Flames & Losing For Higher Draft Order.

[robrob1974]

This thread can die when it's no longer possible to move up the draft order by losing... like forever.

 

Or else we'll just see this thread again next year.

 

It is going to be the same next year. I see this team hovering around this place in the standings for at least one more season, maybe the year after too. 

Glencross Stajan and Hudler is the closest thing we have to a top line right now.

 

 

Yes, and Monahan is still going to be a 3rd line center for another season or two. Cammalleri is the only player we have worthy of playing on a first line.

[The_People1]

People are so salty in here, I'm simply cheering for the islanders to win more than the flames at the current moment. 

 

Its not like the team as a whole is throwing in the towel nor will they be allowed too by Hartley n co. so why debate if they will or not. If people are to blind too realize a higher draft pick is by all means better, that's their own ignorance.

 

Cant teach an old dog a new trick.

 

Totals to the maximus.

 

It's not about whether the Flames will or will not tank on purpose.  It's about the fact that a higher pick is more useful than one more win at this point in a rebuilding season.

[FlamesLogic]

It is going to be the same next year. I see this team hovering around this place in the standings for at least one more season, maybe the year after too. 

 

Yes, and Monahan is still going to be a 3rd line center for another season or two. Cammalleri is the only player we have worthy of playing on a first line.

Agreed, ideally we can bring in stastny so we can put him at 1 backlund at 2 and monahan at 3. Stajan becomes the change up C and takes on a shut down role (which I think he does better at than a scoring role)

[The_People1]

Im not sure what talent Kelly Hrudy is watching.

 

I think Hrudy is referring to top line forward and top pair Dmen talent.

 

The Flames certainly have a boat load of high quality 3rd/4th line character players coming up the system so he can't possibly be referring to them.

[DirtyDeeds]

You are welcome to start that conversation in another thread. The topic here is the Flames tanking for better draft position.

Totals to the maximus.

 

It's not about whether the Flames will or will not tank on purpose.  It's about the fact that a higher pick is more useful than one more win at this point in a rebuilding season.

[robrob1974]

I think Hrudy is referring to top line forward and top pair Dmen talent.

 

The Flames certainly have a boat load of high quality 3rd/4th line character players coming up the system so he can't possibly be referring to them.

He is definitely referring to the whole squad. Hudler and Cammalleri are the ones who have the higher end skill and Hudler is 2nd liner on any team. He is including the total team roster depth. We are below average and nearly overachieving.

[conundrumed]

Totals to the maximus.

 

It's not about whether the Flames will or will not tank on purpose.  It's about the fact that a higher pick is more useful than one more win at this point in a rebuilding season.

Look at past drafts. They are more about who you missed, rather than who you selected.

Higher pick isn't one-stop shop to the top. No pretending a higher pick guarantees success. It doesn't.

Potential for greater success? Maybe. Your scouts have to hit it out of the park is all. And none do that with great regularity.

I know many on here like to sell how awesome scouting is nowadays. Is it better than 20 years ago? Sure. Is it approaching being a successful science? Not by a long shot.

Losing for that end simply isn't a solid means to an end.

As much as you would like to sell us that it is/will be faster/better.

Call me crusty, but I know the game pretty well.

But scouting has a fairly large margin of error. Look at top 10-12 picks, look at the next round and a half from past drafts.

Scouting is far from perfect.

[The_People1]

Higher pick isn't one-stop shop to the top. No pretending a higher pick guarantees success. It doesn't.

 

Agreed but anyone who is still arguing this point has completely missed the debate from the other side.

 

First, the undeniable advantage of drafting earlier: Drafting 1st overall, you get to pick from ALL prospects.  Drafting 8th overall, you get to pick from all prospects minus the previous 7 who have already been selected.  This is validation through mathematics.  This is not a subjective debate of any sort. It is truth, period.

 

Knowing we can still pick the wrong guy drafting #1 overall, is it worth it to lose games to pick as high as possible?  In my opinion, yes absolutely.  Even if we don't make a selection, we can trade down and manage the pick as an asset.

 

Is it morally right to lose games to gain this advantage?  No, totally not and I think the NHL should do more to curb the odds of getting first overall more evenly to all teams who miss the playoffs.

[conundrumed]

Spare me the missed debate diatribe, you've pulled that card enough.

Picking 1 means you've hit rock bottom. We aren't there.

You're cheering for us to be worse than we really are, no matter how you try to spin it.

I don't know about you, but I'm seeing a team game, team element going on.

I want to see that built, brick by brick, not disheveled in misery to get the next superstar as you seem to be asking us to do.

Wanting the roster we have right now to lose to attain a "better" 18yo right now is short-sighted.

There are 23 guys in that locker room, not 1 we may or may not get.

You're cheering the team to go south to get that 1 guy 2 beats up the chart.

That's not right. I'd expect you to know better.

If you're playing the black sheep, that's great, I'm all for it.

 

But don't give me the "missed the debate". No I didn't. You'd soon sell the guys we have down the river for a higher draft pick.

No matter how you've been trying to gussy it up.

And I don't believe your right.

[The_People1]

Spare me the missed debate diatribe, you've pulled that card enough.

Picking 1 means you've hit rock bottom. We aren't there.

You're cheering for us to be worse than we really are, no matter how you try to spin it.

I don't know about you, but I'm seeing a team game, team element going on.

I want to see that built, brick by brick, not disheveled in misery to get the next superstar as you seem to be asking us to do.

Wanting the roster we have right now to lose to attain a "better" 18yo right now is short-sighted.

There are 23 guys in that locker room, not 1 we may or may not get.

You're cheering the team to go south to get that 1 guy 2 beats up the chart.

That's not right. I'd expect you to know better.

If you're playing the black sheep, that's great, I'm all for it.

 

But don't give me the "missed the debate". No I didn't. You'd soon sell the guys we have down the river for a higher draft pick.

No matter how you've been trying to gussy it up.

And I don't believe your right.

 

You point out another reason why I feel it's worth it to lose for a higher pick, "the 23 guys in that locker room".

 

It sounds heartless but in all likelihood, only 10 will remain in 3 years time when the Flames are ready to contend for the playoffs again.  Likely, only 3 from this season's roster will remain in 5 years time when we are ready to contend for the Cup.  We still have Baertschi, Gaudreau, Piorier, Klimchuk, and future UFA signings who will take someone's job on this team.  This group is not going to grow together.  We are 4th/5th last in the league and therefore, there will be massive changes.  This season will be forgotten as soon as it's over and lessons learned from this group will go on to benefit other teams.  Likewise, we will bring in UFAs from winning atmospheres and inject their ways into the new core of this group that's still being re-defined.

 

Sucks but it's business.

[conundrumed]

Oh, you're something.

Perhaps you're right. You still don't treat your players like dog food for a better tomorrow.

Not only do you prove karma can be real,  you risk running an environment in the room that we're trying to snap out of.

Guys have to want to play here, but by your wisdom most guys are throw-aways regardless.

Baertschi, Gaudreau, Poirier, Klimchuk and future UFA's have to take someone's job. So far, they haven't, and there are no guarantees they will, moving forward.

Winning atmosphere is seldom imported, it is established, imho.

[Flyerfan52]

You point out another reason why I feel it's worth it to lose for a higher pick, "the 23 guys in that locker room".

 

 

 

Sucks but it's business.

There are 23 guys in that locker room. All know that hockey is a business & some probably won't be in that room next season.

 

Since you are so gung ho on drafting 1/1 if possible to get the player the talking heads are hyping (they go by stats & really haven't met the player in many cases) I'll pose a question.

If that flashy player with gaudy numbers is a SoB with no concept of team play (but he's great @ cherry picking) do you really want him over a slightly less naturally gifted player that gives his all for the team that would be available @ #5,6 or 7 (where we'd be picking as it stands due to work rather then "possible" top end) ?

 

Good scouts analize character as much as talent. Bad GMs ignore that & draft by the numbers on the stat board.

[zima]

hockey this season is at an all high in gritty exciting play but enough lose  lose lose I want that 2 over all player

[robrob1974]

There are 23 guys in that locker room. All know that hockey is a business & some probably won't be in that room next season.

 

Since you are so gung ho on drafting 1/1 if possible to get the player the talking heads are hyping (they go by stats & really haven't met the player in many cases) I'll pose a question.

If that flashy player with gaudy numbers is a SoB with no concept of team play (but he's great @ cherry picking) do you really want him over a slightly less naturally gifted player that gives his all for the team that would be available @ #5,6 or 7 (where we'd be picking as it stands due to work rather then "possible" top end) ?

 

Good scouts analize character as much as talent. Bad GMs ignore that & draft by the numbers on the stat board.

 

I am sure if we have good scouts our scouts would analyze the games and if we're going to draft in that position, they're watching those players a bit more than we think. 

If they don't know this at 1/1, then the scouts haven't done their job and we're boardinged when it comes to all of the other rounds anyway.

[DirtyDeeds]

I am sure if we have good scouts our scouts would analyze the games and if we're going to draft in that position, they're watching those players a bit more than we think. 

If they don't know this at 1/1, then the scouts haven't done their job and we're boardinged when it comes to all of the other rounds anyway.

Can't blame everything on scouts when you have 1st pick.

When you have the #1 pick it is more the concensus pick. Then add to that just look at the Oilers as they had little choice but to take the one they thought was the BPA for 3 years in a row despite the fact that BPA #1 pick might not be a good fit.

Hindsight they probably would have done better to take the 1C in Tyler. They could certainly use him now.

Which was FF's point to a degree. Thus his comments on the character of the players.

The exception is generational players but they come around what 1 every 20+ years?

[MAC331]

Do you think our depth is weak or improving ? you say our guys are overachieving, I say they are progress in experience and this should bode well heading into next season.

The Flames IMO are taking the right approach to rebuilding from the net out. Ramos is going to be a very good goalie for us.

Defensively I think we have a very solid 6 and some depth to call upon. Brodie's play improving and the resigning of Russell speaks for itself. I believe they have resign Smid and I hope they do, along with Wotherspoon it gives us two solid stay at home types. I would pair them up with others.

With respect to our forward lines I think we could fill the bottom two lines inhouse and with the addition of 3 maybe 4 FA forwards the team will make a serious leap in ability to excel next season.

He is definitely referring to the whole squad. Hudler and Cammalleri are the ones who have the higher end skill and Hudler is 2nd liner on any team. He is including the total team roster depth. We are below average and nearly overachieving.

[MAC331]

I would like to see us get Sam Reinhart, watching this guy play reminds of another Monahan. Fundamentally sound and has smart hockey sense. He would be my choice.

There are 23 guys in that locker room. All know that hockey is a business & some probably won't be in that room next season.

 

Since you are so gung ho on drafting 1/1 if possible to get the player the talking heads are hyping (they go by stats & really haven't met the player in many cases) I'll pose a question.

If that flashy player with gaudy numbers is a SoB with no concept of team play (but he's great @ cherry picking) do you really want him over a slightly less naturally gifted player that gives his all for the team that would be available @ #5,6 or 7 (where we'd be picking as it stands due to work rather then "possible" top end) ?

 

Good scouts analize character as much as talent. Bad GMs ignore that & draft by the numbers on the stat board.

[kehatch]

I would like to see us get Sam Reinhart, watching this guy play reminds of another Monahan. Fundamentally sound and has smart hockey sense. He would be my choice.

 

Reinhart is an amazing player.  But he reminds me too much of Monahan.  Not necessarily his play style, but his temperament.  If we go with Reinhart, Monahan, and Backlund up the middle I think we will be guilty of being a little too 'nice'.  

[robrob1974]

Do you think our depth is weak or improving ? you say our guys are overachieving, I say they are progress in experience and this should bode well heading into next season.

The Flames IMO are taking the right approach to rebuilding from the net out. Ramos is going to be a very good goalie for us.

Defensively I think we have a very solid 6 and some depth to call upon. Brodie's play improving and the resigning of Russell speaks for itself. I believe they have resign Smid and I hope they do, along with Wotherspoon it gives us two solid stay at home types. I would pair them up with others.

With respect to our forward lines I think we could fill the bottom two lines inhouse and with the addition of 3 maybe 4 FA forwards the team will make a serious leap in ability to excel next season.

 

I dunno what the future holds. We're all speculating here. It's quite possible that we regress next year. We don't know who will be up or signed next year. As is, we're pretty much the same team. Can Giordano play at this pace again next season? I dunno. He had a down year last season, which is apparently what motivated him this year. 

 

I am hoping that we do progress, that we can pick up some good draft choices and everything will be better. The play is better. I was really frustrated with the Flames play over the past 5-7 years prior to this year. It is refreshing to see a team who wants to play and with a purpose.

Reinhart is an amazing player.  But he reminds me too much of Monahan.  Not necessarily his play style, but his temperament.  If we go with Reinhart, Monahan, and Backlund up the middle I think we will be guilty of being a little too 'nice'.  

 

But do we have to have a mean center? Can't we find mean wingers that can do that? I guess Crosby has a bit of attitude. How about Malkin or Sutter/Staal? 

 

I think, as long as they can move the puck and can play the game, maybe you get the gritty/checking from behind-hole players like the Marchand's of the world to play on the wings?

[MAC331]

Are you kidding me, let the wingers be the big mean guys. LOL

I'm not so sure I wouldn't mind sliding Backlund out to a wing position to accomodate a bigger, better C.

Reinhart is an amazing player.  But he reminds me too much of Monahan.  Not necessarily his play style, but his temperament.  If we go with Reinhart, Monahan, and Backlund up the middle I think we will be guilty of being a little too 'nice'.  

[kehatch]

But do we have to have a mean center? Can't we find mean wingers that can do that? I guess Crosby has a bit of attitude. How about Malkin or Sutter/Staal? 

 

I think, as long as they can move the puck and can play the game, maybe you get the gritty/checking from behind-hole players like the Marchand's of the world to play on the wings?

 

Maybe not mean.  But I think being physical up the middle is important.  Monahan has had 4 minor penalties all season.  Reinhart has a similar passive style.  It would be like having a top 4D full of Bouwmeester clones. Guys like Draisaitl, Dal Colle, and (of course) Bennett  might fit better.    

 

That said, if Reinhart is on the board when we pick at 4 or 5 than you have to take him.  He is one of the top 2 players in the draft.  But I doubt it will be a problem.  If we win the lottery I see us picking Ekblad, and if we don't I doubt Reinhart falls to us.  

[MAC331]

I think another year of experience from this year makes this team better for next year. Look at how many 1 goal games we have lost.

I'm not worried about Giordano at all but we definitely would need all the other D to be better including Wideman. I think with 3 to 4 key additions our team could be a lot better next season. Wouldn't it something to have depth like Baertschi and S Reinhart developing in the farm ?

I dunno what the future holds. We're all speculating here. It's quite possible that we regress next year. We don't know who will be up or signed next year. As is, we're pretty much the same team. Can Giordano play at this pace again next season? I dunno. He had a down year last season, which is apparently what motivated him this year. 

 

I am hoping that we do progress, that we can pick up some good draft choices and everything will be better. The play is better. I was really frustrated with the Flames play over the past 5-7 years prior to this year. It is refreshing to see a team who wants to play and with a purpose.

 

But do we have to have a mean center? Can't we find mean wingers that can do that? I guess Crosby has a bit of attitude. How about Malkin or Sutter/Staal? 

 

I think, as long as they can move the puck and can play the game, maybe you get the gritty/checking from behind-hole players like the Marchand's of the world to play on the wings?

[Flyerfan52]

 

But do we have to have a mean center? Can't we find mean wingers that can do that? I guess Crosby has a bit of attitude. How about Malkin or Sutter/Staal? 

 

I think, as long as they can move the puck and can play the game, maybe you get the gritty/checking from behind-hole players like the Marchand's of the world to play on the wings?

A) Centers @ wing convert better then wings to center when needed.

A center with a 2 way game gives you a forward that doubles as a 3rd defense.

c) Watch Crosby & Malkin a bit more. Crosby only shows "attitude" when the other player is being held back by refs or engaged in a fight & bent over so he can spear him in the yi-yis. Malkin slew-footing is not the same as playing tough.

[kehatch]

Are you kidding me, let the wingers be the big mean guys. LOL

I'm not so sure I wouldn't mind sliding Backlund out to a wing position to accomodate a bigger, better C.

 

Our wingers aren't exactly mean.  If we were to draft Reinhart our top 9 wingers (based on our top prospects) would be:

 

Gaudreau-Reinhart-Poirier

Baertschi-Monahan-Klimchuk

Ferland-Backlund-Reinhart

 

But again, it is a bit of a moot debate.  We can't pass over Reinhart if he fell to us, but he won't fall to us.  

[Lucid_Flame91]

Our wingers aren't exactly mean.  If we were to draft Reinhart our top 9 wingers (based on our top prospects) would be:

 

Gaudreau-Reinhart-Poirier

Baertschi-Monahan-Klimchuk

Ferland-Backlund-Reinhart

 

But again, it is a bit of a moot debate.  We can't pass over Reinhart if he fell to us, but he won't fall to us.  

 

I see Sam bennet as the most likely of the "top 3" to fall to us, and I would be beyond happy about it, if it were to happen.