Flames 2016-2017 Predictions!

[travel_dude]

They, who played Bennett at wing, got fired. I think it'd be best to play Jankowski a full year in the AHL. 

I am glad some of the fans are coming around to the kid. I was worried he'd run with what a lot here were saying about him. 

 

I'm sure he was more concerned about the existing team and future opportunity than what a few posters on a Flames discussion board had to say.  His game is more centered around 2-way play than Bennett's or Monahan's, so his direct competition is Backlund and Stajan.  That is fine with me.  If he can replace Backlund in a year, then we have a bigger player at a cheaper price.

 

I think he is more NHL ready than a lot of people feel, though. 

[robrob74]

The reason I want Jankowski in the AHL for the year is to have him play a key offensive role on the team, continue building leadership skills and hopefully, develop a winning culture for the AHL. 
 

Right now, we aren't much further ahead than Edm. Our AHL team are perennial bottom feeders. We've won a few more games over the years, but have only made the playoffs once. So far, the team still looks sad with how possession looks and being outplayed most of the time. 

I get it's part of being a young team, but I think that if we're going to take the next step in the rebuild, we need to start building a winning culture in the AHL so that they're winners when they make the jump to the NHL. If we could ever get to the Chicagos of the world, then a successful AHL team has to happen as well so that we have a constant influx of players to fill roles. 

His game is more centered around 2-way play than Bennett's or Monahan's, so his direct competition is Backlund and Stajan.  That is fine with me.  If he can replace Backlund in a year, then we have a bigger player at a cheaper price.

 

I think he is more NHL ready than a lot of people feel, though. 

 

I think he is too, more NHL ready. Like I said, I want to develop his offense so that 3rd line isn't his ceiling. 

It could even be that he's able to push Bennett and Monahan in a few years? I bet some will think that's questionable, but you never know. And it's not a bad idea to have too many centers. 

[MAC331]

The reason I want Jankowski in the AHL for the year is to have him play a key offensive role on the team, continue building leadership skills and hopefully, develop a winning culture for the AHL. 

 

Right now, we aren't much further ahead than Edm. Our AHL team are perennial bottom feeders. We've won a few more games over the years, but have only made the playoffs once. So far, the team still looks sad with how possession looks and being outplayed most of the time. 

I get it's part of being a young team, but I think that if we're going to take the next step in the rebuild, we need to start building a winning culture in the AHL so that they're winners when they make the jump to the NHL. If we could ever get to the Chicagos of the world, then a successful AHL team has to happen as well so that we have a constant influx of players to fill roles. 

 

I think he is too, more NHL ready. Like I said, I want to develop his offense so that 3rd line isn't his ceiling. 

It could even be that he's able to push Bennett and Monahan in a few years? I bet some will think that's questionable, but you never know. And it's not a bad idea to have too many centers. 

I don't know how essential it is to have Stockton be perennial winners so long as the development of our prospects is happening. I don't believe any of these players are going to be mentally affected by not winning that league or they shouldn't be. The eye on the prize is to make the NHL and that is where their heads should be as they develop.

Until decisions are made for the main roster we won't know who ends up in Stockton but with the scenario today there will be a few surprises. I think it's a given Jankowski will be there.

[robrob74]

I don't know how essential it is to have Stockton be perennial winners so long as the development of our prospects is happening. I don't believe any of these players are going to be mentally affected by not winning that league or they shouldn't be. The eye on the prize is to make the NHL and that is where their heads should be as they develop.

Until decisions are made for the main roster we won't know who ends up in Stockton but with the scenario today there will be a few surprises. I think it's a given Jankowski will be there.

Ok, then that reasoning nullifies any argument we have that goes against Edmonton's losing, they keep losing and have a loser attitude. Maybe you don't think it is the same but I do. Winners win and want to win at every level they're playing at. I don't think we can dismiss it.

A part of learning how to win is having confidence, if they're always losing, their confidence will be lower. I think success at the AHL is just as important because it means they're developing.

Also, arguing the merits for going to the world juniors and any other tournament is nullified. It's about breeding a winning culture. So I think it is vital to have a successful AHL team, not necessarily perennial champions.

[Flyerfan52]

The reason I want Jankowski in the AHL for the year is to have him play a key offensive role on the team, continue building leadership skills and hopefully, develop a winning culture for the AHL. 

 

Right now, we aren't much further ahead than Edm. Our AHL team are perennial bottom feeders. We've won a few more games over the years, but have only made the playoffs once. So far, the team still looks sad with how possession looks and being outplayed most of the time. 

I get it's part of being a young team, but I think that if we're going to take the next step in the rebuild, we need to start building a winning culture in the AHL so that they're winners when they make the jump to the NHL. If we could ever get to the Chicagos of the world, then a successful AHL team has to happen as well so that we have a constant influx of players to fill roles. 

 

I think he is too, more NHL ready. Like I said, I want to develop his offense so that 3rd line isn't his ceiling. 

It could even be that he's able to push Bennett and Monahan in a few years? I bet some will think that's questionable, but you never know. And it's not a bad idea to have too many centers. 

Rockford (Chicago's AHL team) hasn't been overly successful. The Blackhawks seem to replenish their roster with prospects developed by other teams & acquired for the vets Chicago had to trade for cap reasons.  That's how they get the influx of good NHL ready players.

[MAC331]

Ok, then that reasoning nullifies any argument we have that goes against Edmonton's losing, they keep losing and have a loser attitude. Maybe you don't think it is the same but I do. Winners win and want to win at every level they're playing at. I don't think we can dismiss it.

A part of learning how to win is having confidence, if they're always losing, their confidence will be lower. I think success at the AHL is just as important because it means they're developing.

Also, arguing the merits for going to the world juniors and any other tournament is nullified. It's about breeding a winning culture. So I think it is vital to have a successful AHL team, not necessarily perennial champions.

I would dare to say most of these players have won at most levels they have played at throughout their lives. At this stage it is all about working on getting better to make the NHL, they could likely care less about winning the AHL. Edmonton has lost because the built a poor team around the talent they drafted. If these players are mentally weak from losing at the AHL level we likely don't want them.

[robrob74]

Well, right now we are drafting high. We have, which I think are very few players we've developed into high end NHL players. The ones we have are due to draft position (minus Gaudreau, Giordano and Brodie). If we don't want to rebuild again, we need to successfully develop players. I think a winning atmosphere helps.

We shall see. But until recently, our development systems have sucked and even

[conundrumed]

Well, right now we are drafting high. We have, which I think are very few players we've developed into high end NHL players. The ones we have are due to draft position (minus Gaudreau, Giordano and Brodie). If we don't want to rebuild again, we need to successfully develop players. I think a winning atmosphere helps.

We shall see. But until recently, our development systems have sucked and even

I wouldn't get too caught up in Stockton's success. Like our big club, goaltending has been an Achilles Heel.

If you take Mony as an example, he makes the team because we were pitiful at center.

I have a bigger issue if we need to do that on a regular basis as it speaks to the quality of the NHL team.

We're now very young in Stockton, which imo means we've got our drafting back on the rails and whether it's a 1st rder or a 4th or a prospect in a trade we have players in our system and 3-5 yrs in the A is now affordable as the big team is a bonafide NHL roster for the most part.

There is no reason any longer to get frustrated with the Poirier's and the Klimchuk's because we don't have a heavy reliance on needing to turn them out in a yr or 2, we can afford 3 to 5 and go from there. I believe that was the cause of our Dev failures in the past.

That's where Detroit has been for 25 yrs. Great prospects and you almost forget they have them, and they have them still. Constant, "that team will miss the playoffs", to "wow, where did those 3 come from".

Abdelkader, Helm, Nyqvist, Jurco, Glendenning on and on and on. They also aren't shy to give anyone the 4th line opening to work his way up or stay in that role for as long as it takes.

Imho, that's a big fix for us over the last few years that was sorely needed.

[travel_dude]

The Stockton system was tied at the hip to Hartley's systems in CGY.  How much does that change this season?

 

Success in Stockton gives CHL players a chance to play at the end of their system.  Playoff games = more opportunity.   That is all.

[CalgarySTL]

My cousin lives near San Jose & went to most of the Stockton home games.  They're not as much of a bottom feeder as Robrob74 thinks they are.  They had a revolving door of goalies last year... & even with no real starter after losing Gillies, they were still in the playoff hunt most of the year.  The only reason they fell off at the end, was due to all the call-ups... according to my cousin. He is concerned with losing Agostino though... really thought highly of him. 

[robrob74]

I wouldn't get too caught up in Stockton's success. Like our big club, goaltending has been an Achilles Heel.

If you take Mony as an example, he makes the team because we were pitiful at center.

I have a bigger issue if we need to do that on a regular basis as it speaks to the quality of the NHL team.

We're now very young in Stockton, which imo means we've got our drafting back on the rails and whether it's a 1st rder or a 4th or a prospect in a trade we have players in our system and 3-5 yrs in the A is now affordable as the big team is a bonafide NHL roster for the most part.

There is no reason any longer to get frustrated with the Poirier's and the Klimchuk's because we don't have a heavy reliance on needing to turn them out in a yr or 2, we can afford 3 to 5 and go from there. I believe that was the cause of our Dev failures in the past.

That's where Detroit has been for 25 yrs. Great prospects and you almost forget they have them, and they have them still. Constant, "that team will miss the playoffs", to "wow, where did those 3 come from".

Abdelkader, Helm, Nyqvist, Jurco, Glendenning on and on and on. They also aren't shy to give anyone the 4th line opening to work his way up or stay in that role for as long as it takes.

Imho, that's a big fix for us over the last few years that was sorely needed.

This what I mean by success as well. Not that I am an expert... Detroit's AHL teams seem to always be very competitive. I think competing is the most important, which is development.

[robrob74]

My cousin lives near San Jose & went to most of the Stockton home games. They're not as much of a bottom feeder as Robrob74 thinks they are. They had a revolving door of goalies last year... & even with no real starter after losing Gillies, they were still in the playoff hunt most of the year. The only reason they fell off at the end, was due to all the call-ups... according to my cousin. He is concerned with losing Agostino though... really thought highly of him.

I think the call-ups failed the team too. Not just the end of the year ones. I think that's one of the many reasons why Hartley was fired. They had call-ups all year and he didn't have faith in a lot of them. Most sat and watched.

I just think success helps development. Like others say, it might not be as important, and there were many reasons for the failures for both teams.

I am not saying I am not excited, just saying I would like to see a bit more focus on playing them in their roles and develop.

Agostino would have been a good career AHLer for us. But he probably wanted a better chance somewhere else. He wouldn't make the flames as we are too small as it is.

The AHL team will be better if Gillies can make his comeback... I just want more focus down there too.

The Stockton system was tied at the hip to Hartley's systems in CGY. How much does that change this season?

Success in Stockton gives CHL players a chance to play at the end of their system. Playoff games = more opportunity. That is all.

I agree. Meaningful games bring out the best in players. To have that opportunity for the prospects is part of developing them as pros. I don't fully mean champs every year.

I don't see the Sharks as the failure a lot of others see them as. They've made it to the finals, conference finals a few times, past the first and have been perennial competitors with high end skill. That's what you ask for is that chance to win. The Flames may never win another cup, but to have an opportunity every year is what we watch for.

[conundrumed]

Ferland is one that I think may have benefited from another A yr.

The playoff thing was great, but to have a young player basically because you have no size imo leads to IR visits because that is the path he's given to stay up and that's what he'll go overboard with.

I like his size and he's got pretty good mitts, but I believe we pulled him in early.

With that out of the way, and new coach, I hope that he can settle into a consistent hockey role rather than tasmanian devil expectation.

It's a big yr for him and Bouma imo. Can they be solid hockey players without overcompensating with aggression?

Want the aggression, but pick your spots and stay off the IR or near it.

[travel_dude]

Ferland is one that I think may have benefited from another A yr.

The playoff thing was great, but to have a young player basically because you have no size imo leads to IR visits because that is the path he's given to stay up and that's what he'll go overboard with.

I like his size and he's got pretty good mitts, but I believe we pulled him in early.

With that out of the way, and new coach, I hope that he can settle into a consistent hockey role rather than tasmanian devil expectation.

It's a big yr for him and Bouma imo. Can they be solid hockey players without overcompensating with aggression?

Want the aggression, but pick your spots and stay off the IR or near it.

 

Two different players IMHO.  Bouma has said he plays the way he has to, to stay in the NHL.  He is not known for being a points guy.  He benefited from getting 2nd line minutes one season, playing with Backlund.  That's not going to happen again, unless we have no better options.  Ferland was used in short shifts to cause trouble, which is not what his forte was in junior and AHL.  He will benefit from consistent usage and less grinder-type linemates.  I would prefer to see him use his size and speed to disrupt play, and play a bit longer shift when we have possession.

[robrob74]

Ferland is one that I think may have benefited from another A yr.

The playoff thing was great, but to have a young player basically because you have no size imo leads to IR visits because that is the path he's given to stay up and that's what he'll go overboard with.

I like his size and he's got pretty good mitts, but I believe we pulled him in early.

With that out of the way, and new coach, I hope that he can settle into a consistent hockey role rather than tasmanian devil expectation.

It's a big yr for him and Bouma imo. Can they be solid hockey players without overcompensating with aggression?

Want the aggression, but pick your spots and stay off the IR or near it.

I agree Ferland may have been up too early. But I also think it would've been good to have a Brouwer type to help him settle into his role. At the beginning of last season all we heard was, "I can't play this way every night, I gotta know when to pick my spots..."

I feel like he came in unsure and maybe was waiting for cues from coaches to say, it's time to let out Mr. Ferly. And that never seemed to happen, and he was one player who jumped lines a lot because Hartley couldn't find lines that worked, other than the first line of course.

[robrob74]

Two different players IMHO. Bouma has said he plays the way he has to, to stay in the NHL. He is not known for being a points guy. He benefited from getting 2nd line minutes one season, playing with Backlund. That's not going to happen again, unless we have no better options. Ferland was used in short shifts to cause trouble, which is not what his forte was in junior and AHL. He will benefit from consistent usage and less grinder-type linemates. I would prefer to see him use his size and speed to disrupt play, and play a bit longer shift when we have possession.

This makes sense.

I thought the same of Bouma and that year he ran with the opportunity he got. I was skeptical because he wouldn't have played there on a better team.

And I agree on your view of Ferland.

He isn't elite skill, but is skilled enough to play with skilled players. He is going to compliment a skilled line. Too bad he wasn't a right shot.

He dies show moments that wow you. I think with good players, he and they can open up ice for each other.

[MAC331]

This makes sense.

I thought the same of Bouma and that year he ran with the opportunity he got. I was skeptical because he wouldn't have played there on a better team.

And I agree on your view of Ferland.

He isn't elite skill, but is skilled enough to play with skilled players. He is going to compliment a skilled line. Too bad he wasn't a right shot.

He dies show moments that wow you. I think with good players, he and they can open up ice for each other.

I think we saw a lot of inconsistent use with a number of players and got inconsistent results. Ferland has not been given a long enough period with any line to show what he is capable of, hopefully this is a change we see with GG.

[travel_dude]

This makes sense.

I thought the same of Bouma and that year he ran with the opportunity he got. I was skeptical because he wouldn't have played there on a better team.

And I agree on your view of Ferland.

He isn't elite skill, but is skilled enough to play with skilled players. He is going to compliment a skilled line. Too bad he wasn't a right shot.

He dies show moments that wow you. I think with good players, he and they can open up ice for each other.

 

My biggest problem with Ferland was him playing short shifts.  He would bail on the play and skate to the bench, mostly while we had possession.  That seemed to be less his decision and more getting pulled in favor of another player.  I tend to think he would do well by continuing on the cycle or crating havoc in front of the goalie.

[jjgallow]

What I will say about this upcoming year:

 

When you get THAT many goals scored against you.....

 

Looking at just the goaltender doesn't cut it.

 

 

the Flames have made a LOT of improvements, as has Every other NHL team,

 

But done absolutely nothing to shore up their defence.

 

We will see how that pans.

[conundrumed]

What I will say about this upcoming year:

 

When you get THAT many goals scored against you.....

 

Looking at just the goaltender doesn't cut it.

 

 

the Flames have made a LOT of improvements, as has Every other NHL team,

 

But done absolutely nothing to shore up their defence.

 

We will see how that pans.

You have to admit the larger share was goaltending. How any times did we see a point wrister elude Hiller. He was having huge problems seeing the puck. It led to a lot of other problems with his confidence as even his net coverage became loathsome.

Then between Ramo and Ortio it's guesswork because they're too scrambly. What I mean is you can have the exact same shot 5 times and every time the rebound is going somewhere different. It helps if defenders know what their goalie WILL do, rather than might do.

 

But you make a good point because we should be leery of St Loo's very good D play under Hitchcock in front of Elliot.

One thing that annoyed me right from preseason was springing the D at all costs. It was downright reckless too often and hopefully that gets reigned in. Also the stretch pass was forced way too much.

I would go as far as to say we were more focused on creating offence on our backend than a responsible D game. I saw very little in the way of challenging entering our zone, just collapsing too deep and trying to get in front of pucks.

It was far too passive.

I believe Hartley became his own worst enemy in not transitioning out of the style that gave us some success. Every team knew the stretch passes and Dmen springing too early and simply waited for it.

Preseason games were loaded with odd man rushes but Hartley stayed committed to his plan.

My hope is having Elliot back there will help in telling the coaches and players what he sees back there. You can put all the coaching you want in the rafters but your goalie has the best view. Elliot's known for being vocal so hopefully that is a part of the fix.

[MAC331]

What I will say about this upcoming year:

 

When you get THAT many goals scored against you.....

 

Looking at just the goaltender doesn't cut it.

 

 

the Flames have made a LOT of improvements, as has Every other NHL team,

 

But done absolutely nothing to shore up their defence.

 

We will see how that pans.

By the end of last season I thought our defense looked very good. Natural growth together can also be classified as an improvement. I think the big question will be, do they break up Giordano and Brodie. The unfortunate part of this offseason was BT not finding Wideman a new home so hopefully he has a far better start here than all his play last season.

You have to admit the larger share was goaltending. How any times did we see a point wrister elude Hiller. He was having huge problems seeing the puck. It led to a lot of other problems with his confidence as even his net coverage became loathsome.

Then between Ramo and Ortio it's guesswork because they're too scrambly. What I mean is you can have the exact same shot 5 times and every time the rebound is going somewhere different. It helps if defenders know what their goalie WILL do, rather than might do.

 

But you make a good point because we should be leery of St Loo's very good D play under Hitchcock in front of Elliot.

One thing that annoyed me right from preseason was springing the D at all costs. It was downright reckless too often and hopefully that gets reigned in. Also the stretch pass was forced way too much.

I would go as far as to say we were more focused on creating offence on our backend than a responsible D game. I saw very little in the way of challenging entering our zone, just collapsing too deep and trying to get in front of pucks.

It was far too passive.

I believe Hartley became his own worst enemy in not transitioning out of the style that gave us some success. Every team knew the stretch passes and Dmen springing too early and simply waited for it.

Preseason games were loaded with odd man rushes but Hartley stayed committed to his plan.

My hope is having Elliot back there will help in telling the coaches and players what he sees back there. You can put all the coaching you want in the rafters but your goalie has the best view. Elliot's known for being vocal so hopefully that is a part of the fix.

Sometimes you just don't have the personel to run certain systems, to Hartley's credit I think he knew what he had to work with and used it.

[robrob74]

What I will say about this upcoming year:

When you get THAT many goals scored against you.....

Looking at just the goaltender doesn't cut it.

the Flames have made a LOT of improvements, as has Every other NHL team,

But done absolutely nothing to shore up their defence.

We will see how that pans.

I agree, and it's a full team issue. I think puck retrieval will have to be the main focus. We have the creativity to play offense, but how often will depend on team D.

I am with you that it's not just a goalie issue. Goaltending was a part of it, and will improve, but how much team D improvement will tell the playoff tale...

MAC,

What I wonder though is how much that improvement can be attributed to the pressure being taken off, this playing better, and the idea of saving face on the season.

Last year they came in thinking that the team would continue the momentum/play they had in the playoffs. Will that team growth/gelling continue?

If it's also a pride thing, I can see a better start this year. Also learning from the poor start is key. It's a part of being professional and gaining knowledge from failures...

[MAC331]

I agree, and it's a full team issue. I think puck retrieval will have to be the main focus. We have the creativity to play offense, but how often will depend on team D.

I am with you that it's not just a goalie issue. Goaltending was a part of it, and will improve, but how much team D improvement will tell the playoff tale...

MAC,

What I wonder though is how much that improvement can be attributed to the pressure being taken off, this playing better, and the idea of saving face on the season.

Last year they came in thinking that the team would continue the momentum/play they had in the playoffs. Will that team growth/gelling continue?

If it's also a pride thing, I can see a better start this year. Also learning from the poor start is key. It's a part of being professional and gaining knowledge from failures...

I don't know, good play is good play to me. I liked what I saw from Jokipakka and Hamilton's growth by the final month. Giordano and Brodie are proven and I think Brodie has more to offer up yet. Engelland, Nakladal and Wotherspoon were solid showings, Engelland all season. Wideman will always be the wildcard, he is simply not a good defender and if he isn't providing you points what good is he really. He has to go at some point between now and the TDL. Anytime BT.

I really like that we got Elliott and Johnson, both are well tested and have performed.

[rickross]

I'll predict Elliot gets injured before the 40th game, Johnson steps in and will do an admirable job in raising his stock. With our current bottom six there's not enough production to support a playoff berth but overall I think we see the team improve defensively. I'll predict a slight drop off for Monny and JH ..usually happens once u sign that big contract , always I think it"lol take 20+ games before they click with the right RW.

[MAC331]

I'll predict Elliot gets injured before the 40th game, Johnson steps in and will do an admirable job in raising his stock. With our current bottom six there's not enough production to support a playoff berth but overall I think we see the team improve defensively. I'll predict a slight drop off for Monny and JH ..usually happens once u sign that big contract , always I think it"lol take 20+ games before they click with the right RW.

Why predict anything before you even know who the bottom 6 are or who the RW is with JG and SM ? Having both Elliott and Johnson is a definite plus should either one get hurt, our depth is building.