady Byng winner Jiri Hudler the same year .. why ?  because he fell off a cliff.  This isnt a Raptors-Casey scenario where he got fired before his trophy was even back from the engravers.. his job was to move this team forward and I still see way more good moves than bad .

[kehatch]

31 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I understand how firing the GM, or losing faith in the GM, might seem irrational, or one might "want" it to be irrational.

 

But, the fact is, 

 

The GM's clock is ticking.    You know, as well as I, that his days are numbered, and what I am talking about is nothing short of the inevitable.

 

And you are absolutely right, firing the GM isn't going to win us a cup fast.   That, is why I am so dissapointed.   

 

But we know it's coming.  And it's coming before the next Stanley cup.

 

You listed a lot of positives in your post.  None of them win us a cup in near term.   None of them make up for the aging of some of our key vets like Giordano, our goaltender.   Many in supporting roles.   Even Backlund, who plays a hard game.

 

There is, unfortunately, nothing irrational about foreseeing the GM's exit.   He might have 30 games left in him imho.  What can he do, fire another coach?

 

The only irrational thing about my post, is that it's not constructive right now.  Thus, why did I post it.  Out of frustration.   But it is also our reality, at some point we have to face it, and when we do, maybe we can start to see the light at the end of the tunnel.  Because there is light there, I just can't see it yet.    Need a few more weeks.

 

No, your point wasn't that the GMs clock is ticking. It was apparently because Smith got injured that we need a new GM, new ownership, and we can't win a cup until Gaudreau and Monahan are in their mid 30s (after we go through another rebuild). 

 

I get frustration. But the entire "until you face the reality of my irrational hyperbole we will never win a cup" rant is way over the top. 

 

How about acknowledging that Gaudreau and Monahan had career years and are now on budget contracts. That Tkachuk looks like the real deal and could be the best of the bunch. That Hamilton and Giordano are one of the leagues top pairings. That the new coaches are a great fit with the team. That despite a lack of picks we have quietly put together a strong prospect pool, especially on D. That the bulk of our bad contracts are off the books and we are in a great cap situation going forward. Etc, etc, etc. 

 

The sky isn't falling. The Flames are in good shape. 

[travel_dude]

28 minutes ago, kehatch said:

How about acknowledging that Gaudreau and Monahan had career years and are now on budget contracts. That Tkachuk looks like the real deal and could be the best of the bunch. That Hamilton and Giordano are one of the leagues top pairings. That the new coaches are a great fit with the team. That despite a lack of picks we have quietly put together a strong prospect pool, especially on D. That the bulk of our bad contracts are off the books and we are in a great cap situation going forward. Etc, etc, etc. 

 

The sky isn't falling. The Flames are in good shape. 

 

It's nice to hear some positives.  We have issues, but nowhere near some other teams.  Our problem lie with having a few holes, some useless players clogging up the roster, and lack of RHS forwards.  Our PP was brutal at times and we left points on the table.  Hope that gets fixed because we weren;t that far from a playoff spot.

 

If anything, we have too much depth on D, and not enough high end forward prospects.  

 

My concern will always be in nets first.  I was concerned about Smith from day 1, but got proved wrong.  For part of the season. 

Good teams have good starters.  We have a small window of a good starter.  We don;t have the proven backup yet.

I thought Rittich was gold.  But he was underused when you could use him safely.  He folded once he was forced into the starter role.

Gillies was shaky for 1/2 of each game he played.  He would let a squeaker or two, then shut the door.  Very much an Elliott effect.

Neither is proven to be the bonafide backup able to play 30+ games this season.  Proven, that is.

 

Here's the conundrum.  Both coach and GM need to achieve results.  Another lotto pick will not look good.  The only way to know for sure that Gillies or Rittich are potential Smith replacements is to subject them to 40 games this year.  Have to be ready to give them lots of rope.

 

The other possibility is to trade Smith this year and bring in a younger starter/ready to be a starter.  

 

In either case, we should have the defense to allow that.  We should be able to limit the shots.  We should be able to limit the HD shots. 

[cross16]

I'm not sure I see a starter in Gilles either, but I do think I see someone who can give you a good 30/40 games and maybe be a starter if he can clean up something's. I think Rittich is solid for 30 ish games. 

 

So if the Flames want to improve, find someone better than that, or with more upside that won't cost an arm and a league, and is in the right age range (sub 30). Again, I'm just not seeing thst player out there right now but maybe I'm wrong and missing something. 

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, cross16 said:

If the Caps want to talk about dealing Ilya samsonov and it's a fair price I'm all ears, if a current starter in a good age range is available I'm all ears. I'm just not seeing it,

 

Samsonov looks like the real deal. What do you suspect it will cost?

[cross16]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Samsonov looks like the real deal. What do you suspect it will cost?

 

Hard to even speculate because I struggle to see them moving him. Holtby has been fantastic but age and contract kind up really nicely to develop samsonov. I wouldn't move him if I were them.