travel_dude Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 ^ Sven's issues are not his offensive talents it is his heart, desire to go to any end to win. If JH doesn't have exceptional hockey IQ he wouldn't make it either. Other than scoring what does Byron not do? This kid is 5'8 and plays harder faster and stronger than any guy on our club. Byron is the least of concerns, If they played with his heart and desire we would be one hell of a hockey club. We have bigger plugs to worry about, Raymond, Bolig, Engelland, Smid, Diaz. At least Byron creates is 100% more effective than what the other's I mentioned have can do. I will agree that Bryon may have issues scoring but his 100 % effort ever night is something Sven doesn't have. When Sven plays with the effort ever night like Byron, he will be on the roster. Good teams find away to win key games, SJ wins last night, Minny wins last night, 7/8 of our team was invisible last night. When the 2 smallest guys on the team are your biggest players your in trouble. You sure know Baertschi pretty well; you must be at every practice and listening in on the bench. I'll agree that a lot of Flames were invisible for big parts of the game. But how does that relate to Sven? Bouma is occupying a spot for a top 6 player. Byron is occupying a spot for a bottom 3 player. So, I will ask you - what does playing Bouma in a top 6 role and Byron in a bottom 3 role get you that Baertschi and Wolf doesn't? Baertschi can play a top 6 role and can finish. Playing more than 7 minutes should give him that. Wolf outplayed Ferland and Hanowski on the farm this month. Qulaifies as a reasonable bottom 3 player, if he can translate it to NHL. Byron played 12:30 in the loss. And he played in the critical final minutes of the game. We could have had 9 other players out there batling for the puck. Other than being speedy and a pest, what impact did he have on the game? When was the last time his play resulted in a Flames win? -1 each game against LA and ANA. One assist against SJS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 I'll take this bet. Just for clarification purposes, how far back in draft history are we going to justify the "drafted in the top 2" statement? Last year? Last 5 years? Last 10? Sounds good. Bet on, if only to put an end to my misery Lol. It would only be fair to go back as far as when the trend first started, which was Tampa Bay, Or we can say the "new era" post-2004 and start with the Ovechkin/Malkin draft year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 Sounds good. Bet on, if only to put an end to my misery Lol. It would only be fair to go back as far as when the trend first started, which was Tampa Bay, Or we can say the "new era" post-2004 and start with the Ovechkin/Malkin draft year. I'm guessing you are calling a traded for top 2 pick as = to 1 a team tanked for to make your case. If not drafting Seguin 2nd OA with a pick acquired from the Kessel trade wouldn't count. Bruins were 6th in the east & lost in the semifinals to the eastern representative in the SC. Drafting high gives a better chance & the top players. Nobody disputes that. It's how the pick is acquired that makes the difference. If we went 1 & done getting a late teens pick I'm happy. If we make a trade with a bubble team (Florida for instance) & the bottom falls out for them & the pick ends up being the lottery winner I'm over-joyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmac70 Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 You sure know Baertschi pretty well; you must be at every practice and listening in on the bench. I'll agree that a lot of Flames were invisible for big parts of the game. But how does that relate to Sven? Bouma is occupying a spot for a top 6 player. Byron is occupying a spot for a bottom 3 player. So, I will ask you - what does playing Bouma in a top 6 role and Byron in a bottom 3 role get you that Baertschi and Wolf doesn't? Baertschi can play a top 6 role and can finish. Playing more than 7 minutes should give him that. Wolf outplayed Ferland and Hanowski on the farm this month. Qulaifies as a reasonable bottom 3 player, if he can translate it to NHL. Byron played 12:30 in the loss. And he played in the critical final minutes of the game. We could have had 9 other players out there batling for the puck. Other than being speedy and a pest, what impact did he have on the game? When was the last time his play resulted in a Flames win? -1 each game against LA and ANA. One assist against SJS. The response was to a comment above about Sven's game. Sven plays top 6 and can finish, did I miss some games, pretty sure I have seen them all. Explain to my why he doesn`t play in your divine wisdom if he is so great. Never disputed he has talent, but actions speak louder than potential. Another puzzling question, why bring them up just to watch, anyone ever figure that one out. The Bouma issue have no idea, wouldn`t be my choice either. Sven in the line up over Raymond and Wolf in for Bolig, they can`t be any worse. Byron playing the last few minutes was warranted, he and JH were the only ones that showed up last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I'm guessing you are calling a traded for top 2 pick as = to 1 a team tanked for to make your case. If not drafting Seguin 2nd OA with a pick acquired from the Kessel trade wouldn't count. Bruins were 6th in the east & lost in the semifinals to the eastern representative in the SC. Drafting high gives a better chance & the top players. Nobody disputes that. It's how the pick is acquired that makes the difference. If we went 1 & done getting a late teens pick I'm happy. If we make a trade with a bubble team (Florida for instance) & the bottom falls out for them & the pick ends up being the lottery winner I'm over-joyed. Agreed. I have zero problem admitting that drafting in the top 2 is helpful to a club and if done right is going to help lead to a cup. What I do have a problem with is how that top 2 pick is acquired and if it means purposely tanking to get it then I am not for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flamespatriot Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I disagree with those that believe that you need a top 2 pick to win a Stanley cup. You don't need top picks, but you do need play off performers, elite goal-tending, size, speed, and solid defense. It's too soon for us to see who are the playoff performers on this team, but I think we all know that this team doesn't have the elite goal tending, size and solid defense. We have speed and some what solid defense. Our management is working on our goal-tending. I do believe that signing Hiller was a great step forward in the right direction, and that Ortio has the potential to be an elite goaltender for this team. However this team doesn't have the size or the durability to be successful in the deeper rounds in the playoffs. Management is trying to fix this through drafting and free agency, but it will take some time for sure. Losing on purpose is not the way to go. We have the high draft picks in Monahan and Bennett. Have faith in them, and give them time to develop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Agreed. I have zero problem admitting that drafting in the top 2 is helpful to a club and if done right is going to help lead to a cup. What I do have a problem with is how that top 2 pick is acquired and if it means purposely tanking to get it then I am not for that. Agreed. Besides, it's a grossly inaccurate misuse of data to say "teams with a recent cup drafted top two so you need a top two pick to win a cup." the former fact doesn't make the latter true. Not to mention that it's a short sighted take that disregards the other aspects of building a strong team. Many of which directly conflict with a team built to intentionally tank. Plus it's a moot discussion. We had to put up with it when we were legitimately in the running for a top 2 pick. Today we are legitimately in the playoffs race. Why in the heck are we having this debate in a thread dedicated to our potential to make the playoffs? That's just sad. I am sick of people trying to make us disappointed about the effort level and relative success of our team. It's not a bad thing for crying out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flamespatriot Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Agreed. Besides, it's a grossly inaccurate misuse of data to say "teams with a recent cup drafted top two so you need a top two pick to win a cup." the former fact doesn't make the latter true. Not to mention that it's a short sighted take that disregards the other aspects of building a strong team. Many of which directly conflict with a team built to intentionally tank. Plus it's a moot discussion. We had to put up with it when we were legitimately in the running for a top 2 pick. Today we are legitimately in the playoffs race. Why in the heck are we having this debate in a thread dedicated to our potential to make the playoffs? That's just sad. I am sick of people trying to make us disappointed about the effort level and relative success of our team. It's not a bad thing for crying out loud. I think that the issue is that some fans are disappointed in the flames recent success, for they wanted management to be graced with Conner Mcdavid or Jack Eickel. IMO I am happy in Johnny Hockey, Sean Monahan, and Sam Bennett. Let them develop, and we will have the star players to win a cup in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Drafting high gives a better chance & the top players. Nobody disputes that. It's how the pick is acquired that makes the difference. Agreed. I have zero problem admitting that drafting in the top 2 is helpful to a club and if done right is going to help lead to a cup. What I do have a problem with is how that top 2 pick is acquired and if it means purposely tanking to get it then I am not for that. Agreed. Besides, it's a grossly inaccurate misuse of data to say "teams with a recent cup drafted top two so you need a top two pick to win a cup." the former fact doesn't make the latter true. Recent history supports the notion that drafting in the top 2 is one of many necessary ingredients to winning a Cup. Just putting good players together alone without picking in the top 2 has only worked for Detroit, no one else. You can call it a temporary trend, sure, but as long as we're still in this trend, drafting in the top 2 has proved to be a critical ingredient. Those teams trying to build a Cup winner foregoing a top 2 pick haven't yeilded the same results as those who did have had a top 2 pick. This is a fact backed by empirical evidence. All i'm saying is, let's see if the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 and let's close the case on this issue. I'm as done talking about this as everyone else is done hearing me talk about it. This will be my last post on the matter until the next Cup winner is crowned. May the Flames make the playoffs and win the Cup!! I'd love to be proven wrong. IF the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 again, then please have an open mind and support a top 2 pick by whatever means necessary. ie. tanking, trades, etc. If any team wins the Cup without having drafted in the top 2, then i must also change my opinion on the matter as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreining Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Peeps you are very fixated on this hypothesis that you need at least one top 2 pick. Even if this years SC winner has a top two pick, it will not be a prove of this hypothesis. You can tell by experience that possibly a top two pick will bring you a SC, but then there are too many that had a top two pick and will never win the SC. If you have a clean sequence of lets say 30 SC winners with a top two pick, we can start to talk about a necessary ingredient. How about looking at the other indicators that most of the SC winners have in common. If you believe only a top two pick will bring us a SC, then it is like a self fulfilling prophecy, since I don't believe we will ever have a top two pick, except we can trade for that pick (it will cost us Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennet and this years 1st round pick. If we tank for that 1st overall it will cost us the whole team, because there will be no identity anymore! So we start the rebuild from scratch. I believe with Hartley we will win the SC within the next four years without a top 2 pick. This year they are already very close to make the playoffs, next two years they will be in the playoffs for sure and then they will compete for the SC. And all by just by developing what we have. I have faith in the management and coaching team ....... you too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 With no goals. Byron is about as expendable as they come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_jones Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Post lockout, it seems to be the trend to have a top 2 pick on a Stanley Cup winning team, but that's a weak statistic. Most of the runners-ups do not have a top 2 pick. From 1994-2004, 6 of the 10 Stanley Cup Champions did NOT have a top 2 pick. Rangers - '94 Devils - '95 Avalanche - '96 Devils - '00 Avalanche - '01 Devils - '03 And then the Wings in '08, obviously. One could also argue that Sam Bennett could have been a top 2 pick, as through much of last season, he was ranked #1. You don't need to tank it to win the Stanley Cup. You need to win hockey games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Recent history supports the notion that drafting in the top 2 is one of many necessary ingredients to winning a Cup. Just putting good players together alone without picking in the top 2 has only worked for Detroit, no one else. You can call it a temporary trend, sure, but as long as we're still in this trend, drafting in the top 2 has proved to be a critical ingredient. Those teams trying to build a Cup winner foregoing a top 2 pick haven't yeilded the same results as those who did have had a top 2 pick. This is a fact backed by empirical evidence. All i'm saying is, let's see if the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 and let's close the case on this issue. I'm as done talking about this as everyone else is done hearing me talk about it. This will be my last post on the matter until the next Cup winner is crowned. May the Flames make the playoffs and win the Cup!! I'd love to be proven wrong. IF the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 again, then please have an open mind and support a top 2 pick by whatever means necessary. ie. tanking, trades, etc. If any team wins the Cup without having drafted in the top 2, then i must also change my opinion on the matter as well. Can we not believe that the Flames got a top 2 pick in Bennett as he was actually suppose to go #2? It was a battle of the Sams prior to the draft. Florida needed a stud D, Buffalo went with a Sam and the Oilers wanted a bigger C. Sam would have gone #2 but the other team's needs dropped Sam to 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Recent history supports the notion that drafting in the top 2 is one of many necessary ingredients to winning a Cup. Just putting good players together alone without picking in the top 2 has only worked for Detroit, no one else. You can call it a temporary trend, sure, but as long as we're still in this trend, drafting in the top 2 has proved to be a critical ingredient. Those teams trying to build a Cup winner foregoing a top 2 pick haven't yeilded the same results as those who did have had a top 2 pick. This is a fact backed by empirical evidence. All i'm saying is, let's see if the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 and let's close the case on this issue. I'm as done talking about this as everyone else is done hearing me talk about it. This will be my last post on the matter until the next Cup winner is crowned. May the Flames make the playoffs and win the Cup!! I'd love to be proven wrong. IF the next Cup winner has drafted in the top 2 again, then please have an open mind and support a top 2 pick by whatever means necessary. ie. tanking, trades, etc. If any team wins the Cup without having drafted in the top 2, then i must also change my opinion on the matter as well. The guy in the living room talking about better draft picks in the living room in the midst of a playoff run is annoying. Your logic is flawed. You won't listen to reason. Your set on this notion that you have to lose to win. But beyond any of that is is incredibly annoying to be having this discussion in the Flames playoff thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The guy in the living room talking about better draft picks in the living room in the midst of a playoff run is annoying. Your logic is flawed. You won't listen to reason. Your set on this notion that you have to lose to win. But beyond any of that is is incredibly annoying to be having this discussion in the Flames playoff thread. Can't give you a thumbs up so take this as 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flamespatriot Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Another solid win over the Oilers. Man all of those points are going to add up for this team. Hopefully they can beat the jets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Another solid win over the Oilers. Man all of those points are going to add up for this team. Hopefully they can beat the jets That'll be a tough game for me as again I have both dogs in the set-to. Eh, lets get 2 points with an OT win so both gain on the Orca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreining Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The Jets need to gain ground on the Hawks.... the Orcas have more games left, but pretty sure feel the pressure of the Flames. regarding the third pacific playoff spot. The best of today.... the Flames are three points ahead of the Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_jones Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 That'll be a tough game for me as again I have both dogs in the set-to. Eh, lets get 2 points with an OT win so both gain on the Orca. You're not a loyal fan, that's why. Just a bandwagon jumper that thinks he know what he's talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flamespatriot Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 You're not a loyal fan, that's why. Just a bandwagon jumper that thinks he know what he's talking about. The dark side of the force is strong in this one ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyromancer Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The East looks like a done deal. Talk about disparity. OTT-TOR-BUF-PHI-NJD-CLB-CAR out barring divine intervention. FLR requiring a lesser miracle. The West is still fairly wide open. ARI-EDM out. DAL-COL-MIN needing a strong, but unlikely finish. WPG-CGY-LAK on the bubble fighting for 2 spots. SJS & VAN can easily drop with poor play. 13488 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The guy in the living room talking about better draft picks in the living room in the midst of a playoff run is annoying. Your logic is flawed. You won't listen to reason. Your set on this notion that you have to lose to win. But beyond any of that is is incredibly annoying to be having this discussion in the Flames playoff thread. +1, even though he says he's done arguing this pathetic reasoning, he's not done. You're not a loyal fan, that's why. Just a bandwagon jumper that thinks he know what he's talking about. FF52 is as loyal as they come, he's like a gigolo, has numerous irons in the fire so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s4xon Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 ***Enough of the tank talk. Take it to the other thread boys 'n' girls.*** Pyro's playoff graphics. Something I look forward to every year. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The East looks like a done deal. Talk about disparity. OTT-TOR-BUF-PHI-NJD-CLB-CAR out barring divine intervention. FLR requiring a lesser miracle. The West is still fairly wide open. ARI-EDM out. DAL-COL-MIN needing a strong, but unlikely finish. WPG-CGY-LAK on the bubble fighting for 2 spots. SJS & VAN can easily drop with poor play. 13488 You ever wanna show us what it would look like had it been the old system where wins were two points and losses in OT meant you weren't getting points, I'd love to see what that looked like. Where would we be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Post lockout, it seems to be the trend to have a top 2 pick on a Stanley Cup winning team, but that's a weak statistic. Most of the runners-ups do not have a top 2 pick. From 1994-2004, 6 of the 10 Stanley Cup Champions did NOT have a top 2 pick. Rangers - '94 Devils - '95 Avalanche - '96 Devils - '00 Avalanche - '01 Devils - '03 And then the Wings in '08, obviously. One could also argue that Sam Bennett could have been a top 2 pick, as through much of last season, he was ranked #1. You don't need to tank it to win the Stanley Cup. You need to win hockey games. Stats from 1994-2004 have zero relevance on the game today. I agree with Peeps, there is a link between high draft picks and winning the Cup. That is based on a very specific reasoning. You have to have good players on ELC's to win in the salary cap era. Top picks give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.