Blow It Up?

[Heartbreaker]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I can't believe you celebrate mediocrity.

 

It's been 34 years since the last Cup win and that's the only number that matters.  Who cares if you've been on 34 dates or went on a cold spell for 9-years.  You still didn't score.  That's the only number that matters.

 

You are basically saying it's better to lose with some playoff years mixed in rather than lose for 9-years straight but in the end it's all still losing.

 

I mean, I guess... but the Oilers have had more number one picks than any other team, and they still haven't won anything. They have the best player in the world, and arguably two of the top five. I do think that they have the potential to win a cup in the next few years, but I think that the Flames of two seasons ago had just as good, and maybe even better a shot - and did it without the four-in-six.

 

I would love to have a Connor McDavid, or Nathan MacKinnon, and it's frustrating that in all the years the Flames have been here, they've never had a player like that (some greats, to be sure, but never that). It doesn't always guarantee a parade, though.

 

Love.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I can't believe you celebrate mediocrity.

 

It's been 34 years since the last Cup win and that's the only number that matters.  Who cares if you've been on 34 dates or went on a cold spell for 9-years.  You still didn't score.  That's the only number that matters.

 

You are basically saying it's better to lose with some playoff years mixed in rather than lose for 9-years straight but in the end it's all still losing.

 

Would you rather be STL or OTT?  STL was more like us, but with more success with the recent cup win.  The only reason they went on sell off mode was that they won the big prize after loading up for it.  They are re-tooling more than rebuilding now.  Tarasenko was strategic in that they couldn't afford to re-sign him and maintain making improvements.  

[robrob74]

8 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I mean, I guess... but the Oilers have had more number one picks than any other team, and they still haven't won anything. They have the best player in the world, and arguably two of the top five. I do think that they have the potential to win a cup in the next few years, but I think that the Flames of two seasons ago had just as good, and maybe even better a shot - and did it without the four-in-six.

 

I would love to have a Connor McDavid, or Nathan MacKinnon, and it's frustrating that in all the years the Flames have been here, they've never had a player like that (some greats, to be sure, but never that). It doesn't always guarantee a parade, though.

 

Love.

i think Dougie came close after he was traded to Toronto. He became a beast. 
 

Niewendyk was a steady eddy. It's too bad Theo was a douche because I think that ruffled a few feathers the wrong way, and we could have built around him a bit more too. 
 

losing Cliff changed a lot. 

[cross16]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I can't believe you celebrate mediocrity.

 

It's been 34 years since the last Cup win and that's the only number that matters.  Who cares if you've been on 34 dates or went on a cold spell for 9-years.  You still didn't score.  That's the only number that matters.

 

You are basically saying it's better to lose with some playoff years mixed in rather than lose for 9-years straight but in the end it's all still losing.

 

Must be nice to cheer for Florida, Islanders, Leafs, Oilers, Detroit, Montreal, Columbus. You know all those clubs that apparently don't celebrate mediocrity and are doing so much better than the Flames. 

 

it's fine to like rebuilds but we have to stop acting like rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success and an easy ticket to a cup. Think it's unfair to suggest that because someone doesn't want to see a team live in the basement that it means they are ok with mediocrity. The chances of a rebuild leading to more mediocrity are stronger than them leading to a cup (especially based on your barometer for success)

 

[robrob74]

14 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Must be nice to cheer for Florida, Islanders, Leafs, Oilers, Detroit, Montreal, Columbus. You know all those clubs that apparently don't celebrate mediocrity and are doing so much better than the Flames. 

 

it's fine to like rebuilds but we have to stop acting like rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success and an easy ticket to a cup. Think it's unfair to suggest that because someone doesn't want to see a team live in the basement that it means they are ok with mediocrity. The chances of a rebuild leading to more mediocrity are stronger than them leading to a cup (especially based on your barometer for success)

 

i still think this argument goes both ways. I don't think you can believe in your teams drafting scouting and think this way. Many say look at the oilers, look at Buffalo, but all of those teams haven't done anything with their draft picks beyond the first round. If you are only relying on top 7 of drafts first rounders and not hitting deep in the draft, then that argument makes perfect sense. 
 

for every team you argue that didn't do well picking high in the draft, you have Stanley cup or contending teams who do. 
 

would I rather be the Leafs? Yes. Oilers? No, but I'd like to have a McDavid talent. If you believe in the scouts, getting a McDavid would be great! 
 

i think those who use that argument actually don't believe in our scouting department. 

[Heartbreaker]

20 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Must be nice to cheer for Florida, Islanders, Leafs, Oilers, Detroit, Montreal, Columbus. You know all those clubs that apparently don't celebrate mediocrity and are doing so much better than the Flames. 

 

it's fine to like rebuilds but we have to stop acting like rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success and an easy ticket to a cup. Think it's unfair to suggest that because someone doesn't want to see a team live in the basement that it means they are ok with mediocrity. The chances of a rebuild leading to more mediocrity are stronger than them leading to a cup (especially based on your barometer for success)

 

 

🎯

 

Love.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

i still think this argument goes both ways. I don't think you can believe in your teams drafting scouting and think this way. Many say look at the oilers, look at Buffalo, but all of those teams haven't done anything with their draft picks beyond the first round. If you are only relying on top 7 of drafts first rounders and not hitting deep in the draft, then that argument makes perfect sense. 
 

for every team you argue that didn't do well picking high in the draft, you have Stanley cup or contending teams who do. 
 

would I rather be the Leafs? Yes. Oilers? No, but I'd like to have a McDavid talent. If you believe in the scouts, getting a McDavid would be great! 
 

i think those who use that argument actually don't believe in our scouting department. 

 

I look at top picks as a reason why you win a cup like I look at the illusion of causation.

I won the race.

I bet the guy that had old sneakers on.

The sneakers were the reason why I won the race.

 

[MP5029]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

i still think this argument goes both ways. I don't think you can believe in your teams drafting scouting and think this way. Many say look at the oilers, look at Buffalo, but all of those teams haven't done anything with their draft picks beyond the first round. If you are only relying on top 7 of drafts first rounders and not hitting deep in the draft, then that argument makes perfect sense. 
 

for every team you argue that didn't do well picking high in the draft, you have Stanley cup or contending teams who do. 
 

would I rather be the Leafs? Yes. Oilers? No, but I'd like to have a McDavid talent. If you believe in the scouts, getting a McDavid would be great! 
 

i think those who use that argument actually don't believe in our scouting department. 

That’s an ok argument for fear of the unknown…what we do know is where is the cup since 1989? Not in Calgary that’s for sure!

 

we have never rebuilt properly ever, Iggy was a lucky break and a retool process, with another lucky break with Kipper…

 

what we have seen Cgy do has been nothing short of throwing paint on a wall and hoping for some to stick that worked once in 2004 and never again since…we seen some semblance of a plan here and there with BT but never a full on commitment always afraid to make the big change particularly since 2020…until players forced his hand last summer and now it’s happening again.

 

there comes a time when doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…one has to think in like 20 years almost now, at some point your gonna clue in (ownership) and move in a different direction try something new cause it’s not gonna be any worse.

 

most of us advocate for blowing it up, are not saying trade everything and everyone for draft picks only…many of us would be very happy if we would just make some smart moves for younger players much like Fla, Mlt and others have been doing…add in a extra 1st rounder here and there and maybe get a lucky break…it happens we got Monahan, Bennett and Tachuck by having a higher end pick than the middle of the road….odds are you add a few extra picks to a deep draft year like this year and your gonna land at least one player in that level…if not trade for them.

 

Cgy keeps trading young talent year over year for 30+ guys and it NVEER works.

 

why the heck didn’t we take a shot at Reinheart back in the day? Why did we trade Bennet? These are all things I and many others have said many times yet Cgy keeps doing the opposite…moreover, teams That did make those moves are now top threats to contend for a number of years…

 

what most of us want to see is a blow up of the old mindset and way of doing things, I for one am Sick and tired of hearing Mgt and the players whine every year about just making the playoffs, for once I’d like to hear at the start of the season about a cup run starting game 1 of the season opener that’s what’s needed and the only way that happens is with young talented tough minded players…..

 

there is a reason why the RNH/Hall and group of Olier 1st rounders failed before McD…they had that silly mind set of just getting in…McD from day one was all about going for a cup win and he still is…pretty sure the same could be said for Kane and Towes back in the day or

Sid and Malki etc…

 

and if you note all those players most have won cups or are probably gonna in a year or so, and all of them are top end draft picks so hint hint…we need a crack or two at a top 1-3 draft pick before any real

change can be had…we need McD, Bedard, Kane, Towes, Crosby, Marner, McKinnon, Stamkos…

 

we haven’t had that since Iggy till Tachuck and we traded him away cause Mgt fails to recognize his true value…he should have been given the C when Gio departed and I’m betting that hind would be a lot different right now…well that and if we would wakw up and make smart moves, that GM in Mlt is building one heck of a team very smartly much like Fla did we really need to start doing what other teams are doing that works and do that too, we gotta stop giving 8+ year NTC/NMC contracts to 30, or just about 30+ year olds as our core group those should be for guys like Tachuck when he was 24 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Must be nice to cheer for Florida, Islanders, Leafs, Oilers, Detroit, Montreal, Columbus. You know all those clubs that apparently don't celebrate mediocrity and are doing so much better than the Flames. 

 

it's fine to like rebuilds but we have to stop acting like rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success and an easy ticket to a cup. Think it's unfair to suggest that because someone doesn't want to see a team live in the basement that it means they are ok with mediocrity. The chances of a rebuild leading to more mediocrity are stronger than them leading to a cup (especially based on your barometer for success)

 

Lol no one said rebuild or whatever.  I'm saying losing is losing.  How justifying losing one way is slightly better than the other.  It's all losing.  That's it.  There's nothing else to read into it.

 

Winning the Cup is hard but that's the only real thing worth celebrating.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Must be nice to cheer for Florida, Islanders, Leafs, Oilers, Detroit, Montreal, Columbus. You know all those clubs that apparently don't celebrate mediocrity and are doing so much better than the Flames. 

 

it's fine to like rebuilds but we have to stop acting like rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success and an easy ticket to a cup. Think it's unfair to suggest that because someone doesn't want to see a team live in the basement that it means they are ok with mediocrity. The chances of a rebuild leading to more mediocrity are stronger than them leading to a cup (especially based on your barometer for success)

 

 

Not discounting your whole arguement, but... with regards to people saying rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success, I think that's a bit unfair in itself.   Unless you can provide an example anywhere here where that's ever happened on this forum.

 

I know you were exaggerating.    But still, if you've got a solid arguement then it should be able to stand on its own without polarizing the discussion.

[cross16]

30 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Not discounting your whole arguement, but... with regards to people saying rebuilds are a guaranteed path to success, I think that's a bit unfair in itself.   Unless you can provide an example anywhere here where that's ever happened on this forum.

 

I know you were exaggerating.    But still, if you've got a solid arguement then it should be able to stand on its own without polarizing the discussion.

 

 

Hhaha.. this is so rich coming from you all I can do is laugh. 

[cross16]

44 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Lol no one said rebuild or whatever.  I'm saying losing is losing.  How justifying losing one way is slightly better than the other.  It's all losing.  That's it.  There's nothing else to read into it.

 

Winning the Cup is hard but that's the only real thing worth celebrating.

 

I think that is highly debatable. I get it's your opinion, which is fine, but because I don't consider it a failure every season the Flames don't win a cup i'm ok with mediocrity?

 

Big leap there. 

 

[cross16]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

i still think this argument goes both ways. I don't think you can believe in your teams drafting scouting and think this way. Many say look at the oilers, look at Buffalo, but all of those teams haven't done anything with their draft picks beyond the first round. If you are only relying on top 7 of drafts first rounders and not hitting deep in the draft, then that argument makes perfect sense. 
 

for every team you argue that didn't do well picking high in the draft, you have Stanley cup or contending teams who do. 
 

would I rather be the Leafs? Yes. Oilers? No, but I'd like to have a McDavid talent. If you believe in the scouts, getting a McDavid would be great! 
 

i think those who use that argument actually don't believe in our scouting department. 

 

I'm not even making an argument here, simply agreeing with conundrumed that I think the concept of rebuild has been overly romanticized. Predominantly because most of the arguments for rebuilds also ignore the impact of luck. 

 

For example, Hawks got Kane because they won the lottery. Do you think the Hawks have 3 cups (heck let's just settle with 1) with Sam Gagner, Jakub Vorachek, Zach Hamil or Logan Coture in stead of Kane?

 

Obviously if you have a bad scouting staff rebuilds arn't going to work but they don't work, in terms of the measure of success being winning cups, for good scouting staffs etiher without some luck. 

 

I don't have a problem with the Flames rebuilding and have been in favor of one for several years in fact. But I'm preapred to see the team lose for the next 5-7 years and I think it's reasonable that some are not. 

[MP5029]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I'm not even making an argument here, simply agreeing with conundrumed that I think the concept of rebuild has been overly romanticized. Predominantly because most of the arguments for rebuilds also ignore the impact of luck. 

 

For example, Hawks got Kane because they won the lottery. Do you think the Hawks have 3 cups (heck let's just settle with 1) with Sam Gagner, Jakub Vorachek, Zach Hamil or Logan Coture in stead of Kane?

 

Obviously if you have a bad scouting staff rebuilds arn't going to work but they don't work, in terms of the measure of success being winning cups, for good scouting staffs etiher without some luck. 

 

I don't have a problem with the Flames rebuilding and have been in favor of one for several years in fact. But I'm preapred to see the team lose for the next 5-7 years and I think it's reasonable that some are not. 

Every season for every team has some

Element of luck….

 

yes finishing dead last is no guarantee of 1st over all nor is even the 1st over all pick a guaranteed franchise player…look at NYR with Laf…

 

rebuilding is not just the draft it’s about getting young talent, and doing so year in year out to keep a competitive team on the ice…

 

we haven’t seen this in Cgy, the second we get lucky and have a few good young  players we mess it up and bring in a bunch of 30+ vets to “bring us over the top” and cause the young guys need “veteran leadership” none of that ever works.

 

good drafting, having a few solid picks in a good draft and then trading for young talent is the proper way to win…only way to win especially when you look at the past SC champs Stl, LVK, Col, Dal and so on…all teams that were up and coming then exploded into cup champs or contenders…NJD and Fla are the newest teamsto adopt this and they are gonna be fierce contenders for a number of years 

 

as far as veteran leadership, that can be gained by playing your young guys and they will gain experience and become leaders, leaders are taught not born and we have some very valuable leaders now in Mgt and behind the bench to teach younger players we don’t need Hubby, Kadri and Backlund none of them have really accomplished much of anything…Kadri sure won a cup but that was more From hitching a ride in McKinnon and the rest of Col wagon rather than what he did for Col 

 

anyway, till Cgy figures out youth and how to build a team from that youth it will be the same old same old….and I do mean OLD…and slow team just different faces with the same old results.

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I think that is highly debatable. I get it's your opinion, which is fine, but because I don't consider it a failure every season the Flames don't win a cup i'm ok with mediocrity?

 

Big leap there. 

 

 

back to the exaggeration thing, I don't think we consider not winning the cup each season failure.

 

I could be wrong lol.  but I don't think anyone has come anywhere close to ever suggesting that on here.

 

Every 30 years, on the other hand, is another story.

 

Or 40.

[Sarasti]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

back to the exaggeration thing, I don't think we consider not winning the cup each season failure.

 

I could be wrong lol.  but I don't think anyone has come anywhere close to ever suggesting that on here.

 

Every 30 years, on the other hand, is another story.

 

Or 40.

 

It really feels like a once-in-a-lifetime deal sometimes for sure.

And in the Leafs case once-in-two-lifetimes.

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I think that is highly debatable. I get it's your opinion, which is fine, but because I don't consider it a failure every season the Flames don't win a cup i'm ok with mediocrity?

 

Big leap there. 

 

 

"9-years in a row of no playoffs" vs "in one year and out the next"

 

Which one is better?

 

Answer is none.  All sucks equally.  I'm not sure you get what i'm saying but I find it disappointing that there is even a preference to one over the other.  And if it's okay to establish that both are categorically horrific, then do whatever it takes to build a winner.

 

"Rebuilds takes 9-years in a row of missing the playoffs?  No, i'm not doing that!"  WHAT?? What's the difference suddenly?  I thought we've established that both scenarios suck already?

[jjgallow]

15 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

"9-years in a row of no playoffs" vs "in one year and out the next"

 

Which one is better?

 

Answer is none.  All sucks equally.  I'm not sure you get what i'm saying but I find it disappointing that there is even a preference to one over the other.  And if it's okay to establish that both are categorically horrific, then do whatever it takes to build a winner.

 

"Rebuilds takes 9-years in a row of missing the playoffs?  No, i'm not doing that!"  WHAT?? What's the difference suddenly?  I thought we've established that both scenarios suck already?

 

It's not so much that I want to blow the Flames up every year.

 

What interests me is the hope of a brighter future, strong prospects and development.   If you focus on that, the rest just comes.   So many teams try to skip past it with UFAs and it's never really gotten any of them to the finish line.  Just got them in the conversation.  I don't care about the conversation.

 

If you put prospects and development and scouting first with every trade and every move and every signing, you will get to a point where you can sell a veteran at the tdl without everyone freaking out, because you'll have 3 guys on the farm ready to take on the same role at the same pace or better.  (or maybe  a young guy on line 2 is ready for line 1, and you have a guy on the farm ready to replace line 2, etc)

 

the fact that we get ourselves in a knot about selling a veteran at the deadline is simply the result of having no pipeline from years of short term moves.

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's not so much that I want to blow the Flames up every year.

 

What interests me is the hope of a brighter future, strong prospects and development.   If you focus on that, the rest just comes.   So many teams try to skip past it with UFAs and it's never really gotten any of them to the finish line.  Just got them in the conversation.  I don't care about the conversation.

 

If you put prospects and development and scouting first with every trade and every move and every signing, you will get to a point where you can sell a veteran at the tdl without everyone freaking out, because you'll have 3 guys on the farm ready to take on the same role at the same pace or better.  (or maybe  a young guy on line 2 is ready for line 1, and you have a guy on the farm ready to replace line 2, etc)

 

the fact that we get ourselves in a knot about selling a veteran at the deadline is simply the result of having no pipeline from years of short term moves.

 

No.

 

"9-straight years no playoffs" then win the Cup.

"In one year out the next", then win the Cup.

"6-straight first round exits", then win the Cup.

 

Every scenario on the left side of the equation is the same.  No one is better than the other.  It's merely the path to the Cup.  There's nothing to celebrate or brag about while being on the left side of the equation.  Only thing to celebrate is being on the right side.  Whatever it takes.  Whatever path is required, do it.

 

I'm for all paths equally.  I'm just saying, I'm fully ready for 9-years of no playoffs if that's what it takes because I'm not about to celebrate going to the dance 6-straight times and coming up empty handed and then thinking that it's somehow better than the alternatives.  Just win the Cup, whatever the path.

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

No.

 

"9-straight years no playoffs" then win the Cup.

"In one year out the next", then win the Cup.

"6-straight first round exits", then win the Cup.

 

Every scenario on the left side of the equation is the same.  No one is better than the other.  It's merely the path to the Cup.  There's nothing to celebrate or brag about while being on the left side of the equation.  Only thing to celebrate is being on the right side.  Whatever it takes.  Whatever path is required, do it.

 

I'm for all paths equally.  I'm just saying, I'm fully ready for 9-years of no playoffs if that's what it takes because I'm not about to celebrate going to the dance 6-straight times and coming up empty handed and then thinking that it's somehow better than the alternatives.  Just win the Cup, whatever the path.

There are 31 teams every year with the same questions. They are all formulated differently. The same formula rarely works consistently. The closest being TBay and then a bunch of one offs. St. Loo was a giant fail, fire Yeo and hire Berube, give it a month and suddenly they plough through everyone to a cup. The Avs got their 1, but what happened to that Colorado vs Boston final that everyone and their dog predicted? All of it is very unpredictable.

Adin Hill earned his keep. Chicago had one of the worst goalies I've seen in the NHL. But TBay had Vasilevsky put them on his back. FLA squeaks in and nearly wills their way with a goalie that became the brunt of jokes. There are so many ways and so many factors. All of them are kinda fun and many unexpected. It would be boring if it was the same thing constantly.

There are many things to celebrate, but if you are thinking it's "only a cup" prepare to stay miserable. It's the pinnacle, but if it's the only reason to watch and cheer, I wouldn't bother personally.

If we get back to a fun product to watch that has a chance I'll celebrate that. That's all I can ask. Last year we were one of the most frustrating and boring teams to watch in the entire league. If that ends, I'll celebrate. I like hockey and I want to be entertained. I don't want to hate on everyone if we come up short when the effort is there. Leave it all on the ice is all that I can cheer for. Last year was a hard watch. Always felt like they played tense, instead of intense. Most games I felt like they never left it all on the ice.

There was just no passion. So how do they expect me to remain passionate as a fan?

I'm confident all of that is about to change for the better. That alone should be celebrated. It's a looong season. I'd be fine if they cut it back from 82 games. Because the playoffs are an absolute war. Go 70 games and add playoff playdowns for 7th and 8th seeds.

But yeah, there is a lot of enjoyment(we hope) beyond a cup. The pinnacle is the pinnacle. It doesn't make the other 7 months meaningless. Or why even watch the regular season? Take up crochet or something. Everyone gets a quilt for Christmas!

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

No.

 

"9-straight years no playoffs" then win the Cup.

"In one year out the next", then win the Cup.

"6-straight first round exits", then win the Cup.

 

Every scenario on the left side of the equation is the same.  No one is better than the other.  It's merely the path to the Cup.  There's nothing to celebrate or brag about while being on the left side of the equation.  Only thing to celebrate is being on the right side.  Whatever it takes.  Whatever path is required, do it.

 

I'm for all paths equally.  I'm just saying, I'm fully ready for 9-years of no playoffs if that's what it takes because I'm not about to celebrate going to the dance 6-straight times and coming up empty handed and then thinking that it's somehow better than the alternatives.  Just win the Cup, whatever the path.

 

All paths are not equal.

 

I agree with you on the importance of winning the cup.

 

But how we get there does matter to me, and there is most definitely a difference in success rates between those paths.

 

What we've been doing lately is patching our core every year through either FA signings or trades for our picks.  With an emphasis on established veterans.  The result that you get is a team which is competitive but always lacks something intangible.

 

I personally can't stand teams that do this.   It has a very low success rate at winning cups, the resulting teams seem to lack a soul, and, also, we are absolutely the wrong market for this approach.     

 

The "prototype" of this was the Rangers.  Another was Toronto for many years.     The Rangers were impossible to really like, at least for me.   A fully rented team with nobody really devoted.   They were a big city so they could afford and attract all the UFAs, but there was no passion.   They did win the cup...once, on a Messier acquisition which simply over-powered all that.

 

However, when the biggest, richest city in the NHL/North America only manages one cup on what most consider to be a bit of a miracle, then we as a small-market team deploying this same approach is ...laughable, and basically resigning ourselves to never...and I mean never...winning a cup.   As demonstrated by Toronto, who is still a bigger city than us.

 

All paths...not equal.

 

 

Most of the Cup winners had strong drafting, strong development, investment in their future, were built from the goalie (or at least defence) out, and a had long term plan.   They might have picked up one rental months before their cup win but it was not really their story.

 

It doesn't Have to happen through a "rebuild", however we define that.   However it commonly does, and we are so far-gone right now that this is basically unavoidable, so imho a moot point.

 

 

Strangely enough, I think we are all arguing with each other about how we're going to mentally adjust to what is to come for the Flames.   We'll have different definitions and perspectives on it but where we are headed is becoming quite clear.

 

When I see a long term plan (that makes sense past one year), draft pick accumulation instead of depletion, a strong development system, trades that make us younger, then I know we are putting the pieces together that most cup winners also put together prior to winning it all.     That doesn't mean we think it's easy @cross16, lol

[MP5029]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

There are 31 teams every year with the same questions. They are all formulated differently. The same formula rarely works consistently. The closest being TBay and then a bunch of one offs. St. Loo was a giant fail, fire Yeo and hire Berube, give it a month and suddenly they plough through everyone to a cup. The Avs got their 1, but what happened to that Colorado vs Boston final that everyone and their dog predicted? All of it is very unpredictable.

Adin Hill earned his keep. Chicago had one of the worst goalies I've seen in the NHL. But TBay had Vasilevsky put them on his back. FLA squeaks in and nearly wills their way with a goalie that became the brunt of jokes. There are so many ways and so many factors. All of them are kinda fun and many unexpected. It would be boring if it was the same thing constantly.

There are many things to celebrate, but if you are thinking it's "only a cup" prepare to stay miserable. It's the pinnacle, but if it's the only reason to watch and cheer, I wouldn't bother personally.

If we get back to a fun product to watch that has a chance I'll celebrate that. That's all I can ask. Last year we were one of the most frustrating and boring teams to watch in the entire league. If that ends, I'll celebrate. I like hockey and I want to be entertained. I don't want to hate on everyone if we come up short when the effort is there. Leave it all on the ice is all that I can cheer for. Last year was a hard watch. Always felt like they played tense, instead of intense. Most games I felt like they never left it all on the ice.

There was just no passion. So how do they expect me to remain passionate as a fan?

I'm confident all of that is about to change for the better. That alone should be celebrated. It's a looong season. I'd be fine if they cut it back from 82 games. Because the playoffs are an absolute war. Go 70 games and add playoff playdowns for 7th and 8th seeds.

But yeah, there is a lot of enjoyment(we hope) beyond a cup. The pinnacle is the pinnacle. It doesn't make the other 7 months meaningless. Or why even watch the regular season? Take up crochet or something. Everyone gets a quilt for Christmas!

True to a point but Cgy has absolutely no consistency, outside of most of the pas 20 years we as fans never expect much of the upcoming season, this is what needs to change heck even Chi, Mlt and Det are all now in their 2nd and 3rd rebuilds of hope and promise where as we have had 0 outside of the odd fluke year it’s always just a wait and see never an optimistic year that the team breaks out…heck most teams have years of optimism we never really do, it’s 9/10 times a oh wow a good season here and there and only 1 time a

fluke cup run….even Sea has has an optimistic year already so that’s not good when a 2 year old franchise is out performing your team Already…even the Isle and Buf are poised to break out but we are still waiting for change…I have and most fans do, have absolutely zero expectations of this team, didn’t have any last year either…year before that was a fluke surprise year before that junk, and junk for many years going back to 2019 which was agin a fluke surprise year after a junk year… See a pattern of failures? I sure do! 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

There are 31 teams every year with the same questions. They are all formulated differently. The same formula rarely works consistently. The closest being TBay and then a bunch of one offs. St. Loo was a giant fail, fire Yeo and hire Berube, give it a month and suddenly they plough through everyone to a cup. The Avs got their 1, but what happened to that Colorado vs Boston final that everyone and their dog predicted? All of it is very unpredictable.

Adin Hill earned his keep. Chicago had one of the worst goalies I've seen in the NHL. But TBay had Vasilevsky put them on his back. FLA squeaks in and nearly wills their way with a goalie that became the brunt of jokes. There are so many ways and so many factors. All of them are kinda fun and many unexpected. It would be boring if it was the same thing constantly.

There are many things to celebrate, but if you are thinking it's "only a cup" prepare to stay miserable. It's the pinnacle, but if it's the only reason to watch and cheer, I wouldn't bother personally.

If we get back to a fun product to watch that has a chance I'll celebrate that. That's all I can ask. Last year we were one of the most frustrating and boring teams to watch in the entire league. If that ends, I'll celebrate. I like hockey and I want to be entertained. I don't want to hate on everyone if we come up short when the effort is there. Leave it all on the ice is all that I can cheer for. Last year was a hard watch. Always felt like they played tense, instead of intense. Most games I felt like they never left it all on the ice.

There was just no passion. So how do they expect me to remain passionate as a fan?

I'm confident all of that is about to change for the better. That alone should be celebrated. It's a looong season. I'd be fine if they cut it back from 82 games. Because the playoffs are an absolute war. Go 70 games and add playoff playdowns for 7th and 8th seeds.

But yeah, there is a lot of enjoyment(we hope) beyond a cup. The pinnacle is the pinnacle. It doesn't make the other 7 months meaningless. Or why even watch the regular season? Take up crochet or something. Everyone gets a quilt for Christmas!

I agree. It's why I said I'd like to be Toronto. At least they have some hope, albeit, not much. There are some very good to elite players there. 
 

a lot call Sam Jose a failure during the years they were consistent contenders. I wished we were. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

All paths are not equal.

 

I agree with you on the importance of winning the cup.

 

But how we get there does matter to me, and there is most definitely a difference in success rates between those paths.

 

What we've been doing lately is patching our core every year through either FA signings or trades for our picks.  With an emphasis on established veterans.  The result that you get is a team which is competitive but always lacks something intangible.

 

I personally can't stand teams that do this.   It has a very low success rate at winning cups, the resulting teams seem to lack a soul, and, also, we are absolutely the wrong market for this approach.     

 

The "prototype" of this was the Rangers.  Another was Toronto for many years.     The Rangers were impossible to really like, at least for me.   A fully rented team with nobody really devoted.   They were a big city so they could afford and attract all the UFAs, but there was no passion.   They did win the cup...once, on a Messier acquisition which simply over-powered all that.

 

However, when the biggest, richest city in the NHL/North America only manages one cup on what most consider to be a bit of a miracle, then we as a small-market team deploying this same approach is ...laughable, and basically resigning ourselves to never...and I mean never...winning a cup.   As demonstrated by Toronto, who is still a bigger city than us.

 

All paths...not equal.

 

 

Most of the Cup winners had strong drafting, strong development, investment in their future, were built from the goalie (or at least defence) out, and a had long term plan.   They might have picked up one rental months before their cup win but it was not really their story.

 

It doesn't Have to happen through a "rebuild", however we define that.   However it commonly does, and we are so far-gone right now that this is basically unavoidable, so imho a moot point.

 

 

Strangely enough, I think we are all arguing with each other about how we're going to mentally adjust to what is to come for the Flames.   We'll have different definitions and perspectives on it but where we are headed is becoming quite clear.

 

When I see a long term plan (that makes sense past one year), draft pick accumulation instead of depletion, a strong development system, trades that make us younger, then I know we are putting the pieces together that most cup winners also put together prior to winning it all.     That doesn't mean we think it's easy @cross16, lol

they also built up their stock cupboards with NHL ready prospects where they can trade another significant piece down the final pieces that push over the edge.

[travel_dude]

I will be glad when the summer "blow it up" season is over for this team.  Not that this thread bothers me, just there seems to be so much negativity about anything about this team.  My problem with this team is that we are yet to see a good roster, good trades and signings, a good coach happen at the same time.  Have a good roster, lousy coach.  Have a good roster sign garbage and get into cap trouble.  Have a great season for results, ruin that with poor coaching decisions and poor goaltending.  There's only so much a GM can do.  That includes stripping down the team to a point that can still be recovered.  Were we to trade Huberdeau, Lindholm, Backlund, Weegar, Hanifin, Kadri, Mangiapane, Markstrom, Vladar we would never get back enough to rebuild in less than 6 years.  And that would include signing crap to maintain the prospects we do have.  

 

So, we can continue with a thread that talks about something we are not doing and justify or criticize it, but it's kinda pointless.  We aren't going there anytime soon.  The crazy trade suggestions are more likely.