Calgary Flames 20/21 Roster and Lines

[sak22]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

drafts are a crapshoot. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wanna look back at all of the RHS that the Flames didn’t draft that have decent careers. I get it, it isn’t good for my health to dwell! lol 

 

It's only bad for your health if you make it, reality is its pointless.  For every good RS that the Flames passed up on there are X amount of non-factors, like the RS that the Flames actually drafted through the years (Smith, Carroll, Bruce, Joly, Fischer).  The other side is for the ones who slip through a few rounds there are 29 franchises that also missed.  Finally given how much you go on about effort ask yourself, are we better had we taken the Nylander brothers instead of Bennett and Tkachuk?

 

[robrob74]

7 minutes ago, sak22 said:

It's only bad for your health if you make it, reality is its pointless.  For every good RS that the Flames passed up on there are X amount of non-factors, like the RS that the Flames actually drafted through the years (Smith, Carroll, Bruce, Joly, Fischer).  The other side is for the ones who slip through a few rounds there are 29 franchises that also missed.  Finally given how much you go on about effort ask yourself, are we better had we taken the Nylander brothers instead of Bennett and Tkachuk?

 

 

 

Maybe better with William N.?

 

You'd have:

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Nylander/Lindholm

Mangiapane, Backlund, Nylander/Lindhholm

Lucic, Bennett, Dube

 

It might be a more evenly spread lineup... But then you lose Tkachuk's leadership and hockey sense.

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

Maybe better with William N.?

 

You'd have:

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Nylander/Lindholm

Mangiapane, Backlund, Nylander/Lindhholm

Lucic, Bennett, Dube

 

It might be a more evenly spread lineup... But then you lose Tkachuk's leadership and hockey sense.

 

 

 

 

Think you are mixing up Nylanders.

Willie was drafted the Bennett draft; that was Burke calling the shots.

Maybe it was a miss, but you pick Bennett 9/10 over Willie.

He was just that kind of junior player.

 

Alex was drafted the year we got Tkachuk.

He may never get to Tkachuk levels.

Right now he is playing well with decent linemates.

He would not give us a better team in place of Tkachuk.

Well, we might have had lotto picks with him being picked over Tkachuk.

 

[robrob74]

19 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Think you are mixing up Nylanders.

Willie was drafted the Bennett draft; that was Burke calling the shots.

Maybe it was a miss, but you pick Bennett 9/10 over Willie.

He was just that kind of junior player.

 

Alex was drafted the year we got Tkachuk.

He may never get to Tkachuk levels.

Right now he is playing well with decent linemates.

He would not give us a better team in place of Tkachuk.

Well, we might have had lotto picks with him being picked over Tkachuk.

 

 

 

yup!!!

 

so no Bennett. That could mean we would have still had Tkachuk then lol... just playing the redraft game... 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm

Tkachuk, Backlund, Nylander

 

We wouldve had to have the same records.... Not that I like Nylander.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

yup!!!

 

so no Bennett. That could mean we would have still had Tkachuk then lol... just playing the redraft game... 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm

Tkachuk, Backlund, Nylander

 

We wouldve had to have the same records.... Not that I like Nylander.

 

It's entirely possible that our drafting, trades and performance over those years is completely different.

We had Bennett at level 1 in the first playoffs.

We expect him to increase his performance, but we had a coach that played Granlund at C.

We make other trades possibly based on regular season performance by the whole team.

Do we get Hammy or Hammer?

Moderate regular season success makes GM do things.

 

We make the playoffs with Hartley in McDavid's draft year.

We trade for Hammy after we know we don't have 1st overall.

Hammy means we get Lindholm and Hanifin later.

Before that we get Hamonic.

 

We were a couple points away from 3rd oiverall and 2nd overall the Tkachuk draft.

We get 2nd we don't pick Tkachuk over Laine.

We get Laine, maybe we don't go after Hamonic.

A person could go crazy over this stuff.

Which is why I just follow what we have and not worry about what could have been.

I get PO'd when we trade a pick for trash like Smith and Lazar.

A bit miffed over Hammer, but that should have been a better result.

We got something we needed, but he declined even before he showed up.

Poor pro scouting, more repulation based IMHO.

He's a solid character guy that just didn't have it anymore. 

[The_People1]

On 11/3/2020 at 1:57 PM, cross16 said:

Interesting Q +A from Geoff Ward and Eric Francis. Few highlights:

 

More talk about Lindholm at center. Feels Lindholm is a natural center.

Doesn't feel they will change their style of play from the playoffs (I find this very concerning)

Some interesting points about depth and roster flexibility. Expects a lot of competition in camp. 

Mentions specifically that Valimaki is current only Finland playing the right side. Could you be a right side option for them. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/qa-flames-ward-moving-lindholm-top-centre-spot-markstrom-deal/

 

So Lindholm as #1 Center,

 

Tkachuk - Lindholm - Dube

Gaudreau - Monahan - Leivo

Mangiapane - Backlund - Simon/Ryan

Lucic - Bennett - Ryan/Simon

x: Nordstrom, Rinaldo

[cross16]

18 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

And those are the issues of going fully BPA (usually being a LHS player for the Flames). A lot say that it is easy to just trade and sign RHS players after going BPA in the draft. But we see that it’s a really hard thing to do. 
 

drafts are a crapshoot. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wanna look back at all of the RHS that the Flames didn’t draft that have decent careers. I get it, it isn’t good for my health to dwell! lol 

 

but is the chance taken in the draft on a RHS worth it in comparison to losing (what you and JJ, among others claim) a 20% loss in a trade? Maybe more, maybe less? 
 

 

 

You should then also do the reverse, when the Flames passed on a RS to take a better prospect. Like when most wanted Taylor Raddysh (a RS) but the Flames took Dillon Dube. The argument cuts both ways. 

 

[sak22]

15 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

yup!!!

 

so no Bennett. That could mean we would have still had Tkachuk then lol... just playing the redraft game... 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm

Tkachuk, Backlund, Nylander

 

We wouldve had to have the same records.... Not that I like Nylander.

I'm not trying to sound like a homer but I'd still go Bennett over Willie.  Just playoffs alone Sam has 19 pts in 30 games, Willie has 15 in 25 a close pace, but factor in Willie has averaged 3 more minutes in ice time and half  minute more in avg PP TOI.  My take is 1 has benefited more from opportunities, and the other has had to put in the work to gain minimal opportunities, with playoff results being a main  issue I don't see why a re-draft of one of the only performers for a mediocre playoff performer is something that should be even given hindsight thought.  

[JTech780]

It's not like he does a whole lot in the defensive zone anyways.

[JTech780]

Wanted to add the second part of the tweet.

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, JTech780 said:

Wanted to add the second part of the tweet.

 

But that's the thing, he HAD these chances all season.  He just didn't finish.

 

Again, not exaggerating if he literally squandered 30+ breakaways during the season, sometimes 3 in one game.  No goals to show for.  That's not even counting the amount of 2-on-1s he had and also didn't score.  Gaudreau is going to be fine... he just has to stop going 5-hole.  NHL goalies have gotten the word.  

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

But that's the thing, he HAD these chances all season.  He just didn't finish.

 

Again, not exaggerating if he literally squandered 30+ breakaways during the season, sometimes 3 in one game.  No goals to show for.  That's not even counting the amount of 2-on-1s he had and also didn't score.  Gaudreau is going to be fine... he just has to stop going 5-hole.  NHL goalies have gotten the word.  

 

So true.  Whether it was him thinking one move (one move only) or just not being confident, it impacted his finishing ability.

I wouldn't mind him going 5 hole, if it was once in a blue moon.  He's selling it as 5 hole, so he's going to get burned.

It would also be nice if someone could keep up to go to the net fterwards or even skate with him for a 2-1 or 2-0.  

[JTech780]

 

[cross16]

For me the debate is not and never has been about Gaudreau needing to go because of the regular season. The concept that Gaudreau took a step back last year is false. The reality is they as a line, and he as a player, had a terrible first third of the season. He was fine and very productive once he got more comfortable with Ward so the argument he is on the downslope is just lazy analysis. 

 

The key question and debate should be centered around can Gaudreau be a productive player in the playoffs and IMO those video are evidence that I just don't think he can be. Those types of plays are so much harder to execute in the playoffs. That leads to the discussion around with 2 years left on the deal is Gaudreau the type of player you go all in with an extension. 

 

Those are still questions I have and I think the organization really needs a plan here. 

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

 

What player in the NHL actually sees better offensive numbers after the rush and after the other team's D gets setup in the D zone?   Of course more goals are scores off rushes and turnovers.  Right?

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

For me the debate is not and never has been about Gaudreau needing to go because of the regular season. The concept that Gaudreau took a step back last year is false. The reality is they as a line, and he as a player, had a terrible first third of the season. He was fine and very productive once he got more comfortable with Ward so the argument he is on the downslope is just lazy analysis. 

 

The key question and debate should be centered around can Gaudreau be a productive player in the playoffs and IMO those video are evidence that I just don't think he can be. Those types of plays are so much harder to execute in the playoffs. That leads to the discussion around with 2 years left on the deal is Gaudreau the type of player you go all in with an extension. 

 

Those are still questions I have and I think the organization really needs a plan here. 

 

I don't agree.  I think Monahan has been the most disappointing every single playoffs.  He goes completely missing down the stretch every single time.

 

Ya ya injuries.  Every single season come playoffs.  He's injured.  He's playing hurt.  Something is bothering him.  He doesn't look himself.

 

Some times, Wingers are only as good as their Centers.  In this case, Monahan drags down Gaudreau down the stretch.

[travel_dude]

43 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I don't agree.  I think Monahan has been the most disappointing every single playoffs.  He goes completely missing down the stretch every single time.

 

Ya ya injuries.  Every single season come playoffs.  He's injured.  He's playing hurt.  Something is bothering him.  He doesn't look himself.

 

Some times, Wingers are only as good as their Centers.  In this case, Monahan drags down Gaudreau down the stretch.

 

Considering how well Bennett played with Dube and Lucic, I think they missed an opportunity last playoffs.

Monahan with Lucic and Lindholm may have been able to do thing.

For sure, Bennett flying and Dube stealing the puck would have made some difference.

 

It comes down to having options.

When playoffs rolled around JH-Monahan-Lindholm was the only option used for the top line.

It should have been dealt with when they were unable to generate any scoring 5v5.

It wasn't, so we had to rely on Bennett, Dube and a few others.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I don't agree.  I think Monahan has been the most disappointing every single playoffs.  He goes completely missing down the stretch every single time.

 

Ya ya injuries.  Every single season come playoffs.  He's injured.  He's playing hurt.  Something is bothering him.  He doesn't look himself.

 

Some times, Wingers are only as good as their Centers.  In this case, Monahan drags down Gaudreau down the stretch.

 

I wouldn't really argue against that point nor it is my central argument. i don't disagree at all that the Flames need more out of Monahan in the playoffs too and while I point to Gaudraeu more it really is a matter of opinion and I see both sides. 

 

What I am saying is the things that made Gaudreau great are much, much harder to do in the playoffs and I don't think it relates to Monahan. Even if it did, it still prompt the question is Gaudreau is only as good as his center then is he worth a contract that is going to make him a franchise caliber winger and is that a smart decision for the Flames?

 

The answer to that is no for me and I don't think it will change because I don't see his game being able to adapt to be successful in the playoffs because it's not about line mates so much as it is about his strengths and weaknesses. 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I wouldn't really argue against that point nor it is my central argument. i don't disagree at all that the Flames need more out of Monahan in the playoffs too and while I point to Gaudraeu more it really is a matter of opinion and I see both sides. 

 

What I am saying is the things that made Gaudreau great are much, much harder to do in the playoffs and I don't think it relates to Monahan. Even if it did, it still prompt the question is Gaudreau is only as good as his center then is he worth a contract that is going to make him a franchise caliber winger and is that a smart decision for the Flames?

 

The answer to that is no for me and I don't think it will change because I don't see his game being able to adapt to be successful in the playoffs because it's not about line mates so much as it is about his strengths and weaknesses. 

 

It's hard to tell what Gaudreau can be in the playoffs because the sample size is usually so small.

He was effective on the PP this year, but spent the rest of the time with one line.

That line wasn't effective 5v5.

Instead of providing prime zone starts, he spent a lot of the time starting in the D-zone.

 

No excuses; he needs to dig in.  We lost the series because they didn't do enough 5v5.  Do I think he can adapt?  Sure, as long as the coach does too.

It's not like the top line was killing it and cooled off; they were basically inept from game 1.

No change to the deployment much through 10 games.

[robrob74]

8 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

So true.  Whether it was him thinking one move (one move only) or just not being confident, it impacted his finishing ability.

I wouldn't mind him going 5 hole, if it was once in a blue moon.  He's selling it as 5 hole, so he's going to get burned.

It would also be nice if someone could keep up to go to the net fterwards or even skate with him for a 2-1 or 2-0.  

 

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

For me the debate is not and never has been about Gaudreau needing to go because of the regular season. The concept that Gaudreau took a step back last year is false. The reality is they as a line, and he as a player, had a terrible first third of the season. He was fine and very productive once he got more comfortable with Ward so the argument he is on the downslope is just lazy analysis. 

 

The key question and debate should be centered around can Gaudreau be a productive player in the playoffs and IMO those video are evidence that I just don't think he can be. Those types of plays are so much harder to execute in the playoffs. That leads to the discussion around with 2 years left on the deal is Gaudreau the type of player you go all in with an extension. 

 

Those are still questions I have and I think the organization really needs a plan here. 

 

ya, but he also didn’t look good in most of Ward’s games. He barely looked himself most of the season. He is able to get points and look terrible at the same time, so to me it just looks like he was closer to himself in the second half of the year. But I still don’t think so. I think he looked better than the first third, but it took the Buddy as his line mate to get going, then he went back to looking like he didn’t care again, but still got points. For me, it’s his engagement. He can get points without looking like he’s trying. I get what you’re saying, that it is easy to point to a start of a decline or downslope, but I think he only looked close to himself in a small handful of games this year. Which to me points to getting back to 80-90 points if he can re-engages. How much of that is systems? Hard to tell. It could be that he just didn’t buy in. But to me it was deeper than that, his mind was elsewhere. Even in the 2nd half and playoffs he didn’t look all there. Was it lack of confidence? 
 

for me, you can point to stats and I know you watch the games, but for me, he just didn’t look all there.  He will get points, even in bad games.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I wouldn't really argue against that point nor it is my central argument. i don't disagree at all that the Flames need more out of Monahan in the playoffs too and while I point to Gaudraeu more it really is a matter of opinion and I see both sides. 

 

What I am saying is the things that made Gaudreau great are much, much harder to do in the playoffs and I don't think it relates to Monahan. Even if it did, it still prompt the question is Gaudreau is only as good as his center then is he worth a contract that is going to make him a franchise caliber winger and is that a smart decision for the Flames?

 

The answer to that is no for me and I don't think it will change because I don't see his game being able to adapt to be successful in the playoffs because it's not about line mates so much as it is about his strengths and weaknesses. 

 

I could see it being somewhat not being the C or being his game. I just feel that:

 

1. the coach creates plays/style and players play to it and react. The coaches should be able to find different things he can do or a different style of play for the line to utilize him better. It isn’t beer league. Find ways for him to use his line mates more often and it opens things up for him. Other teams can’t concentrate on just him. It was what they did with Lindholm at the start of the year but somehow went away from using all three players effectively.
 

2. if he had a C that was more mobile or could go in deep to chase a puck he’d have extra options. 

I think there is a communication issue somewhere. Maybe the coaches have too much respect for his ability and give him a green light to do what he wants. I personally think it is hurting his game and all he needs to do is change things up a lot more so it has other teams guessing.
 

 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's hard to tell what Gaudreau can be in the playoffs because the sample size is usually so small.

He was effective on the PP this year, but spent the rest of the time with one line.

That line wasn't effective 5v5.

Instead of providing prime zone starts, he spent a lot of the time starting in the D-zone.

 

No excuses; he needs to dig in.  We lost the series because they didn't do enough 5v5.  Do I think he can adapt?  Sure, as long as the coach does too.

It's not like the top line was killing it and cooled off; they were basically inept from game 1.

No change to the deployment much through 10 games.

 

i think ward did that with line 1 because they were either just ok in the regular season or hot Satoshi Nakamoto. They didn’t look good all year. Sure they started getting points but either didn’t look good doing it or almost approaching looking normal. I was always hoping that a goal might get them going or light a fire under them. 
 

Gaudreau had some shifts where he looked like the best he could be, but there weren’t many shifts like that. When he’s like that though, he can be deadly. How many games did he play like that? I would say 5 all season and maybe a few periods in the regular season. 
 

I think it’s why most of us have expected a trade to happen. 

[The_People1]

19 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I wouldn't really argue against that point nor it is my central argument. i don't disagree at all that the Flames need more out of Monahan in the playoffs too and while I point to Gaudraeu more it really is a matter of opinion and I see both sides. 

 

What I am saying is the things that made Gaudreau great are much, much harder to do in the playoffs and I don't think it relates to Monahan. Even if it did, it still prompt the question is Gaudreau is only as good as his center then is he worth a contract that is going to make him a franchise caliber winger and is that a smart decision for the Flames?

 

The answer to that is no for me and I don't think it will change because I don't see his game being able to adapt to be successful in the playoffs because it's not about line mates so much as it is about his strengths and weaknesses. 

 

Okay I see what you are saying.  Honestly I would move both Gaudreau and Monahan and rebuild.  I agree committing long term to these two to big money is going to sink us.  We won't recover for 7 to 8 years.  

 

The argument I was trying to make is Gaudreau plays the same way all season including playoffs but it's Monahan who vanishes down the stretch and that's the main factor for the drop in production.  I know Monahan put up good numbers this playoffs but the eyeball test would reveal he wasn't there for Gaudreau most of the time.

 

That said, I think Gaudreau wants big money while Monahan may be okay staying at $6-ish long term.  Monahan should either be moved or relegated to 2nd line Center.  We need a legit #1 Center.   Gaudreau I would trade after he has a bounce back season.  We need to avoid selling low.

[The_People1]

On 11/17/2020 at 8:11 AM, travel_dude said:

 

So true.  Whether it was him thinking one move (one move only) or just not being confident, it impacted his finishing ability.

I wouldn't mind him going 5 hole, if it was once in a blue moon.  He's selling it as 5 hole, so he's going to get burned.

It would also be nice if someone could keep up to go to the net fterwards or even skate with him for a 2-1 or 2-0.  

 

Ya Gaudreau had the chances to score at least 10 more goals this season.  He needs to change it up on the breakaways.

 

I know playoffs is a different beast.  It's almost impossible to get breakaways in the playoffs.  It's the regular season where we catch teams napping and going through the motions.  In the playoffs, teams design game plans around stopping the other team's best players.

[Horsman1]

I'm actually very pleased with the current group of forwards going into the season

 

 Tkachuk/Monahan/ Ryan

Gaudreau/Backlund/ Lindholm

Mangiapane/Bennett/ Dube

Nordstrom/Smon/ Leivo

Lucic. are pretty balanced .. I worry most about what will be our third pairing on Defense.. With Gio//Valamaki/

Tanev/Anderson.. the top 4 are pretty solid.. Then we get into ifffy with Kylington.Hanafin.. and the new guys.. nesterov/Yeltsin/Lerby/Kinnevac .and whoever else shows up at camp.. None of these guys inspire me.. As Well.. Do we have the right coaching in place for the defense which is basically a complete rebuild