Calgary Flames 20/21 Roster and Lines

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

Yup that Tampa winning the cup with their depth. Had nothing to do with having an elite goalie, number 1 center and Norris Caliber dman. Nah....

 

I can't tell if it's comical or depressing to be a fan of this organization. Just so stuck in the past. 

 

 

 

So, I was confused.  Tampa has Gourde, Johnson, Point and Kucherov all below 5'11".

Fast yes.

All their D over 6 feet.  Most teams have similar size.

Hedman a difference make and huge.

Vegas was a big team, but they didn't go to SCF.

 

He was answering a general question with one or two sentences.

He may have strictly been talking about bottom 6 and D.

Might be the reason why he doesn't like Valimaki and Kylington.

Don't hit enough.

I think he tolerates Guadreau and love Tkachuk.

Tolerates Johnny because he stirs the offence and can get results under Sutter.

 

I will reserve judgement, since I think Sutter will only get some of what he thinks he needs.

Backlund doesn't fit his mold, nor does Dube.

AT some point, it might come to a head, since we jave some players that will be shunned that BT wants to see in.

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I know you are going to hate this but we can expect to see Ryan gone.  He's neither big nor gritty.  

 

I'm happy this will likely mean Ritchie comes back.  I enjoyed what he brought.  Size and grit.  He taught Khaira a lesson and sent the rest of the league a message.  I would bring Ritchie back for the duration of Sutter's contract so two years.  $800k x 2-years should get it done.  Also RHS RW helps balance lines in bottom 6.

 

Goodbye Nordstrom and Leivo.  Not big and no grit.

 

Hello Rucizka and Duehr.  Looking forward to see what Rucizka can bring.  Duehr sounds like a 4th line energy grinder.

 

Sutter also really liked Stone down the stretch.  Stone also played well.  I expect him to be back next season.  Size and grit.

 

 

Nordstrom is a role player.

Maybe not everyday player, but played to kill penalties and forecheck.

Leivo never hit his stride, so I don't really know how to evaluate him.

I like Ryan, but he's no match for bigger players.

Not the same ability to fight for spots as Mangiapane, even though Mangiapane ends up on his butt more often.

 

Stone played the way you want an injury call up or 7th D to be.

If that's the best we can do, then we are in big trouble.

I know I have been critical, and I also know he has been much better of late, but that is limited duty.

My issue with using either of these new guys is that they will be played the way 4th liners are played here.

Crash and bang for 8 minute.

Did so much good for Bennett.

[cross16]

13 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I know you are going to hate this but we can expect to see Ryan gone.  He's neither big nor gritty.  

 

I'm happy this will likely mean Ritchie comes back.  I enjoyed what he brought.  Size and grit.  He taught Khaira a lesson and sent the rest of the league a message.  I would bring Ritchie back for the duration of Sutter's contract so two years.  $800k x 2-years should get it done.  Also RHS RW helps balance lines in bottom 6.

 

Goodbye Nordstrom and Leivo.  Not big and no grit.

 

Hello Rucizka and Duehr.  Looking forward to see what Rucizka can bring.  Duehr sounds like a 4th line energy grinder.

 

Sutter also really liked Stone down the stretch.  Stone also played well.  I expect him to be back next season.  Size and grit.

 

If you are getting rid of those guys then don’t replace them with Ruzicka. He is not gritty at all. 
 

I actually have no problem with the concept of your bottom 6 being fast and gritty. The key to me is being fast, gritty AND effective. Ritchie is a good example. Fast and gritty sure but a good player? Makes the team better? No. It’s a good approach but it’s getting so much tougher to do it right. As I’ve said before lost in what Tampa did is they gave up 2 first round picks to build that bottom 6. 
im fine moving on with Ryan just so long as they replace him with someone good. Your losing a lot of transition ability with Ryan and if the plan is to lose that but make up for it by being gritty well that ain’t gonna work. 
 

fine with the philosophy I just think it’s comical to try and argue Tampa won the cup based on their bottom 6. 

[MP5029]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

So, I was confused.  Tampa has Gourde, Johnson, Point and Kucherov all below 5'11".

Fast yes.

All their D over 6 feet.  Most teams have similar size.

Hedman a difference make and huge.

Vegas was a big team, but they didn't go to SCF.

 

He was answering a general question with one or two sentences.

He may have strictly been talking about bottom 6 and D.

Might be the reason why he doesn't like Valimaki and Kylington.

Don't hit enough.

I think he tolerates Guadreau and love Tkachuk.

Tolerates Johnny because he stirs the offence and can get results under Sutter.

 

I will reserve judgement, since I think Sutter will only get some of what he thinks he needs.

Backlund doesn't fit his mold, nor does Dube.

AT some point, it might come to a head, since we jave some players that will be shunned that BT wants to see in.

 

 

 

That is a good point, we do need to brace ourselves for some players we love to be moved and some friction between BT and DS...

 

the one thing that should be pointed out is LVK is the second best in the league and are still very big, skilled and fast which IMO is what Sutter really wants is a team in that build and style, very much like what his LAK were...I’d be ok with that as long as they stay the heck away from over 30 players it’s a short 2-5 year window with those guys and what makes me a bit nervous is that’s DS’s contract 3 years to win...I’m not sure if one win would offset the next 10 years of no prospects and bottom feeding.

[travel_dude]

46 minutes ago, cross16 said:

If you are getting rid of those guys then don’t replace them with Ruzicka. He is not gritty at all. 
 

I actually have no problem with the concept of your bottom 6 being fast and gritty. The key to me is being fast, gritty AND effective. Ritchie is a good example. Fast and gritty sure but a good player? Makes the team better? No. It’s a good approach but it’s getting so much tougher to do it right. As I’ve said before lost in what Tampa did is they gave up 2 first round picks to build that bottom 6. 
im fine moving on with Ryan just so long as they replace him with someone good. Your losing a lot of transition ability with Ryan and if the plan is to lose that but make up for it by being gritty well that ain’t gonna work. 
 

fine with the philosophy I just think it’s comical to try and argue Tampa won the cup based on their bottom 6. 

 

I really wonder what Sutter actually means when he talks.  He gets angry when asked cerain questions.  When he is being thoughful, the thought process is more coherent.

He talked about playing young guys to TSN, saying he wanted to get at least two games in a row for guys like Ruzicka and Mackey, and mentioned specificallly Mackey, Kylington, Valimaki and Nesterov (?).  He wasn;t excluding Phillips, just didn't say their names.  Said he was constantly telling them things they need to work on, so it's not specific assignments in these games.

 

His comments about being big and fast seems to me (on reflection) to be how you have to be able to contain the top teams.  Can't expect to win if you don't win battles and your bottom 6 is on the ice for too many goals against.  The D needs to be better at containing forwards.  Filling up on Ritchie's and Robinson's isn't the answer.  

 

Fast attack still seems to be an issue for us.  Slow, plodding, dump and chase is a strategy, but probably easier to defend against.  A lot of one and done possession.  

I really didn't like the way our players were distributed through the lineup.

Lucic with Backlund didn't make a lot of sense to me, nor did playing Mangiapane there.

I'm not sure if Gaudreau doing well with Tkachuk and Lindholm is a product of end of season or if they fit that well.

Prior to that it was Gaudreau-Monahan-plugin, which only makes sense if it's a player that fits and a healthy Monahan.

4th line always seemed to be leftovers.

 

 

[The_People1]

14 hours ago, cross16 said:

If you are getting rid of those guys then don’t replace them with Ruzicka. He is not gritty at all. 
 

I actually have no problem with the concept of your bottom 6 being fast and gritty. The key to me is being fast, gritty AND effective. Ritchie is a good example. Fast and gritty sure but a good player? Makes the team better? No. It’s a good approach but it’s getting so much tougher to do it right. As I’ve said before lost in what Tampa did is they gave up 2 first round picks to build that bottom 6. 
im fine moving on with Ryan just so long as they replace him with someone good. Your losing a lot of transition ability with Ryan and if the plan is to lose that but make up for it by being gritty well that ain’t gonna work. 
 

fine with the philosophy I just think it’s comical to try and argue Tampa won the cup based on their bottom 6. 

 

"Size" and grit though.  Ruzicka is 6'-4" - 209 lbs so he's got some size.

 

And ya, we know Sutter hockey.  It's not really about transition but just get to the red line and dump it in.  Then send in the size and grit to go after it.  Throw some weight around and then head back on D.  This is the typical 3rd/4th line that Sutter likes.  The idea is they don't score.  They just bruise the other team and keep them honest.

[The_People1]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I really wonder what Sutter actually means when he talks.  He gets angry when asked cerain questions.  When he is being thoughful, the thought process is more coherent.

He talked about playing young guys to TSN, saying he wanted to get at least two games in a row for guys like Ruzicka and Mackey, and mentioned specificallly Mackey, Kylington, Valimaki and Nesterov (?).  He wasn;t excluding Phillips, just didn't say their names.  Said he was constantly telling them things they need to work on, so it's not specific assignments in these games.

 

His comments about being big and fast seems to me (on reflection) to be how you have to be able to contain the top teams.  Can't expect to win if you don't win battles and your bottom 6 is on the ice for too many goals against.  The D needs to be better at containing forwards.  Filling up on Ritchie's and Robinson's isn't the answer.  

 

Fast attack still seems to be an issue for us.  Slow, plodding, dump and chase is a strategy, but probably easier to defend against.  A lot of one and done possession.  

I really didn't like the way our players were distributed through the lineup.

Lucic with Backlund didn't make a lot of sense to me, nor did playing Mangiapane there.

I'm not sure if Gaudreau doing well with Tkachuk and Lindholm is a product of end of season or if they fit that well.

Prior to that it was Gaudreau-Monahan-plugin, which only makes sense if it's a player that fits and a healthy Monahan.

4th line always seemed to be leftovers.

 

Am I the only one who really understood what Sutter was saying?  Basically, Tampa had all the skill for the longest time and it wasn't until they took the bottom 6 seriously by adding the size and grit that they finally won.  That's all he was saying.  Don't need to take it so far.  He still values high end skill, like small, fast, and skilled players BUT for the top 6 "mainly".

 

And I completely agree with him.  This idea that ALL lines score, ALL lines transition, ALL lines have the perfect balance is not only ineffective but not possible to build under a cap system.  Highly under-rated and not given enough credit in this discussion is the idea that a 4th line that causes the other team physical intimidation is necessary for playoff hockey.  Brett Ritchie doesn't do anything 90% of the time but he doesn't hurt us either.  He's defensively capable.  He's also a minimum wager that does a few things extremely well.  Hit, fight, trash talk, intimidate, etc.  No one cares for this anymore in the new NHL?  Tampa tried to go without it and didn't win the Cup until they realized they need it.

 

This team already lacks personality and has their superstar do all the dirty work that minimum wagers are supposed to do.

[robrob74]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Am I the only one who really understood what Sutter was saying?  Basically, Tampa had all the skill for the longest time and it wasn't until they took the bottom 6 seriously by adding the size and grit that they finally won.  That's all he was saying.  Don't need to take it so far.  He still values high end skill, like small, fast, and skilled players BUT for the top 6 "mainly".

 

And I completely agree with him.  This idea that ALL lines score, ALL lines transition, ALL lines have the perfect balance is not only ineffective but not possible to build under a cap system.  Highly under-rated and not given enough credit in this discussion is the idea that a 4th line that causes the other team physical intimidation is necessary for playoff hockey.  Brett Ritchie doesn't do anything 90% of the time but he doesn't hurt us either.  He's defensively capable.  He's also a minimum wager that does a few things extremely well.  Hit, fight, trash talk, intimidate, etc.  No one cares for this anymore in the new NHL?  Tampa tried to go without it and didn't win the Cup until they realized they need it.

 

This team already lacks personality and has their superstar do all the dirty work that minimum wagers are supposed to do.

 

yup, we see it this year with the Flames. I am not saying that the Flames are Tampa, but I am saying we are seeing what it means for guys to play for each other. I don’t think one Flames player went for bat for another this year, okay Ritchie did once, but we haven’t seen nearly enough of that. 
 

I think it could be that the bottom six cements the team together. They may not get the points but they lay a foundation. It’s why I don’t understand why a lot here don’t seem to think bottom 6 is a big deal, mainly the 4th line. But a guy like Hathaway or what he brought in his last year he was here did a lot to get the team going. They uplift the upper lines with what they bring. If they’re not going or don’t have the size to make a difference, they get 6 min a night and you rely on the other players to bring that. 
 

Everyone says it’s easy to fill those roles but so far other that a few guys over the years, I have found that they are very hard positions to fill. BT still hasn’t found fixtures there, and more fill-ins and guys who don’t play a brand he’s trying to put there. Ritchie might be his first step in the right direction... Hathaway was a good one, but too expensive to re-sign.  
 

there are games where the flames have to play big and stand up for themselves and are forced to outhit, because their identity is being questioned over the last few years. They got away from their skill game to make up for it because they don’t have enough of it in the lineup. 
 

Tkachuk, Dube and Mangiapane are the grittiest forwards in the top 9. Two of the three are not bumping guys off the puck for 4 rounds of the playoffs. If they try they’ll fade by the 2nd round if they ever get that far. 
 

for me, the bottom 6 brings the team together and helps sets a tone, gets guys going. The Top6 can do that for a bit, but the game turns and the momentum needs to shift back, bottom6 can do that.

 

i don’t think he is making light of the small forwards or that just because he dismissed them from his comments that he’s forgetting about them, just that the acquisitions of guys like Maroon and Goodrow were instrumental. Do we have that?

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Am I the only one who really understood what Sutter was saying?  Basically, Tampa had all the skill for the longest time and it wasn't until they took the bottom 6 seriously by adding the size and grit that they finally won.  That's all he was saying.  Don't need to take it so far.  He still values high end skill, like small, fast, and skilled players BUT for the top 6 "mainly".

 

And I completely agree with him.  This idea that ALL lines score, ALL lines transition, ALL lines have the perfect balance is not only ineffective but not possible to build under a cap system.  Highly under-rated and not given enough credit in this discussion is the idea that a 4th line that causes the other team physical intimidation is necessary for playoff hockey.  Brett Ritchie doesn't do anything 90% of the time but he doesn't hurt us either.  He's defensively capable.  He's also a minimum wager that does a few things extremely well.  Hit, fight, trash talk, intimidate, etc.  No one cares for this anymore in the new NHL?  Tampa tried to go without it and didn't win the Cup until they realized they need it.

 

This team already lacks personality and has their superstar do all the dirty work that minimum wagers are supposed to do.

 

Agree with the bolded.

 

Barclay and Maroon accounted for one goal each.  Coleman is big for a guy less than 6', but he is not a bottom 6 player on most teams.

Then again, a team with a cap hit of $98m can probably choose to use many methods to have top 6 players paid and played as bottom 6.

I don't think you can look at last year's success and say the only thing they did was get guys to do the dirty work.

 

Onto this team.  We lack players that do everything they can to win.  We had 2 players that block close to 2 per game, and only 3 others that did it more than 1 per game.

Stone was one of them.  This includes guys that PK every night.  How is that possible?  Backlund and Ryan had 20 all season.  If you aren't doing that, then you better be leading somewhere else.  

 

[cross16]

13 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

"Size" and grit though.  Ruzicka is 6'-4" - 209 lbs so he's got some size.

 

And ya, we know Sutter hockey.  It's not really about transition but just get to the red line and dump it in.  Then send in the size and grit to go after it.  Throw some weight around and then head back on D.  This is the typical 3rd/4th line that Sutter likes.  The idea is they don't score.  They just bruise the other team and keep them honest.

great but that isn’t going to win you a cup. I’m not sure it even gets you into the playoffs especially given that the flames don’t really have that elite or high end goal scoring prowess in their top 6. Bottom 6 is going to need to produce for this club I think. 

[cross16]

13 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Am I the only one who really understood what Sutter was saying?  Basically, Tampa had all the skill for the longest time and it wasn't until they took the bottom 6 seriously by adding the size and grit that they finally won.  That's all he was saying.  Don't need to take it so far.  He still values high end skill, like small, fast, and skilled players BUT for the top 6 "mainly".

 

And I completely agree with him.  This idea that ALL lines score, ALL lines transition, ALL lines have the perfect balance is not only ineffective but not possible to build under a cap system.  Highly under-rated and not given enough credit in this discussion is the idea that a 4th line that causes the other team physical intimidation is necessary for playoff hockey.  Brett Ritchie doesn't do anything 90% of the time but he doesn't hurt us either.  He's defensively capable.  He's also a minimum wager that does a few things extremely well.  Hit, fight, trash talk, intimidate, etc.  No one cares for this anymore in the new NHL?  Tampa tried to go without it and didn't win the Cup until they realized they need it.

 

This team already lacks personality and has their superstar do all the dirty work that minimum wagers are supposed to do.

but that isn’t what Tampa did. Tampa went out and got guys in the bottom 6 who can bring either size or grit AND the ability score. Blake Coleman is not big but he’s fast, can be physical but brings a scoring punch. Tampa did not load up on Brett Ritchies they went after effective bottom 6 players. 
 

I have no problem with the idea that your bottom 6 needs to have some size or physical presence to forecheck effectively. Where I think Sutter is either missing the boat, or perhaps just over simplifying, is those players need to produce too. You don’t win with Brett Richie’s anymore you need every like to have the ability to produce in certain situations. 
 

it also ignores the fact that Tampa won because their star players played like them which was not the case the previous year. So while there is one truth it’s not accurate either imo. It’s a false conclusion imo but that’s a separate discussion 

[travel_dude]

29 minutes ago, cross16 said:

but that isn’t what Tampa did. Tampa went out and got guys in the bottom 6 who can bring either size or grit AND the ability score. Blake Coleman is not big but he’s fast, can be physical but brings a scoring punch. Tampa did not load up on Brett Ritchies they went after effective bottom 6 players. 
 

I have no problem with the idea that your bottom 6 needs to have some size or physical presence to forecheck effectively. Where I think Sutter is either missing the boat, or perhaps just over simplifying, is those players need to produce too. You don’t win with Brett Richie’s anymore you need every like to have the ability to produce in certain situations. 
 

it also ignores the fact that Tampa won because their star players played like them which was not the case the previous year. So while there is one truth it’s not accurate either imo. It’s a false conclusion imo but that’s a separate discussion 

 

I've got no issue with Ricthie as an extra forward.  Insert him in the lineup for a low scoring game where you need a guy to fight someone or make a big hit.  He's not going to win you a game against EDM.  Our bottom 6 had Lucic and Backlund that could score.  That's about it.  And they were tasked with shutting down the league's best (North at least).  

 

Besides Tampa's best forwards playing their best, they also had an absolute stud D that scored insanely.

That's not a Gio getting one or two goals.

Maybe if the Flames target Seth Jones, that would help with size and grit.

A bigger guy that can handle big players.

If they can sign or trade for decent bottom 6 players, sure.

It's possible that Ruzicka could be an effective bottom 6 guy, but not as a gritty guy.

Pospisil is more in that Hathaway mold.

Probably not capable of a lot of scoring, but gritty.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

but that isn’t what Tampa did. Tampa went out and got guys in the bottom 6 who can bring either size or grit AND the ability score. Blake Coleman is not big but he’s fast, can be physical but brings a scoring punch. Tampa did not load up on Brett Ritchies they went after effective bottom 6 players. 
 

I have no problem with the idea that your bottom 6 needs to have some size or physical presence to forecheck effectively. Where I think Sutter is either missing the boat, or perhaps just over simplifying, is those players need to produce too. You don’t win with Brett Richie’s anymore you need every like to have the ability to produce in certain situations. 
 

it also ignores the fact that Tampa won because their star players played like them which was not the case the previous year. So while there is one truth it’s not accurate either imo. It’s a false conclusion imo but that’s a separate discussion 

 

I would compare Ritchie more to Maroon.  Why you have to compare him to Coleman?

 

In a perfect world, our bottom 6 are a mix of Curtis Glencross, Rene Bourque, Lance Bouma, Micheal Ferland, etc in their primes.

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

great but that isn’t going to win you a cup. I’m not sure it even gets you into the playoffs especially given that the flames don’t really have that elite or high end goal scoring prowess in their top 6. Bottom 6 is going to need to produce for this club I think. 

 

True and fair.  That's why we need to break this thing down and draft a Wright or Bedard.  or even 1 or 2 extreme high end scorers in the next two years.  We don't have the pieces either way so... 

[travel_dude]

32 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I would compare Ritchie more to Maroon.  Why you have to compare him to Coleman?

 

In a perfect world, our bottom 6 are a mix of Curtis Glencross, Rene Bourque, Lance Bouma, Micheal Ferland, etc in their primes.

 

Except that Ritchie has never been a 20 goal scorer.

Hathhaway is closer to Maroon, but not really that close.

 

[cross16]

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I would compare Ritchie more to Maroon.  Why you have to compare him to Coleman?

 

In a perfect world, our bottom 6 are a mix of Curtis Glencross, Rene Bourque, Lance Bouma, Micheal Ferland, etc in their primes.

 

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I would compare Ritchie more to Maroon.  Why you have to compare him to Coleman?

 

In a perfect world, our bottom 6 are a mix of Curtis Glencross, Rene Bourque, Lance Bouma, Micheal Ferland, etc in their primes.

you can add up Ritchie last 3-4 seasons and his point totals barely beat out Maroon last year. So even if Coleman isn’t a good comparison I’m not sure maroon is either. 
both fall under the category of not just grit and or size but actual effective play. 

[travel_dude]

Ryan Pike

@RyanNPike

Via NHL media site, #Flames have returned Adam Ruzicka, Connor Mackey & Dominik Simon to their AHL roster. All three were up yesterday on emergency recalls.

 

Wes Gilbertson

@WesGilbertson

#Flames coach Darryl Sutter was asked today about whether we'd see more prospects over next two games. He stressed they still have a full roster, then added that several kids have been given a look. “We’ve tried to be very respectful of who is deserving to play a game.” (1 of 2)

 

So much for the 2 games each spiel.  Much more important to win the next two.  Perhaps this could be the NHL sending a message to the Flames about abusing the recall rule, but it sounds more like those deserving had their chance.  Onto Froese, Robinson and Rinaldo I guess?  You know, those high ranked prospects of ours.

[travel_dude]

The only positive thing that occurred today was that Phillips, Yelesin and Poolman were added to the taxi squad.

That had to happen for them to be able to play today.

Whether it happens or not, is another story.

[cross16]

Nothing about this team makes sense to me right now. Why be so terse with the media to just wind up playing him?

 

Really feels like a power struggle is coming in the Flames organization. Barely 10 years since their last one.... sigh

 

 

[travel_dude]

13 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Nothing about this team makes sense to me right now. Why be so terse with the media to just wind up playing him?

 

Really feels like a power struggle is coming in the Flames organization. Barely 10 years since their last one.... sigh

 

 

 

Time to bring in a POHO.  We need something to bridge the gap here.  Sutter is giving cues to the direction the team is going, yet he has no say in that.  He is supposed to win with whatever he is given.  He had some pretty snide comments about it, saying he can only play guys on the active roster.  Meaning you should ask BT.  

 

This has divorce written all over it.  If BT is being pushed out by the owners, then they better be getting a POHO to control it.  So important a draft coming up and prospects we need to maximize that a change could derail this team even more.    

[travel_dude]

Ryan Leslie says that Phillips indeed will make his NHL debut today.  

At least Sutter may have a whipping boy if he takes a penalty or is on the ice for a goal against.

[travel_dude]

Who is Lucic talking about?

You can probably guess, but I don't see any particular player looking for cookies as opposed to trying to win a game by scoring. 

I guess that he still thinks we have a culture problem.

Maybe he should also take some responsibility for missed assignments and blown plays in critical games?

 

I mean, I can agree that some players try to cheat out of the D-zone and don't do everything to keep the puck out of the net, but I wonder about him sometimes.

 

[LouCifer]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Who is Lucic talking about?

You can probably guess, but I don't see any particular player looking for cookies as opposed to trying to win a game by scoring. 

I guess that he still thinks we have a culture problem.

Maybe he should also take some responsibility for missed assignments and blown plays in critical games?

 

I mean, I can agree that some players try to cheat out of the D-zone and don't do everything to keep the puck out of the net, but I wonder about him sometimes.

 

I agree with him 100%. Did he make mistakes? Sure. Show me a player who hasn’t. Combine this here with his comments today about the problem this year being between the ears of some players... 

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, lou44291 said:

I agree with him 100%. Did he make mistakes? Sure. Show me a player who hasn’t. Combine this here with his comments today about the problem this year being between the ears of some players... 

 

If he is correct, then trade those players away.  The simple thing is we did not score enough goals to win close games.  If we scored 2 or less, then we lost the majority of the games.  In April alone, we had 5 games we scored 2 or less and lost every single one of them.  In March we had 8 games with 2 or less goals for, and we won one.

 

So, if he's pissed that Tkachuk or Gaudreau were just trying to score goals, then he's missing the part of the equation that you win zero game by scoring zero goals.

They may need to play more complete games, but we are not talking about guys that were trying to win the scoring title.

 

 

[LouCifer]

Look, Milan isn’t a wordsmith. In most of his interviews he throws an incorrect word but you get the gist of what he’s saying. To be honest, my opinion of his quote is that he misused the word “achievements”. So, from my perspective, I understood him say that certain players didn’t align with the goals of the team. They found it more important to do what they wanted to do despite the direction the team wanted to go. That is a disconnect any way you look at it, and I’m with you that those players need to go.