Goaltending

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Really hoping the WJC is able to go in December. Great chance to get a glance at Wolf, as the Americans will be playing in Red Deer

 

Knight is still eligible.

Knight has the keys right now, but a good warm up tourney or camp could unseat Mr. Knight.

I tend to think as well that Wolfy could play a much better game against kids.

He's seen a lot of players that would be on the rosters for other teams.

Knight has seen a lot of older college players, with a smattering of high end players.

Let's face it, Hockey East is not a powerhouse.

[Thebrewcrew]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Knight is still eligible.

Knight has the keys right now, but a good warm up tourney or camp could unseat Mr. Knight.

I tend to think as well that Wolfy could play a much better game against kids.

He's seen a lot of players that would be on the rosters for other teams.

Knight has seen a lot of older college players, with a smattering of high end players.

Let's face it, Hockey East is not a powerhouse.

It's also rather telling that Wolf won USA hockey goaltender of the year over Knight. Both played in the WJC last year, Knight was the guy and the US underwhelmed. It would be an open competition IMO

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

It's also rather telling that Wolf won USA hockey goaltender of the year over Knight. Both played in the WJC last year, Knight was the guy and the US underwhelmed. It would be an open competition IMO

 

Knight was really good in his games, but he couldn;t stop powerful teams from scoring.

Even Wolfy let in 3 in his one game.

I think that was nerves.

 

I expect Wolfy to be the star this year in the WJC.

If he gets a chance, he will be a force.

[JTech780]

These playoffs could be a big determining factor of how they go forward in net. 

 

I think they should go with Rittich, we need to know what he can do in the playoffs. If he comes in and plays well I could see them looking at another Talbot like signing with Rittich being the starter/1A. On the other hand if he flops, I could see the team looking at guys like Holtby, Lehner, or Markstrom in free agency, or Murray via trade. Which would push Rittich to the 1B/Backup spot.

 

The goalie market this offseason actually has a few legit starters for options. It would a good time to make a move if the team feels it needs to solidify the position.

[Thebrewcrew]

There's lots of good goalies that will be available, my preference would be still to keep Talbot. I can understand his frustration, he deserved more playing time, so maybe he explores other options. 

 

Markstrom and Lehner are probably getting 4 or 5 year deals, that's something the Flames should stay away from. Maybe Holtby is an option on a 1 year deal, coming off a bad season.

 

If not Talbot, then explore the market on Khudobin and Greiss. The market on Khudobin would be nuts for a backup though, I think he will see 3 mill or more.

 

Trade market, check in on Murray, that likely means Rittich is going the other way though. Georgiev I really like if NYR has any interest in shopping him. Raanta could likely be had from ARI as well

[JTech780]

I would be fine with 4 or 5 years for either Markstrom or Lehner, even Holtby. I think Calgary needs to find a solution in net, Rittich might be that I am just not 100% sold on him at this point.

 

If Wolf or Parsons end up being the real deal then we can make room for them at that point. As it stands right now, we can't count on them. 

[cross16]

Markstrom and Lehner are the only two out there I would consider on the right deal. I don't really agree with giving goalies more than 4 year terms so if they want more I would be out. The rest of the options to me are not starters, not worth the money they will get, or I would just prefer to stick with Ritttich. 

 

I'm pretty lukewarm on Murray given his injury problems. Might be tough for him to recover but I do like the skill set. 

 

Unless it's a young goalie that you can add now and for the future I'm not as much a believer in the Flames needing a solution in net. While I understand the reservation around Rittich, IMO I think you would have the same reservations around many of the available "upgrades". i just don't think there are that many very good or great goalies in the league so spending time, assets or cap space for a marginal upgrade doesn't really interest me. I see the Flames going with Rittich and another 1B next year and there are a few options there I don't mind. 

[robrob74]

21 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

There's lots of good goalies that will be available, my preference would be still to keep Talbot. I can understand his frustration, he deserved more playing time, so maybe he explores other options. 

 

Markstrom and Lehner are probably getting 4 or 5 year deals, that's something the Flames should stay away from. Maybe Holtby is an option on a 1 year deal, coming off a bad season.

 

If not Talbot, then explore the market on Khudobin and Greiss. The market on Khudobin would be nuts for a backup though, I think he will see 3 mill or more.

 

Trade market, check in on Murray, that likely means Rittich is going the other way though. Georgiev I really like if NYR has any interest in shopping him. Raanta could likely be had from ARI as well

 

I think the Talbot situation was a result of going with the player you know vs the player you don't. That stunted his ability to get back on track sooner. Now, he didn't play all that great at first, but it's a question of, do you put someone in so they can get a feel for the puck and the game, or if he's not doing well, do you not play him? Right or wrong (I think wrong), Rittich was playing so well they ran with him... I think Talbot would have improved faster by getting more feels for the puck. I'd like to try Talbot again as well. If he would sign a similar contract, I am ok with that. The cost of two goalies is equivalent to one starter... Not bad. 

 

I am with @cross16, I wouldn't mind a Markstrom. 

 

I think we need to solidify the goaltending for 3-4 years in hopes that Wolf, Parsons or Zagidulin can make a push. I get what JJ is getting at, and the anger that the team hasn't been able to develop a goalie and the need for a long term solution NOW, but you can't push a goalie that's not ready. Philly wasn't going to push Hart, but ended up letting him make that decision. Best route is to develop until they make that decision for you. Even Binnington on St Louis nearly didn't play last year in the NHL. I think we do have WITHIN 4 or 5 years before one of the prospects really pushes. That doesn't mean a prospect can't make the roster in 2-3 or 4 years from now. 

 

I think we have a really good 1B or backup in Rittich. 

[robrob74]

20 hours ago, cross16 said:

i just don't think there are that many very good or great goalies in the league so spending time, assets or cap space for a marginal upgrade doesn't really interest me. I see the Flames going with Rittich and another 1B next year and there are a few options there I don't mind. 

 

And we already spent far too many assets on a couple of goalies over the last 4 or 5 years... Elliott and Smith. I can't remember if there were anymore goalies in there. Even though they were not 1st rounders, I feel like the way the team has been drafting post 1st round, giving up picks is shooting blanks. I think our picks in the later rounds are worth more than they seem with how they've been able to draft. Keep picking!

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think the Talbot situation was a result of going with the player you know vs the player you don't. That stunted his ability to get back on track sooner. Now, he didn't play all that great at first, but it's a question of, do you put someone in so they can get a feel for the puck and the game, or if he's not doing well, do you not play him? Right or wrong (I think wrong), Rittich was playing so well they ran with him... I think Talbot would have improved faster by getting more feels for the puck. I'd like to try Talbot again as well. If he would sign a similar contract, I am ok with that. The cost of two goalies is equivalent to one starter... Not bad. 

 

I am with @cross16, I wouldn't mind a Markstrom. 

 

I think we need to solidify the goaltending for 3-4 years in hopes that Wolf, Parsons or Zagidulin can make a push. I get what JJ is getting at, and the anger that the team hasn't been able to develop a goalie and the need for a long term solution NOW, but you can't push a goalie that's not ready. Philly wasn't going to push Hart, but ended up letting him make that decision. Best route is to develop until they make that decision for you. Even Binnington on St Louis nearly didn't play last year in the NHL. I think we do have WITHIN 4 or 5 years before one of the prospects really pushes. That doesn't mean a prospect can't make the roster in 2-3 or 4 years from now. 

 

I think we have a really good 1B or backup in Rittich. 

 

All this talk about Markstrom.

Is he even going to be available?

I don't see why he would, he finally emerged as a strong goalie for the Nuckers.

 

As for Rittich, he's shown that he can be a 1a.

I don't think there is much more that you should expect from a goalie.

Did he have a few games where he let in some stinkers?

Sure, but how many of those games were the D causing them.

I think I can count about 1 or 2 that were his losing the net.

A 1a is only going to play 40 something games in a season, not clumped together like we ran him.

That is true of the majority of good teams.

 

As for the backup, I think that there will be some available options as good as Talbot.

The money may not work, so I would keep Talbot as an option.

As you say, $2.5 isn't that bad.

It won't get you some of the really good backups out there.

The Flames could decide (not sure I agree) to re-sign and use Gillies.

He needs work, or at least did at the NHL level.

He's exactly what a lot of the good goalies look like.

His problems are in mechanics or game readiness.

[robrob74]

29 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

He's exactly what a lot of the good goalies look like.

His problems are in mechanics or game readiness.

 

I feel like Gillies' mechanics are ok, to me it's more in his game readiness. It takes him too long to get a feel for the game that is being played. He looks terrible at times in the first period and then he starts to focus and looks like a goalie in the 2nd and 3rd. By then he's already playing from behind after a few stinkers. Then if teams get legit goals then the Flames are down more. At first he doesn't look comfortable, shaky. Then he slowly looks more and more like a goalie. 

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

I feel like Gillies' mechanics are ok, to me it's more in his game readiness. It takes him too long to get a feel for the game that is being played. He looks terrible at times in the first period and then he starts to focus and looks like a goalie in the 2nd and 3rd. By then he's already playing from behind after a few stinkers. Then if teams get legit goals then the Flames are down more. At first he doesn't look comfortable, shaky. Then he slowly looks more and more like a goalie. 

 

 

I don't really like the way he plays for a big goalie.

His mechanics that I am talking about it how he plays to cover the lower half of the net.

Most bigger goalies use their size to take out the lower half.

Gillies looks small, but tall.

He does not use size to his advantage and relies on reaction time.

I agree that it takes him some touches to get a feel for the puck, but his body is not doing anything useful.

 

For a goalie to be successful, they have to either be lightening quick in reflexes or be able to cover the net without much movement.

Having both is a recipe for real success.

MAF is quick.  Bishop is big.  Koskinen is big with a decent glove.

Rittich is quick, but his overreaction gets him in trouble.

Smith was big and overreaction was his folly.

He's been luck this year to seldom have to make a 2nd save.

[LouCifer]

Personally I think if we address the D situation properly, we only need to figure out who the backup is going to be. 

[Thebrewcrew]

20 hours ago, lou44291 said:

Personally I think if we address the D situation properly, we only need to figure out who the backup is going to be. 

I think Rittich can start 55 games for the Flames, they just need to manage him properly. They didn't need to play the wheels off him in Oct and Nov like they did.

 

55 starts equates to playing 2 of every 3. But that doesn't mean you have to stick to that. Don't be afraid to give the backup 2 or 3 consecutive starts in November if the play warrants it. That lessens the likelihood of Rittich getting hurt and he will be more fresh for the stretch drive, then if you need to start BSD 6 in a row you can do that. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think Rittich can start 55 games for the Flames, they just need to manage him properly. They didn't need to play the wheels off him in Oct and Nov like they did.

 

55 starts equates to playing 2 of every 3. But that doesn't mean you have to stick to that. Don't be afraid to give the backup 2 or 3 consecutive starts in November if the play warrants it. That lessens the likelihood of Rittich getting hurt and he will be more fresh for the stretch drive, then if you need to start BSD 6 in a row you can do that. 

 

I find he gets tired after two games in a row. If it isn’t fatigue, it could be more just mental awareness. His tracking starts to drop in a third start and he’s horrible after that. For me, I wouldn’t start him in more than 3 in a row. It isn’t even just him. I just notice that’s what it has been like for most of our goalies. 

[Thebrewcrew]

11 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I find he gets tired after two games in a row. If it isn’t fatigue, it could be more just mental awareness. His tracking starts to drop in a third start and he’s horrible after that. For me, I wouldn’t start him in more than 3 in a row. It isn’t even just him. I just notice that’s what it has been like for most of our goalies. 

He's still learning, he never played this often in the Czech league. One thing he needs to continue to work on is, leaving a game behind him the second he leaves the arena. The stick-flip game sticks out, it was awesome and he played a phenomenal game, but he didn't back it up and looked foolish as a result. Flames could have protected him by starting Talbot though, which was the obvious choice at the time.

[jjgallow]

I've come to the opinion that the Flames are entering their next rebuilding phase and don't know it or haven't accepted it yet.   It's becoming less of a decision and more of a reallity.

They could be in denial for an entire year, worst case even 2.   But I think they'll come to accept it sometime in the next year.     

 

No goalie whom all fans recognize is going to give us what we need, which is 8-10 years of top notch netminding.   Wolf has an outside chance of that but nothing the Flames should be relying on as a ringer.    

 

Currently strategies are either loading up on 3-4 Dustin Wolfs, or going for a big name prospect.    Some of you may say 3-4 Dustin wolfs is too much.   Well it's not.    They're not all going to come through the same development system and many of them will dissapoint.   In the very fortunate event that all are successful, you have trading assets.  There simply is no downside to taking netminding seriously.

 

The other consideration is that we are very poor with developing goalies.  Or at least our history has failed to produce results.   This lends itself to getting big name prospects.

There is really just the one that stands out:
Yaroslav Askarov  in the 2020 draft.  He may fall to the Flames.  If the Flames got an opportunity to upgrade their picks it would be better.

 

Then you'e got:

Cayden Primeau

Jake Oettinger

 

Not sure who else.   Obviously a short list.

[Sarasti]

23 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

I've come to the opinion that the Flames are entering their next rebuilding phase and don't know it or haven't accepted it yet.   It's becoming less of a decision and more of a reallity.

They could be in denial for an entire year, worst case even 2.   But I think they'll come to accept it sometime in the next year.     

 

No goalie whom all fans recognize is going to give us what we need, which is 8-10 years of top notch netminding.   Wolf has an outside chance of that but nothing the Flames should be relying on as a ringer.    

 

Currently strategies are either loading up on 3-4 Dustin Wolfs, or going for a big name prospect.    Some of you may say 3-4 Dustin wolfs is too much.   Well it's not.    They're not all going to come through the same development system and many of them will dissapoint.   In the very fortunate event that all are successful, you have trading assets.  There simply is no downside to taking netminding seriously.

 

The other consideration is that we are very poor with developing goalies.  Or at least our history has failed to produce results.   This lends itself to getting big name prospects.

There is really just the one that stands out:
Yaroslav Askarov  in the 2020 draft.  He may fall to the Flames.  If the Flames got an opportunity to upgrade their picks it would be better.

 

Then you'e got:

Cayden Primeau

Jake Oettinger

 

Not sure who else.   Obviously a short list.

 

From all the posts I've read on here it seems like you always believe the Flames are/should be rebuilding.

I fully disagree with this train of thought.

 

I do, however,  agree with what you said about the organization's inability to develop quality netminders in recent years though.

 

Hopefully Wolf pans out.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Sarasti said:

 

From all the posts I've read on here it seems like you always believe the Flames are/should be rebuilding.

I fully disagree with this train of thought.

 

I do, however,  agree with what you said about the organization's inability to develop quality netminders in recent years though.

 

Hopefully Wolf pans out.

 

To add to that, we are not 10 pieces away from being a contender.

We are 3 or 4 Flames that need to be traded from being a contender.

Goalie is only a small piece of that.

Whether Rittich is a MAF or a Vasilevskiy is unknown because we have holes.

 

We have Gio, which would be fine if his partner was able to do things Gio can't.

I love Brodie, but recognize his weakness is not offset by Gio.

Lucic is a player we need for one or two aspects of his game, but not for 15 minutes in his present output.

Bennett, Janko, Dube, Ryan are fine, but do not take you over the edge.

Hanifin and Gustafsson do not offer you a mix of offense and defense.

None of the 3rd or 4th lines really click.

Mostly because they are collections of pieces.

 

We have talented players in the A because we have healthy scrubs.

And we are not making deals because the feel is someday these players might mean a cup.

 

We need a coach with the stones to put together skilled lines based on fit, not salary.

Everyone else is dealt.

It wasn;t an accident that we were 2nd in goals the previous season.

 

There is no team that can attain contender status for 10 years.

6 is about max, and that's assuming you have 2 top F and a very good goalie.

So you have to look at the age of your top players and add a defense that will last that long.

And a goalie tandem that will span that time; one or both.

Vegas' time in the spotlight will only last until MAF fizzles out.

EDM will only fit there if they get a solid goalie.

Tampa will as long as Stamkos is relevent.

TO will become one if they get a d-core and a goalie. 

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Lucic is a player we need for one or two aspects of his game, but not for 15 minutes in his present output.

Bennett, Janko, Dube, Ryan are fine, but do not take you over the edge.

Hanifin and Gustafsson do not offer you a mix of offense and defense.

None of the 3rd or 4th lines really click.

Mostly because they are collections of pieces.

 

We have talented players in the A because we have healthy scrubs.

And we are not making deals because the feel is someday these players might mean a cup.

 

We need a coach with the stones to put together skilled lines based on fit, not salary.

Everyone else is dealt.

It wasn;t an accident that we were 2nd in goals the previous season.

 

 

 

 

Ya, I feel like the last four coaches really played into their biases to their own detriment. Hartley coached his lights out one year, and then played bias and went away from what worked the next year. Then the same thing happened with GG and not playing some players where they should and then not playing them in the right situations. Peters did the same and it failed by over-playing Ryan early, but the lucky thing was they were winning, but continued his bias and line setups all wrong the following year. Then Ward takes over and loves Lucic so much that he sticks with him no matter what. Heart, sure, but he was basically doing what Bennett does but without penalties most of the time. Albeit, Lucic does at a bit more fear factor and a voice. But these management choices are playing into the fit within the depth of the lines. Coaches and management are failing to assemble the bottom6 correctly.

 

I think you're right about that.

 

I mean, you have the first line that provides most of the offence which is what it's supposed to do. You have the 2nd line that is providing tertiary offence that ends up getting labelled as unsuccessful because they're pretty much being depended on to provide all of the offence that the first line isn't providing. If the 3rd and 4th lines did better jobs of providing more scoring, the 2nd line might not be looked at as such a failure that it did for most of the year. 

 

I don't expect a lot from a 4th line, so really it's the 3rd line that I have just a few more expectations from, but that's not even that high either, just that they get a goal here and there every once in awhile, with more consistency than they've provided. You want a hard worker goal sometimes to spark the boys. 

[travel_dude]

44 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

Ya, I feel like the last four coaches really played into their biases to their own detriment. Hartley coached his lights out one year, and then played bias and went away from what worked the next year. Then the same thing happened with GG and not playing some players where they should and then not playing them in the right situations. Peters did the same and it failed by over-playing Ryan early, but the lucky thing was they were winning, but continued his bias and line setups all wrong the following year. Then Ward takes over and loves Lucic so much that he sticks with him no matter what. Heart, sure, but he was basically doing what Bennett does but without penalties most of the time. Albeit, Lucic does at a bit more fear factor and a voice. But these management choices are playing into the fit within the depth of the lines. Coaches and management are failing to assemble the bottom6 correctly.

 

I think you're right about that.

 

I mean, you have the first line that provides most of the offence which is what it's supposed to do. You have the 2nd line that is providing tertiary offence that ends up getting labelled as unsuccessful because they're pretty much being depended on to provide all of the offence that the first line isn't providing. If the 3rd and 4th lines did better jobs of providing more scoring, the 2nd line might not be looked at as such a failure that it did for most of the year. 

 

I don't expect a lot from a 4th line, so really it's the 3rd line that I have just a few more expectations from, but that's not even that high either, just that they get a goal here and there every once in awhile, with more consistency than they've provided. You want a hard worker goal sometimes to spark the boys. 

 

I'm not really concerned about Lucic's love affair with Ward.

He's actually been playing well, but I don't think his usage on the PP makes sense.

His forte is standing in front of the net and distracting/poking at loose puckc.

It may sound wierd but I would play Lucic on the top unit.

Have Tkachuk or Monahan move to 2nd unit.

 

The production of the bottom 6 was not my biggest concern.

It was keeping the puck out of the zone and the net.

Part of that is possession, but a lot has to do with stopping entry.

 

 

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

To add to that, we are not 10 pieces away from being a contender.

We are 3 or 4 Flames that need to be traded from being a contender.

Goalie is only a small piece of that.

 

 

I agree with this.

 

The problem is that they are the 3 or 4 hardest positions to fill in the game.   Completely unattainable without giving up our future entirety or losing many key players whib would leave is being 4-5 players short.

 

By next year we'll be 4-5 players short.  Then 5-6.   That's an entire lineup on the ice.

 

With the amount of parity in the NHL, being 3-4 guys short is not recoverable imho.    

 

I'm  not trying to be doom and gloom, I'm excited for it.    But I do think that to do it properly the goalie situation needs to be addressed first. 

[travel_dude]

53 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree with this.

 

The problem is that they are the 3 or 4 hardest positions to fill in the game.   Completely unattainable without giving up our future entirety or losing many key players whib would leave is being 4-5 players short.

 

By next year we'll be 4-5 players short.  Then 5-6.   That's an entire lineup on the ice.

 

With the amount of parity in the NHL, being 3-4 guys short is not recoverable imho.    

 

I'm  not trying to be doom and gloom, I'm excited for it.    But I do think that to do it properly the goalie situation needs to be addressed first. 

 

The bottom 6 isn't hard to fill in.

You just have to realize that preventing goals is as important than scoring.

To use last year as an example, only Ryan and Hathaway were effective at cancelling out goals scored when on the ice.

Mangiapane was too, but only played part of the year

That means you don't have scrubs like Neal, bruisers like Bennett and marginal C's like Janko.

So, I would say we have guys in the system that can do that.

 

The defense was structured poorly this past season.

Nobody taking the guy in front of the net effectively.

Even with Gio or Ras on the ice, the struggle was there.

It starts with communication, but I wonder if Gio even realizes it.

There were so many times that the defense was in too deep on a borderline offfensive chance.

I get frustrated with Brodie, but he never over-committed.

Unlike Gio or Hanifin.

Hamonic was never able to get back even if he was on the center line.

 

I will be honest, but I'm not really sure what they have in Rittich.

On a defensive team he would have shutouts.  I think.

So, I'm going to suggest that replacing him in a rebuild scenario is not necessary.

Vasilefskiy looked unbeatable, except when he wasn't.

TBL plays a good game in front of him and he stunk when they didn't.

Taking away the 2nd chances is what separates the good teams.

 

 

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

The bottom 6 isn't hard to fill in.

You just have to realize that preventing goals is as important than scoring.

To use last year as an example, only Ryan and Hathaway were effective at cancelling out goals scored when on the ice.

Mangiapane was too, but only played part of the year

That means you don't have scrubs like Neal, bruisers like Bennett and marginal C's like Janko.

So, I would say we have guys in the system that can do that.

 

The defense was structured poorly this past season.

Nobody taking the guy in front of the net effectively.

Even with Gio or Ras on the ice, the struggle was there.

It starts with communication, but I wonder if Gio even realizes it.

There were so many times that the defense was in too deep on a borderline offfensive chance.

I get frustrated with Brodie, but he never over-committed.

Unlike Gio or Hanifin.

Hamonic was never able to get back even if he was on the center line.

 

I will be honest, but I'm not really sure what they have in Rittich.

On a defensive team he would have shutouts.  I think.

So, I'm going to suggest that replacing him in a rebuild scenario is not necessary.

Vasilefskiy looked unbeatable, except when he wasn't.

TBL plays a good game in front of him and he stunk when they didn't.

Taking away the 2nd chances is what separates the good teams.

 

 

 

The fact that we're even talking about Gio at all says where we're at.  Gio is a 36 year old going on 37 who scored 5 goals.    Yes he came off a great odds-defying season when he was 35 years old.   Thinking he will do that at 37 is beyond odds defying.  We should be glad for anything he does at all at the NHL level, and proud of him for it.  I don't think he should be in part of a discussion about cups anymore, and definitely not the start of that conversation.

 

We are, statistically speaking, cooked.  And I gave Ward great credit for the performance that we did show.

 

When I think of those 3-4 players we need to be a contender, one of them is a starting goaltender and the other 3 are all on the first line, quite frankly.

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

The fact that we're even talking about Gio at all says where we're at.  Gio is a 36 year old going on 37 who scored 5 goals.    Yes he came off a great odds-defying season when he was 35 years old.   Thinking he will do that at 37 is beyond odds defying.  We should be glad for anything he does at all at the NHL level, and proud of him for it.  I don't think he should be in part of a discussion about cups anymore, and definitely not the start of that conversation.

 

We are, statistically speaking, cooked.  And I gave Ward great credit for the performance that we did show.

 

When I think of those 3-4 players we need to be a contender, one of them is a starting goaltender and the other 3 are all on the first line, quite frankly.

 

I do happen to believe that Gio has at most one good season or so left.

Good as in this year's production.

What I am hoping is that we go after Pietrangelo this summer.

He may not want to play for us, which is understood.

BT may not want to pay that high a AAV.

But he is exactly the type of player you build a contender around.

 

I get that you are quick to dismiss the top line.

Last playoff and this year showed how they can lose the chemistry.

They went from leading a team to being shut down in the playoffs.

We don't really know why.

You should, perhaps, wait till the end of the Flames season to truly comment.

 

This was a very different season for the Flames.

Monahan went from a perimeter sniper to being harder on the body.

His defensive play is still shoddy, but nobody took notice of it.

 

If you operate on the premise that this year was a one-off, then you have the makings of a contender.

They did however play against tough teams this year with some good results.

Not from the scoring side, but from the statistical dominance side.

Those are the areas that can make a difference in a playoff game.

I think we can hang with any team and it's a matter of who can prevent goals.

Let's compare notes in August.