So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[DirtyDeeds]

9 hours ago, redfire11 said:

The Flames have in Gaudreau possibly one of the most dynamic players in the NHL. But as a team we are doing NOTHING to emphasize/protect/ensure that. Sean M is a 6/3 200 lb center man; he finds and makes space in the slot but he does nothing to protect JG his set up man. We need SM and Ferland to start creating space for JG if they want JG to remain on their line. If not we need to find a Center and RW to open up the JG potential. Unless we find a way to protect JG we need to realize the Flames are not the type of team that can fully utilize a potential generational player in JG and should look to make a trade before he is long term injured or has regressed to a point of low value.  

First off JH is not a generational Player, nor a potential Generational Player. Generational players don't fall to the 4th round and 104 pick overall.

 

He might become a franchise player which would make his pick exceptional good scouting. We can hope he develops to become that for us.

 

You have 1 thing right. We need to surround him with complimentary players, some who can defend him. Engelland is one of those to protect him and it would be a shame to let him get away.

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I don't consider you as an attacker at all. I would like to see where this goes for a few more years with these young players and trying to get the "right" RWer for the top line is hardly building a line around Gaudreau, more like finishing it off with the right option. We don't absolutely need Oshie and someone likely will throw stupid money at him but all I see is a RW worth somewhere between 4.5 and 5.5M.

I'm tempted to try Justin Williams (proven winner) or Patrick Eaves if they'd accept a 1 year contract. Stop gap solutions but I just don't have much faith in what we have now or in the pipe.

Maybe if we re-sign Lazar & have him on RW throughout camp & exhibition he can do it. If not putting Frolik there is worth a try.

 

Like @ D we have more left shooters than righties.

[phoenix66]

9 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

First off JH is not a generational Player, nor a potential Generational Player. Generational players don't fall to the 4th round and 104 pick overall.

 

He might become a franchise player which would make his pick exceptional good scouting. We can hope he develops to become that for us.

 

You have 1 thing right. We need to surround him with complimentary players, some who can defend him. Engelland is one of those to protect him and it would be a shame to let him get away.

agreed.. i think its an overused term...   I would definitely want Engelland back and I'm sure the Flames will try on a reduced deal,  My only fear there is he's from and Still lives in Vegas. I could see him  wanting to play there if they'd take him and i think they would given his usefulness and leadership. 

[redfire11]

23 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

First off JH is not a generational Player, nor a potential Generational Player. Generational players don't fall to the 4th round and 104 pick overall.

 

He might become a franchise player which would make his pick exceptional good scouting. We can hope he develops to become that for us.

 

 

Correct Generational was not the correct term as potential franchise player could be. Franchise players do fall to or later than the 4th rounds. ie. 6th and 7th rounds

Drafted by Detroit Red Wings

- round 6 #171 overall 1998 NHL Entry Draft

Drafted by Detroit Red Wings

- round 7 #210 overall 1999 NHL Entry Draft

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, redfire11 said:

Correct Generational was not the correct term as potential franchise player could be. Franchise players do fall to or later than the 4th rounds. ie. 6th and 7th rounds

Drafted by Detroit Red Wings

- round 6 #171 overall 1998 NHL Entry Draft

Drafted by Detroit Red Wings

- round 7 #210 overall 1999 NHL Entry Draft

I'm a Wings fan and don't need to click. It might be a good time to point out we were the Christopher Columbus of scouting for a long time.

We were the 1st to smuggle Russians etc.

Everyone has caught up.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

First off JH is not a generational Player, nor a potential Generational Player. Generational players don't fall to the 4th round and 104 pick overall.

 

He might become a franchise player which would make his pick exceptional good scouting. We can hope he develops to become that for us.

 

You have 1 thing right. We need to surround him with complimentary players, some who can defend him. Engelland is one of those to protect him and it would be a shame to let him get away.

It's early.

I wonder, Johnny finished his degree last summer. Is there a chance he wasn't focused on training as much as he will be this summer?

The definition is also a bit out there.

Was St. Louis not a generational player?

Not comparing the 2, but I despise 1 year judgements.

How much did everyone hate Engelland in 1 year?

Brouwer's now everyone's dog, well, and the goalies.

We aren't building a team, it's a ferris wheel.

[MAC331]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's early.

I wonder, Johnny finished his degree last summer. Is there a chance he wasn't focused on training as much as he will be this summer?

The definition is also a bit out there.

Was St. Louis not a generational player?

Not comparing the 2, but I despise 1 year judgements.

How much did everyone hate Engelland in 1 year?

Brouwer's now everyone's dog, well, and the goalies.

We aren't building a team, it's a ferris wheel.

Well JG should be a smarter player now with that degree, we didn't see that. LOL

Don't worry as the ferris wheel is just thoughts on here and not with the real decision makers. I think we are building a good team here.

Next season IMO is another one where we could still use some vet stability while our young core matures into themselves. BT has some definite decisions on how to fill the 2 net positions, how to round out the defense group and with the forwards who stays, who goes and who comes in.

GOALIES: plenty of options
DEFENSE: I would bring back Stone and Engelland and introduce one or two of our prospects.
FORWARDS: FF makes a point above for a short term affordable RW such as Justin Williams, Patrick Eaves and I will throw in Versteeg's name again. This provides enough players to have for our top 9, then the decisions narrow down to what happens with Stajan, Bouma and Chiasson.

[travel_dude]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's early.

I wonder, Johnny finished his degree last summer. Is there a chance he wasn't focused on training as much as he will be this summer?

The definition is also a bit out there.

Was St. Louis not a generational player?

Not comparing the 2, but I despise 1 year judgements.

How much did everyone hate Engelland in 1 year?

Brouwer's now everyone's dog, well, and the goalies.

We aren't building a team, it's a ferris wheel.

 

It is early.  We can brand people all we want based on what we see in the first few years.  There are things that McDavid and JH do that make people say "how dd he do that".  Wait and see where they are in 5 years time, or 1/4 of a generation.  I think it's fair to say they both have elite talent.  

 

It's funny about goaltending.  We finally get a guy that has good enough numbers to suggest he can lead this team into the playoffs.  Like Hamilton in 15/16 he struggles early, with the team in front of him trying to figure out a new system and carrying Wideman and Grossmann.  He gets benched.  Eventually he gets back in and starts on a roll.  He has an outstanding run, but tails off after that.  Was he good enough in the playoffs?  No, but there were a lot of bad signs in those game that pointed elsewhere.

 

Engelland kind of grows on you.  Fought two Nucks at the same time.  Played like a goalie blocking cross-crease passes.  Stepped up when others didn't.  My only issue with bringing him back is that I feel he is great 6/7 guy, just don't overuse him.  He is after all 35 years old.  Maybe it's just the partners that he's had, but I didn't find the 3rd pairing to be a great option to play 16 minutes a game.  He's one of the better PK guys we have.  He's pretty good on the boards.  Where he suffers the most is when players get between him and the net.  He can't stop them.  He's better than a lot of D-men out there, but I want this team to be better than just OK.    

[phoenix66]

well I'll say this , assuming the Ducks do close out the Oilers,(ironically history says the Oilers have the Ducks right where they want them) Id much rather go out like we did.. in every game, than to have to live with the collapse they saw last night. It does however show us we are much further ahead than the Oilers are.

It also amplifies our goaltending .. we played well enough against them to beat them with better goaltending .

The oilers however are proving you need more than just Goaltending 

 

We need way better goaltending 

we need a 4th line that chips in consistent scoring so that the better goaltending is that much more of a weapon 

yes our 2nd line played about as well as their second line is, but I have no doubts MT will mature from the experience .. their $18 M line has no excuses , and you can be sure PC will be addressing that this summer 

 

I was corrected earlier on what the cost would be but now I wonder instead of a 3rd pairing , if Justin Schultz wouldn't be a better for the 2nd pair than Stone,It's amazing me what his game is now.. hes filing in for Letang like letang was never there .. get his rights and give him the 4M.. if you can possibly swing it get Stone on the 3rd pairing ..but not sure hed sign for 3rd pair $

 

Players line Eaves, Thompson , to replace the likes of Bouma..add in a Jankowski   and i think you have a force next year 

[MAC331]

37 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It is early.  We can brand people all we want based on what we see in the first few years.  There are things that McDavid and JH do that make people say "how dd he do that".  Wait and see where they are in 5 years time, or 1/4 of a generation.  I think it's fair to say they both have elite talent.  

 

It's funny about goaltending.  We finally get a guy that has good enough numbers to suggest he can lead this team into the playoffs.  Like Hamilton in 15/16 he struggles early, with the team in front of him trying to figure out a new system and carrying Wideman and Grossmann.  He gets benched.  Eventually he gets back in and starts on a roll.  He has an outstanding run, but tails off after that.  Was he good enough in the playoffs?  No, but there were a lot of bad signs in those game that pointed elsewhere.

 

Engelland kind of grows on you.  Fought two Nucks at the same time.  Played like a goalie blocking cross-crease passes.  Stepped up when others didn't.  My only issue with bringing him back is that I feel he is great 6/7 guy, just don't overuse him.  He is after all 35 years old.  Maybe it's just the partners that he's had, but I didn't find the 3rd pairing to be a great option to play 16 minutes a game.  He's one of the better PK guys we have.  He's pretty good on the boards.  Where he suffers the most is when players get between him and the net.  He can't stop them.  He's better than a lot of D-men out there, but I want this team to be better than just OK.    

Truth is Elliott did lead us into the playoffs as expected of him. People were let down by what happened there. I don't know why fans have a problem with admitting their team just isn't ready to advance further. Nice if it happens but we lost to a better more experienced team.

[DirtyDeeds]

10 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's early.

I wonder, Johnny finished his degree last summer. Is there a chance he wasn't focused on training as much as he will be this summer?

The definition is also a bit out there.

Was St. Louis not a generational player?

Not comparing the 2, but I despise 1 year judgements.

How much did everyone hate Engelland in 1 year?

Brouwer's now everyone's dog, well, and the goalies.

We aren't building a team, it's a ferris wheel.

no.. he was not a generational player. Not even close. He was an exceptional 1st ballot Hall of fame player. 

 

Guys please don't get sucked into the media hype. They have to talk about the best players coming into the league and hand out the generational handle like free sample candy. There is very few players deserving this title. A generation is 20+ years. It is not every seasons best player.......

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Truth is Elliott did lead us into the playoffs as expected of him. People were let down by what happened there. I don't know why fans have a problem with admitting their team just isn't ready to advance further. Nice if it happens but we lost to a better more experienced team.

 

Advancing further is like catching lightening in a bottle some times.  You get a good matchup in round one and you build momentum.  But part of it is making sure you roll into the playoffs, not stumble.  We had opportunity to win the division and came up short with lacklustre play to end the season.  The end of the playoffs was not unexpected.

 

Where I see the team most lacking is with guys doing everything you need to do to win.  Scraping, clawing, leaving it all on the ice.  Instead, we got deflated by a bad call or an untimely goal.  We pass off, instead of taking the shot and attacking the rebounds.   Blowing a 4-1 lead isn't about goaltending, it's about playing 60 minutes.  It's about supporting the guy behind you. 

[MAC331]

19 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Advancing further is like catching lightening in a bottle some times.  You get a good matchup in round one and you build momentum.  But part of it is making sure you roll into the playoffs, not stumble.  We had opportunity to win the division and came up short with lacklustre play to end the season.  The end of the playoffs was not unexpected.

 

Where I see the team most lacking is with guys doing everything you need to do to win.  Scraping, clawing, leaving it all on the ice.  Instead, we got deflated by a bad call or an untimely goal.  We pass off, instead of taking the shot and attacking the rebounds.   Blowing a 4-1 lead isn't about goaltending, it's about playing 60 minutes.  It's about supporting the guy behind you. 

I think the entire performance was just an indication of where we are in the maturing process. The one good thing I saw was that the team didn't quit which was a huge step for this group. We witnessed some players trying to do to much on their own and others not doing enough, some of this scramble will disappear with experience.

[DirtyDeeds]

49 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Advancing further is like catching lightening in a bottle some times.  You get a good matchup in round one and you build momentum.  But part of it is making sure you roll into the playoffs, not stumble.  We had opportunity to win the division and came up short with lacklustre play to end the season.  The end of the playoffs was not unexpected.

 

Where I see the team most lacking is with guys doing everything you need to do to win.  Scraping, clawing, leaving it all on the ice.  Instead, we got deflated by a bad call or an untimely goal.  We pass off, instead of taking the shot and attacking the rebounds.   Blowing a 4-1 lead isn't about goaltending, it's about playing 60 minutes.  It's about supporting the guy behind you. 

I am thinking(Ducks curse aside) even the Blackhawks would have been a better 1st round matchup for us.

[AlbertaBoy12]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Advancing further is like catching lightening in a bottle some times.  You get a good matchup in round one and you build momentum.  But part of it is making sure you roll into the playoffs, not stumble.  We had opportunity to win the division and came up short with lacklustre play to end the season.  The end of the playoffs was not unexpected.

The playoffs can be about catching lighting in a bottle but it can also be about bounces which is very similar.

 

While I do think we could have won a game or two in the first round, the playoffs can go anyway nothing is for sure. 

2 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I am thinking(Ducks curse aside) even the Blackhawks would have been a better 1st round matchup for us.

I dont know if the ducks were necessarily a bad match up for us, but I think we would have stood a better chance against the hawks youre not wrong about that. I really think we could have beat the ducks, but we kind of stumbled into the playoffs as TD said, and I think next year will be better.

[DirtyDeeds]

Just now, AlbertaBoy12 said:

The playoffs can be about catching lighting in a bottle but it can also be about bounces which is very similar.

 

While I do think we could have won a game or two in the first round, the playoffs can go anyway nothing is for sure. 

I dont know if the ducks were necessarily a bad match up for us, but I think we would have stood a better chance against the hawks youre not wrong about that. I really think we could have beat the ducks, but we kind of stumbled into the playoffs as TD said, and I think next year will be better.

I am not so sure about this. They had home ice advantage and we have not beat them there for what a decade? Just because some think we played well, they won 4 straight.

 

How does the old expression go? Close only counts in horseshoes?

 

Even in hindsight, I can see no reason to believe we could have beaten them. As well even what ifs looks just as dismal.

[AlbertaBoy12]

2 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I am not so sure about this. They had home ice advantage and we have not beat them there for what a decade? Just because some think we played well, they won 4 straight.

 

How does the old expression go? Close only counts in horseshoes?

 

Even in hindsight, I can see no reason to believe we could have beaten them. As well even what ifs looks just as dismal.

I agree, and you are right close only counts in horseshoes.

 

Im not trying to live in what ifs, I just dont think the team is that bad off because we lost in 4 games. I just think its totally possible things could have gone differently with a few bounces.

 

What ifs aside, I think the team will be that much better next year.

[phoenix66]

23 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I agree, and you are right close only counts in horseshoes.

 

Im not trying to live in what ifs, I just dont think the team is that bad off because we lost in 4 games. I just think its totally possible things could have gone differently with a few bounces.

 

What ifs aside, I think the team will be that much better next year.

absolutely , like Versteeg says , regardless it says 4-0 in the stats book now .. but to take the positives we were in every single game.. we did outplay them I feel in 4/4 games..  Oilers cant say that ...

took us about about 37 min to Gas a 3 goal lead.. Oilers did it in 3

We Dont have 2 x 6M albatross contracts that need to be moved this summer

 

all our issues are immediately addressable this summer and for once some can be answered from within 

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I am thinking(Ducks curse aside) even the Blackhawks would have been a better 1st round matchup for us.

 

I can think of a few matchups that I would have preferred for round one:

Hawks - maybe they were afflicted by bad goaltending, but we can at least match up with this team most nights

Preds - for some reason, we match up well

Sharks - I would have liked our chances

Blues - apart from Allen, I haven't been too impressed with the team

Wild - very little game from them since their big wining streak

[conundrumed]

4 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

no.. he was not a generational player. Not even close. He was an exceptional 1st ballot Hall of fame player. 

 

Guys please don't get sucked into the media hype. They have to talk about the best players coming into the league and hand out the generational handle like free sample candy. There is very few players deserving this title. A generation is 20+ years. It is not every seasons best player.......

Actually I'm agreeing with you, I don't even know what it means.

That's why I brought up St Louee. Was he one of the best of his generation? Yes. Was he "generational"? No.

Like you say, it's just a catchphrase tossed around like candy. *mmmm, candyyy*lol

[phoenix66]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I can think of a few matchups that I would have preferred for round one:

Hawks - maybe they were afflicted by bad goaltending, but we can at least match up with this team most nights

Preds - for some reason, we match up well

Sharks - I would have liked our chances

Blues - apart from Allen, I haven't been too impressed with the team

Wild - very little game from them since their big wining streak

I would have even taken the Oilers.. by the time we got on track and improved our play and defense we were done playing them . I believe we beat them too.

[DirtyDeeds]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Actually I'm agreeing with you, I don't even know what it means.

That's why I brought up St Louee. Was he one of the best of his generation? Yes. Was he "generational"? No.

Like you say, it's just a catchphrase tossed around like candy. *mmmm, candyyy*lol

I'd put him pretty close to Iggy in stature.. Franchise? probably in most eyes. 1st ballot Hall of Famer... pretty sure there too...

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I'd put him pretty close to Iggy in stature.. Franchise? probably in most eyes. 1st ballot Hall of Famer... pretty sure there too...

only 4 would put I in that conversation in my lifetime memory as "generational"

Gretzky

Lemieux

Crosby

McDavid (and the jury is out there .. but so far I admit hes living up to it )

 

Many get the Franchise tag..

[DirtyDeeds]

14 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

only 4 would put I in that conversation in my lifetime memory as "generational"

Gretzky

Lemieux

Crosby

McDavid (and the jury is out there .. but so far I admit hes living up to it )

 

Many get the Franchise tag..

While I pretty much agree, you could discuss the question, Is Crosby even generational? It may be due to injuries but he is not head and shoulders above everyone else like Gretzky or Lemieux was. Just asking..

 

 

Depends on how/where you draw the line I suppose.

 

From my lifetime I would add 2 players as generational to the above list. Bobby Orr and Gordie Howe, and both I would slot above Crosby. There were others I listened to on the radio but without being able to see them it is hard to tell if they were just Franchise Players or also Generational.

[phoenix66]

On 5/5/2017 at 0:50 PM, MAC331 said:

I'm sure this will get addressed sooner rather than later. Gaudreau can do a number of things to help himself out there.

yup. people keep comparing him to St Louis,  but there was a reason MSL was able to look after himself..

 

MSL  5'8" 176 lbs

JG - 5'9" 157 lbs

 

basically he needs about 20 lbs.. and much like MSL, lower body primarily 

 

I'll also say i believe JG is more talented than Martin,  but he needs to add the strength so he can muscle through people and not get knocked off his feet all the time , that was MSL's best quality , he could not only go around you , he also went through you