cross16 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 They played like this for the bulk of the season. The results improved when goaltending improved. With the exception of Ortio or the new call ups I can't think of a single player that just started to play well. Agreed. They had a few game slump when they played poorly once things got bleak but outside of that they've still played solid hockey. I don't agree with this notion that the team has taken off or played that much better since they've been out of it. They've just gotten NHL calibre goaltending and are playing teams that arnt giving them their best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 I am watching different games all year then, because I don't see it the same as you guys do. I saw glimpses of breaking out but that was mixed in with loads of inconsistency all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 I am watching different games all year then, because I don't see it the same as you guys do. I saw glimpses of breaking out but that was mixed in with loads of inconsistency all year. Have they really broken out thought? I would argue their recent record is due more to the competition and less about them, that is my point. Blues, Habs, Sharks, Jets were all games where yes the flames were better but all 4 were pretty terrible. The wins/points they got has more to do with that than how well the flames played IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted March 21, 2016 Report Share Posted March 21, 2016 Have they really broken out thought? I would argue their recent record is due more to the competition and less about them, that is my point. Blues, Habs, Sharks, Jets were all games where yes the flames were better but all 4 were pretty terrible. The wins/points they got has more to do with that than how well the flames played IMO. Ohhh ok, I get you now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 No I am not suggesting that. But your stuck on the notion we need to tank to get a number one pick and it's the ONLY way we are going to be successful. It has been an ongoing topic for years. How come winning last season did not breed more winning this season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 How come winning last season did not breed more winning this season? A rather obvious lack of competent goaltending... Inexplicable player usage (including goalie choice), questionable strategy (including, but not limited to special teams) and injuries... etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 1) Goaltending. Goaltending. Goaltending. 2) Poor player usage on special teams and on line combinations. 3) Injuries to major players (Brodie, Bennett, Hudler) and to depth scoring (Bouma) 4) We're paying 18 million for 6 players with 12 goals. You can figure out who. Put that money in other positions and we have a much different team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 A rather obvious lack of competent goaltending... Inexplicable player usage (including goalie choice), questionable strategy (including, but not limited to special teams) and injuries... etc... 1) Goaltending. Goaltending. Goaltending. 2) Poor player usage on special teams and on line combinations. 3) Injuries to major players (Brodie, Bennett, Hudler) and to depth scoring (Bouma) 4) We're paying 18 million for 6 players with 12 goals. You can figure out who. Put that money in other positions and we have a much different team. Great answer guys. Personnel. Why did losing last season not breed more losing for the Florida Panthers this season? Again, personnel. We know that drafting #1 overall alone does not mean automatic winning. Winning is created by drafting #1 overall combined with drafting well in all rounds, developing/graduating prospects, getting the right UFAs, etc, etc. In other words, losing does not breed more losing. Otherwise, the Florida Panthers would not be winning this season. And thus, the Oilers are losing not because losing breeds losing but rather, they are trying to win by drafting #1 overall alone. Since losing does not breed more losing, then it is a logical fallacy to say winning breeds more winning. Or more precisely, in the Florida Panthers example, winning does not breed personnel. Personnel breeds winning. Thus, my conclusion, winning culture is great but in comparison to getting personnel, it's more important to get personnel. Don't fear temporary losing. It doesn't last if you draft high and draft well in all rounds, etc. It will only last if we draft high and ignore drafting well in all other rounds. All this losing creates more losing is a complete myth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 How come winning last season did not breed more winning this season? Three easy things as part of the answer: 1. Other teams also improved/focused on the Flames versus last year. 2. Immaturity and not able to handle the pressure, especially early on. 3. Key injuries, whether it was Brodie, Ramo or etc.... and the lack of depth to fill in and replace the guys gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Great answer guys. Personnel. Why did losing last season not breed more losing for the Florida Panthers this season? Again, personnel. We know that drafting #1 overall alone does not mean automatic winning. Winning is created by drafting #1 overall combined with drafting well in all rounds, developing/graduating prospects, getting the right UFAs, etc, etc. In other words, losing does not breed more losing. Otherwise, the Florida Panthers would not be winning this season. And thus, the Oilers are losing not because losing breeds losing but rather, they are trying to win by drafting #1 overall alone. Since losing does not breed more losing, then it is a logical fallacy to say winning breeds more winning. Or more precisely, in the Florida Panthers example, winning does not breed personnel. Personnel breeds winning. Thus, my conclusion, winning culture is great but in comparison to getting personnel, it's more important to get personnel. Don't fear temporary losing. It doesn't last if you draft high and draft well in all rounds, etc. It will only last if we draft high and ignore drafting well in all other rounds. All this losing creates more losing is a complete myth. I still argue that drafting #1 overall is not REQUIRED to win (see Los Angeles) nor is it a GUARANTEE of winning (See Washington). Monahan is already the best player of his draft class (only one player has more points in significantly more games, and has not played in the same role). Gaudreau is far and away the best player of his draft class and its not even close. We have our #1 pick equivalents. We shouldn't be chasing that. If we get Matthews? Fantastic. If we draft a Finn? Great. If we don't get a good pick? Well we're short one top 6 that we'd otherwise have, but we can still improve. ------------------------------- Losing can breed losing IF that losing is deliberate. The Flames have bene losing, but they haven't been TRYING to lose. Winning by luck does not breed more winning, but TRYING to win does. Its intent not results that is the determiner. Look at Buffalo. They spent two seasons deliberately losing in order to draft well. Two great players later and no progress. Look at Edmonton. Once they're out, they tank for another #1 pick, and they don't know how to improve. Compare to Arizona. They've not been good for a while, but they've always tried. They've never gotten a 1 OA pick, but they're continuing to improve. See also Florida. They've traditionally sucked, but it hasn't been a deliberate attempt to do so and when they finally had the pieces they improved. So yes, culture can play a factor because of WHY you're losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Great answer guys. Personnel. Why did losing last season not breed more losing for the Florida Panthers this season? Again, personnel. We know that drafting #1 overall alone does not mean automatic winning. Winning is created by drafting #1 overall combined with drafting well in all rounds, developing/graduating prospects, getting the right UFAs, etc, etc. In other words, losing does not breed more losing. Otherwise, the Florida Panthers would not be winning this season. And thus, the Oilers are losing not because losing breeds losing but rather, they are trying to win by drafting #1 overall alone. Since losing does not breed more losing, then it is a logical fallacy to say winning breeds more winning. Or more precisely, in the Florida Panthers example, winning does not breed personnel. Personnel breeds winning. Thus, my conclusion, winning culture is great but in comparison to getting personnel, it's more important to get personnel. Don't fear temporary losing. It doesn't last if you draft high and draft well in all rounds, etc. It will only last if we draft high and ignore drafting well in all other rounds. All this losing creates more losing is a complete myth. Acceptance of losing creates more losing. That is a key part of the Oilers problems. Florida does not accept losing, is willing to make drastic moves when they are necessary, and does not fall in love with certain players, just because. Ultimately it does come down to personnel, but not in the way you envisage. It is not #1 picks that are key, it is players unwilling to lose and who will do whatever it takes to win that are the key to winning. Those guys MAY be #1 picks, but they are just as likely, no, probably MORE likely to not be #1 picks as #1s get way too hyped/pampered/too much leeway. Sure they have tremendous skill, but that can only carry you so far and a focus on skill alone, as if that is all that it takes is foolish and misguided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I still argue that drafting #1 overall is not REQUIRED to win (see Los Angeles) nor is it a GUARANTEE of winning (See Washington). Monahan is already the best player of his draft class (only one player has more points in significantly more games, and has not played in the same role). Gaudreau is far and away the best player of his draft class and its not even close. We have our #1 pick equivalents. We shouldn't be chasing that. If we get Matthews? Fantastic. If we draft a Finn? Great. If we don't get a good pick? Well we're short one top 6 that we'd otherwise have, but we can still improve. ------------------------------- Losing can breed losing IF that losing is deliberate. The Flames have bene losing, but they haven't been TRYING to lose. Winning by luck does not breed more winning, but TRYING to win does. Its intent not results that is the determiner. Look at Buffalo. They spent two seasons deliberately losing in order to draft well. Two great players later and no progress. Look at Edmonton. Once they're out, they tank for another #1 pick, and they don't know how to improve. Compare to Arizona. They've not been good for a while, but they've always tried. They've never gotten a 1 OA pick, but they're continuing to improve. See also Florida. They've traditionally sucked, but it hasn't been a deliberate attempt to do so and when they finally had the pieces they improved. So yes, culture can play a factor because of WHY you're losing. Agree with this almost 100% except about Phoenix..maloney Did flat out admit he tanked his team last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 was not aware of that. Somewhat surprised. General point stands though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Great answer guys. Personnel. If you agree and say that it was a good answer, then why did you ignore all of the key points like poor goaltending, questionable coaching decisions, injuries, etc, and instead attempt to twist it to suit your agenda of trying to justify tanking for a top pick?... Nice try, but no cigar Peeps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 was not aware of that. Somewhat surprised. General point stands though. I agree with everything else and take it one step further and call it culture. Edmonton fostered an "It's OK to lose" culture.and once it's there it's a cancer. Calgary had it to some degree,but it was more of a country club culture.iggy was the face of it.not his fault,but he was allowed autonomy..he could practice when he wanted,could play his way,and that festered down to the kids..no lead by example..again not his fault..I have nothing but praise for the player and afford him every kudo he deserves.. But he had to go for the culture to change. In Edmonton, same thing, Hall is the face of that culture and I don't believe it will fully change unless they move him. If I was Pc I would move him asap. Again no knock on the player, his attitude, or anything like that..just the face of the culture..it will never be mcdavids team as long as he is there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I still argue that drafting #1 overall is not REQUIRED to win (see Los Angeles) nor is it a GUARANTEE of winning (See Washington). Monahan is already the best player of his draft class (only one player has more points in significantly more games, and has not played in the same role). Gaudreau is far and away the best player of his draft class and its not even close. We have our #1 pick equivalents. We shouldn't be chasing that. If we get Matthews? Fantastic. If we draft a Finn? Great. If we don't get a good pick? Well we're short one top 6 that we'd otherwise have, but we can still improve. ------------------------------- Losing can breed losing IF that losing is deliberate. The Flames have bene losing, but they haven't been TRYING to lose. Winning by luck does not breed more winning, but TRYING to win does. Its intent not results that is the determiner. Look at Buffalo. They spent two seasons deliberately losing in order to draft well. Two great players later and no progress. Look at Edmonton. Once they're out, they tank for another #1 pick, and they don't know how to improve. Compare to Arizona. They've not been good for a while, but they've always tried. They've never gotten a 1 OA pick, but they're continuing to improve. See also Florida. They've traditionally sucked, but it hasn't been a deliberate attempt to do so and when they finally had the pieces they improved. So yes, culture can play a factor because of WHY you're losing. It doesn't need to be the #1 pick but drafting top 2 has become one of many key ingredients to winning a Cup. Kane was #1. Doughty was #2. Stamkos #1 almost won it last season. E.Staal #1, Seguin #2, Crosby #1, Malkin #2, etc. If you don't want to concede we need a high pick, then you must at the very least concede it is not a hindrance to winning a Cup. Can you at least do that? Edmonton, again, drafting #1 overall alone. No other players developed beyond the first round. Again, I think Jeff Petry is the only NHL they have produced beyond the first round in 8 years. The Flames have done well to produce NHLers beyond the first round so I don't see a reason to be alarmed or worried we would become the Oilers. Buffalo, yes they have improved. Last season they had 56-points total. They are already at 68-points this season and there's still time for them to hit 80-points before the season is done. You are totally wrong about Buffalo who have some very good young pieces on the verge of breaking into the NHL. Arizona, admitted to tanking. You are totally wrong about Arizona. At the end of the day, culture can play a factor but it can be overcome by personnel. Acceptance of losing creates more losing. That is a key part of the Oilers problems. Florida does not accept losing, is willing to make drastic moves when they are necessary, and does not fall in love with certain players, just because. Ultimately it does come down to personnel, but not in the way you envisage. It is not #1 picks that are key, it is players unwilling to lose and who will do whatever it takes to win that are the key to winning. Those guys MAY be #1 picks, but they are just as likely, no, probably MORE likely to not be #1 picks as #1s get way too hyped/pampered/too much leeway. Sure they have tremendous skill, but that can only carry you so far and a focus on skill alone, as if that is all that it takes is foolish and misguided. The key part of the Oilers problem is their abysmal draft record. Agree with this almost 100% except about Phoenix..maloney Did flat out admit he tanked his team last year. was not aware of that. Somewhat surprised. General point stands though. All tanks are managerial. If you agree and say that it was a good answer, then why did you ignore all of the key points like poor goaltending, questionable coaching decisions, injuries, etc, and instead attempt to twist it to suit your agenda of trying to justify tanking for a top pick?... Nice try, but no cigar Peeps... Carty, this is what you are basically saying, If you agree and say that it was a good answer, then why did you ignore all of the key points like poor goaltending personnel, questionable coaching personnel, injuries to personnel, etc, and instead attempt to twist it to suit your agenda of trying to justify tanking for a top pick?... Nice try, but no cigar Peeps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 So Peeps in your mind what should the Flames be doing? Are you advocating they play HIller every single game? Are you advocating they bench Johnny/Mony? Are you adovoating they tell their players we would rather lose then win? The Flames have played backups, amended ice time, and dealt away two of their better players at the deadline so I'm not sure how you expect them to ensure a top 3 pick unless you do that above I just mentioned. If you want me to admit that at this point losses are better than yes I would agree with that BUT with a certain caveat. I don't believe losing at all costs, ie play your backup, don't play certain players etc, is better than continuing to try to play hard every night. If the Flames play hard every night and lost every single game the rest of the year I would not complain but if they fail to show up for the rest of the season in order to get a higher draft picks, that is silly IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I still argue that drafting #1 overall is not REQUIRED to win (see Los Angeles) nor is it a GUARANTEE of winning (See Washington). Monahan is already the best player of his draft class (only one player has more points in significantly more games, and has not played in the same role). Gaudreau is far and away the best player of his draft class and its not even close. We have our #1 pick equivalents. We shouldn't be chasing that. If we get Matthews? Fantastic. If we draft a Finn? Great. If we don't get a good pick? Well we're short one top 6 that we'd otherwise have, but we can still improve. ------------------------------- Losing can breed losing IF that losing is deliberate. The Flames have bene losing, but they haven't been TRYING to lose. Winning by luck does not breed more winning, but TRYING to win does. Its intent not results that is the determiner. Look at Buffalo. They spent two seasons deliberately losing in order to draft well. Two great players later and no progress. Look at Edmonton. Once they're out, they tank for another #1 pick, and they don't know how to improve. Compare to Arizona. They've not been good for a while, but they've always tried. They've never gotten a 1 OA pick, but they're continuing to improve. See also Florida. They've traditionally sucked, but it hasn't been a deliberate attempt to do so and when they finally had the pieces they improved. So yes, culture can play a factor because of WHY you're losing. Drew Doughty was drafted 2nd Overall. How does that help your argument? They lost out to get him. LA was horrible for years much like Chicago was, and long before, the RedWings too. Peeps is just saying that losing out the year is more beneficial. We are always arguing about who we draft and how important it is to draft well in all rounds. He isn't saying get the highest draft pick and ignore the other rounds. He wants an elite player to compliment our top like or perhaps Bennett too. As a fan I am angry too. They showed so much inconsistency, even with Brodie in the lineup, that I don't think it mattered, they were still destined to miss. Sure, they went on a good run in December, but what did they do after that? After December they still did elbowing, so I don't care what you say, they weren't making the playoffs. The team played so poor in the first few months it wasn't just the goalies. With Brodie, sure, we might have gone .500, but we will never know. I don't even know if they've played .500 hockey since December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Carty, this is what you are basically saying, No, it is not... You are once again trying to manipulate what I said to support your opinion, and it ain't happening.... A top draft pick will not fix sub par goaltending, because it would not be used to pick a goalie... Neither would it fix questionable coaching decisions, or avoid injuries... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 So Peeps in your mind what should the Flames be doing? Are you advocating they play HIller every single game? Are you advocating they bench Johnny/Mony? Are you adovoating they tell their players we would rather lose then win? The Flames have played backups, amended ice time, and dealt away two of their better players at the deadline so I'm not sure how you expect them to ensure a top 3 pick unless you do that above I just mentioned. If you want me to admit that at this point losses are better than yes I would agree with that BUT with a certain caveat. I don't believe losing at all costs, ie play your backup, don't play certain players etc, is better than continuing to try to play hard every night. If the Flames play hard every night and lost every single game the rest of the year I would not complain but if they fail to show up for the rest of the season in order to get a higher draft picks, that is silly IMO. I think BT has done all he can do at the TDL. I'm pretty happy with what he's done. Again, all tanks are managerial. Players play to win. Coaches coach to win. All a GM can do is trade away NHL-level players for prospects and picks (generally, players who cannot possibly help you win right away but can help you win further down the road). I think this sums it up the best for me, Do I want the flames to lose on purpose? No. Do I want the Flames to lose? Yes. Do I want the Flames to lose on purpose? It's a completely different question. It's complicated because BT can certainly trade away Johnny and Monny for picks and prospects right. We would almost certainly tank to 30th. But, no, not that extreme. Do I want Bennett to trip himself on a breakaway? Do I want Jokipakka to score on us accidentally on purpose? Do I want Hiller to play the angle wrong intentionally? ...it doesn't matter because it's not going to happen. All we as fans can do is cheer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I think BT has done all he can do at the TDL. I'm pretty happy with what he's done. Again, all tanks are managerial. Players play to win. Coaches coach to win. All a GM can do is trade away NHL-level players for prospects and picks (generally, players who cannot possibly help you win right away but can help you win further down the road). I think this sums it up the best for me, Do I want the Flames to lose? Yes. Do I want the Flames to lose on purpose? It's a completely different question. It's complicated because BT can certainly trade away Johnny and Monny for picks and prospects right. We would almost certainly tank to 30th. But, no, not that extreme. Do I want Bennett to trip himself on a breakaway? Do I want Jokipakka to score on us accidentally on purpose? Do I want Hiller to play the angle wrong intentionally? ...it doesn't matter because it's not going to happen. All we as fans can do is cheer. Ok that is fair and I think is reasonable. I just wasn't sure if you were advocating the organization should do more to lose and if that was the case I would strongly disagree. I really like what the organization has done since the TDL but if it leads to more wins so be it thats life. sure I want guys like Laine/Pulljarvi/Thacuck too but not at all costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 No, it is not... You are once again trying to manipulate what I said to support your opinion, and it ain't happening.... A top draft pick will not fix sub par goaltending, because it would not be used to pick a goalie... Neither would it fix questionable coaching decisions, or avoid injuries... My original question was why didn't winning from last season breed more winning for the Flames this season? Then, you answer with the importance of goaltending personnel, coaching personnel, and injuries to personnel as examples to show how it hindered the Flames ability to win this season. My point is that personnel is more important than the culture of losing, which is to say personnel is more important than the culture of winning. My point stands and your argument supports my point. We agree that personnel is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 How come winning last season did not breed more winning this season? It's a young team that did better then expected a year ago. And your missing the point again. The Flames not giving up and the Flames having to much talent young to finish last is a good thing and reflective of the success of the build thus far. Your still try to dramatically warp things to fit into this box you have created where a number one pick is a requisite to winning. It's not. We are not going to get one. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Ok that is fair and I think is reasonable. I just wasn't sure if you were advocating the organization should do more to lose and if that was the case I would strongly disagree. I really like what the organization has done since the TDL but if it leads to more wins so be it thats life. sure I want guys like Laine/Pulljarvi/Thacuck too but not at all costs. I would agree with what you said earlier too. We weren't suppose to be a bottom 3 team and the roster doesn't suggest we are. So to be so close, it's probably not in the cards this year either way. We will likely draft in the 5th to 8th spot depending on lottery results. It's a young team that did better then expected a year ago. And your missing the point again. The Flames not giving up and the Flames having to much talent young to finish last is a good thing and reflective of the success of the build thus far. Your still try to dramatically warp things to fit into this box you have created where a number one pick is a requisite to winning. It's not. We are not going to get one. Move on. If you don't want to cheer for loses because of virtue, then that's okay. I get it. If you don't want to cheer for loses because of losing/winning culture, then that's a fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 If you don't want to cheer for loses because of virtue, then that's okay. I get it. If you don't want to cheer for loses because of losing/winning culture, then that's a fallacy. If you want to be upset because our young developing core is playing to well that's a bigger fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.