2019 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[Thebrewcrew]

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

That could be the biggest problem. We made the playoffs, and next year after we have hype and miss. Then make then miss, then make, then...? But every time this team has gained any hype it’s too big to handle. I’d say it’s the wrong kind of swagger. 

 

You want swagger, but when we get it, we turn to pond hockey. 

 

Next year could very well be a down year. 

I think next year is pretty much guaranteed to be down a year. But that doesn’t mean it will be a non-playoff year

 

Just about everything went right for the Flames through 82 games. Is Monahan gonna be an 82 point player again? Will all the top players remain healthy all year? Very likely more goes wrong next year but if we can find a way to get into the playoffs and have survived adversity, I’m fine with that

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think next year is pretty much guaranteed to be down a year. But that doesn’t mean it will be a non-playoff year

 

Just about everything went right for the Flames through 82 games. Is Monahan gonna be an 82 point player again? Will all the top players remain healthy all year? Very likely more goes wrong next year but if we can find a way to get into the playoffs and have survived adversity, I’m fine with that

 

We are a prime candidate to miss the playoffs next season. Yet, I think we are only going to make the playoffs because our division is so bad.  

 

3 teams have to make it.  So, Vegas.  Okay, Sharks might lose Pavelski, Thornton, and Karlsson.  They might retool.  Kings and Ducks, no way.  

 

So between the Oilers, Canucks, Coyotes, Sharks, and Flames, pick two.

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

That could be the biggest problem. We made the playoffs, and next year after we have hype and miss. Then make then miss, then make, then...? But every time this team has gained any hype it’s too big to handle. I’d say it’s the wrong kind of swagger. 

 

You want swagger, but when we get it, we turn to pond hockey. 

 

Next year could very well be a down year. 

 

We could easily have bad goaltending again next season.  I'm talking bottom 5 in the league which means we would have to score top 5 just to compensate and stay at net zero goal differential.

 

We could miss the playoffs next season.

 

But the year after that, we have something to prove again...

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

10 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

We are a prime candidate to miss the playoffs next season. Yet, I think we are only going to make the playoffs because our division is so bad.  

 

3 teams have to make it.  So, Vegas.  Okay, Sharks might lose Pavelski, Thornton, and Karlsson.  They might retool.  Kings and Ducks, no way.  

 

So between the Oilers, Canucks, Coyotes, Sharks, and Flames, pick two.

Based on what?

 

This whole "1 good year = next year bad" is BS. Sure it may seem like that historically but none of those teams from that period were as dominant as last years. Don't forget those years were filled with spare parts from other teams because of the organizations horrendous scouting, questionable management, and carousel coaching. How many times was the team poor enough to miss the playoffs but good enough to miss picking a potential franchise player? Sure there are improvements still to be made but to think that the same core, even with setbacks and injuries won't make the playoffs seems overly pessimistic.

[MAC331]

21 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Based on what?

 

This whole "1 good year = next year bad" is BS. Sure it may seem like that historically but none of those teams from that period were as dominant as last years. Don't forget those years were filled with spare parts from other teams because of the organizations horrendous scouting, questionable management, and carousel coaching. How many times was the team poor enough to miss the playoffs but good enough to miss picking a potential franchise player? Sure there are improvements still to be made but to think that the same core, even with setbacks and injuries won't make the playoffs seems overly pessimistic.

Useless conversation until you see the finalized roster. This team has been building towards being better each and every year so I don't see BT and now BP in his 2nd season not adding to this year's success.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Based on what?

 

This whole "1 good year = next year bad" is BS. Sure it may seem like that historically but none of those teams from that period were as dominant as last years. Don't forget those years were filled with spare parts from other teams because of the organizations horrendous scouting, questionable management, and carousel coaching. How many times was the team poor enough to miss the playoffs but good enough to miss picking a potential franchise player? Sure there are improvements still to be made but to think that the same core, even with setbacks and injuries won't make the playoffs seems overly pessimistic.

 

Based on the current roster and how this franchise is happy with winning little things.  

 

MAC is right here, useless conversation until we see the final roster.  I hope for a massive shake up with our leadership group.  That includes Giordano, Monahan, and Backlund.  And we need to get a goalie.  

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Based on the current roster and how this franchise is happy with winning little things.  

 

MAC is right here, useless conversation until we see the final roster.  I hope for a massive shake up with our leadership group.  That includes Giordano, Monahan, and Backlund.  And we need to get a goalie.  

I don't feel what they achieved this season was "winning little things". You seem to want to win a SC but want to trade away the very experienced players we likely need in order to accomplish that feat.

[JTech780]

So who are the fallers in this draft? There is always a couple of players who fall down the board.

 

I think Lavoie is one guy that could fall into our range. I could also see Arthur Kaliev falling into our range. Ryan Suzuki will probably be available at 26th, though I am not a huge fan of Suzuki and would probably rank him as a 2nd round prospect.

 

I for some reason can see Peyton Krebs fall in the draft rankings, and not because anything to do with him, I just see some others rising up the rankings. I still don't think falls to us, but I could see him falling out of the top 15. 

 

I could also see Podkolzin fall, but not to us but out of the top 10, because of signing issues.

 

One guy who is really intriguing is Jamieson Rees. He is a very good skater, he plays an aggressive game, and has sneaky good skill. He is small and slight, so you worry about his ability to hold up playing the style of game he does. He didn't put up the numbers you would like to see from a 1st round pick, but the skill is there.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Based on the current roster and how this franchise is happy with winning little things.  

 

MAC is right here, useless conversation until we see the final roster.  I hope for a massive shake up with our leadership group.  That includes Giordano, Monahan, and Backlund.  And we need to get a goalie.  

The final roster isn't going to tell you anything. Wholesale changes could lead to worse results, no changes could bring more post season success. The point I'm getting at is the current core did more than the team has accomplished in a long time (regular season). What's going to get you more consistent and successful results? Growing and building on the current roster or major shake ups because of disappointing playoffs?

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

Just now, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

The final roster isn't going to tell you anything. Wholesale changes could lead to worse results, no changes could bring more post season success. The point I'm getting at is the current core did more than the team has accomplished in a long time (regular season). What's going to get you more consistent and successful results? Growing and building on the current roster or major shake ups because of disappointing playoffs?

PS. Sorry for going off the topic of the thread.

[MAC331]

7 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

The final roster isn't going to tell you anything. Wholesale changes could lead to worse results, no changes could bring more post season success. The point I'm getting at is the current core did more than the team has accomplished in a long time (regular season). What's going to get you more consistent and successful results? Growing and building on the current roster or major shake ups because of disappointing playoffs?

I think you addressed your own questions, your guess is as good as the next guys. If the finalized roster doesn't mean anything then neither do these questions.

[The_People1]

37 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I don't feel what they achieved this season was "winning little things". You seem to want to win a SC but want to trade away the very experienced players we likely need in order to accomplish that feat.

 

That's precisely the problem.  We raise banners for winning the division.  

 

You don't have to agree as I'm sure you don't.  The franchise memo should be Cup or bust every year.

[The_People1]

33 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

The final roster isn't going to tell you anything. 

 

Point is, we could use a culture change.  Just getting to the playoffs is nothing to celebrate.

[MAC331]

13 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's precisely the problem.  We raise banners for winning the division.  

 

You don't have to agree as I'm sure you don't.  The franchise memo should be Cup or bust every year.

I'm sure it is but to not recognize or celebrate one's successes is not the way to go about it either. Look at STL at 50 years, Flames 30 years some never have won a SC. I don't know about you but I enjoyed watching them this season even with all the frustrations.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

50 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I'm sure it is but to not recognize or celebrate one's successes is not the way to go about it either. Look at STL at 50 years, Flames 30 years some never have won a SC. I don't know about you but I enjoyed watching them this season even with all the frustrations.

Exactly. If someone can't see last season as a good start to better things then I'm not sure they ever will.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Exactly. If someone can't see last season as a good start to better things then I'm not sure they ever will.

Peeps hasn't gotten over them not winning the SC this season. LOL

[Cowtownguy]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Peeps hasn't gotten over them not winning the SC this season. LOL

I wish we had just showed up a bit more. At least look competitive.

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I wish we had just showed up a bit more. At least look competitive.

 

 

I think that'll make it much harder for the team to analyze who stays or which steps need to be taken. The 4th line and Bennett, Hamonic and  Valimaki were the only players to show up. 

 

Smith wasn't the reason to lose the series but he nearly won 2 more games on his own. 

 

It'll be a tough read.

[travel_dude]

13 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I think that'll make it much harder for the team to analyze who stays or which steps need to be taken. The 4th line and Bennett, Hamonic and  Valimaki were the only players to show up. 

 

Smith wasn't the reason to lose the series but he nearly won 2 more games on his own. 

 

It'll be a tough read.

 

Well, if the team remained exactly the same, do you think we still finish first and lose in the first round?

Every year is different.

The reasons why a team lose are different.

The one thing obvious to me is that the playoffs did not show much of anything to me.

I don't think the results and play tell me anything about the team.

Not typical play.

These were not games where we outplayed a team and lost because of goaltending (PITTS game).

We didn't win games because the goalie stood on his head.

Hard to make changes to a team when they looked different than any other game.

 

The one change that should be made regardless is Smith.

Picking up a bunch of meaningless wins with him in nets the end of the season.

Even then, he went only 9-7-1.

He stopped a lot of shots in the playoffs and let in a bunch of goals.

[The_People1]

Are there any stud goalie prospects we should consider with our first rounder?

[bosn111]

I don't watch a ton of prospects so I am not the best at looking at specifics. No matter the situation, I know there are better judges of prospects than me. 

 

Goalies are even harder to judge based on their team play, final results etc. Stats can be very deceiving so unless you watch them a lot, it is difficult to tell. The NHL mock draft has Spencer Knight going first at 28 to Carolina with the Flames taking a 6'3 LHD in Matthew Robertson. Knight is the Highest Ranked NA goalie by the NHL in both mid and final rankings. NBC has us taking Knight at 26. Dobber Prospects has him at 21.

 

 Trent Miner rated 6th by central scouting plays for the Vancouver Giants and is quite good. Puts up good numbers, plays with other Flames prospects. Could be a good pick up in the third or fourth round. 

 

Knight is likely the closest to making an AHL or NHL roster. If he is still available at 26, he might be worth the pick.

 

But I am sure there are people who know more about G's than me.

 

 

[The_People1]

21 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

I don't watch a ton of prospects so I am not the best at looking at specifics. No matter the situation, I know there are better judges of prospects than me. 

 

Goalies are even harder to judge based on their team play, final results etc. Stats can be very deceiving so unless you watch them a lot, it is difficult to tell. The NHL mock draft has Spencer Knight going first at 28 to Carolina with the Flames taking a 6'3 LHD in Matthew Robertson. Knight is the Highest Ranked NA goalie by the NHL in both mid and final rankings. NBC has us taking Knight at 26. Dobber Prospects has him at 21.

 

 Trent Miner rated 6th by central scouting plays for the Vancouver Giants and is quite good. Puts up good numbers, plays with other Flames prospects. Could be a good pick up in the third or fourth round. 

 

Knight is likely the closest to making an AHL or NHL roster. If he is still available at 26, he might be worth the pick.

 

But I am sure there are people who know more about G's than me.

 

Yes so hard to guess goalies and so, you shouldn't spend a top 10 pick on one.  But late first to early second is a good time.

[travel_dude]

36 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes so hard to guess goalies and so, you shouldn't spend a top 10 pick on one.  But late first to early second is a good time.

 

Leland Irving?

[The_People1]

41 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Leland Irving?

 

Brent Krahn

[JTech780]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes so hard to guess goalies and so, you shouldn't spend a top 10 pick on one.  But late first to early second is a good time.

 

I hate taking goalies in the 1st round, it is so hard to judge what they are going to be, here some of the more recent 1st round goalies:

 

Jake Oettinger: too early to tell he just signed with Dallas after his college season was over.

 

Ilya Samsonov: again pretty early in his career just 22, finished up a pretty average 1st season in NA in Hershey.

 

Andrei Vasilevsky: Vezina caliber goalie. Could have had but opted to trade down to pick Jankowski.

 

Malcolm Subban: looking like a career backup, and not a great one either.

 

Jack Campbell: finally at age 27 is looking like he might be an NHL goalie.

 

Mark Visentin: retired from hockey at age 25.

 

Chet Pickard: never played a game in the NHL, now playing in Germany.

 

Tom McCollum: has played 3 NHL games, career AHL goalie.

 

Jonathan Bernier: 1B/Backup goalie.

 

Riku Helenius: 1 NHL game, plays in Finland.

 

Semyon Varlamov: inconsistent starting goalie.

 

Leland Irving:...

 

Carey Price: elite goalie

 

Tuuka Rask: number 1 goalie.

 

So going back to the 2005 draft maybe 4 starting goalies and 3 backups. I guess 7 out of 12 and 2 that it is too early to tell isn't that bad, but it isn't great either.