WHO ARE THE CALGARY FLAMES???

[Thebrewcrew]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I forget, what is Wednesday?  We play the Oilers on Thursday and Saturday.

MTL plays TOR Wednesday.  Is that what you refer to?

 

Apparently, I can't keep track of the days lol.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Apparently, I can't keep track of the days lol.

 

I wasn't sure if you meant crucial for MTL, is all.

This is a big week for us, MTL and VAN.

Let's hope we win and they both lose.

[rickross]

Lots of turnover this off season, over a quarter of the way thru this season and this team is still in the process of finding itself. I can’t say any of the new additions have firmly solidified a role just yet. Let’s hope Sutter gets this team firing on all cylinders and establishes a winning identity before it’s too late!

[tmac70]

13 hours ago, rickross said:

Lots of turnover this off season, over a quarter of the way thru this season and this team is still in the process of finding itself. I can’t say any of the new additions have firmly solidified a role just yet. Let’s hope Sutter gets this team firing on all cylinders and establishes a winning identity before it’s too late!

This is a player issue not a coaching issue. For me if I have to commend you for effort your in the wrong league. The issue is this club has a huge issue with execution and engagement. You can have the best X and O plans in place but if there is an inability to engage and execute its doesn't matter how good your coach is if your players can't do it. 

[cross16]

Obviously really clear this group hasn’t found their way yet but I’m not letting the coaching staff off the hook here.  While engagement is an issue I also don’t see the game plan in terms of how this team is supposed to play. At times it’s uptempo, at times it’s low event but there isn’t any consistency to it, which for me reflects on your coaching staff. Low event is not how this team was built either so I think it’s definitely fair to question if Sutter has the correct pulse on his team. 
 

everyone, coaches included, are still trying to find their way which isn’t a huge surprise nor a large concern yet imo. 
 

honestly this group just needs to find a way to get into the playoffs and try to get hot at the right time. I don’t think it’s realistic for a team with as much turnover as they had to have a really successful regular season. Takes time to learn to win as a group. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Obviously really clear this group hasn’t found their way yet but I’m not letting the coaching staff off the hook here.  While engagement is an issue I also don’t see the game plan in terms of how this team is supposed to play. At times it’s uptempo, at times it’s low event but there isn’t any consistency to it, which for me reflects on your coaching staff. Low event is not how this team was built either so I think it’s definitely fair to question if Sutter has the correct pulse on his team. 
 

everyone, coaches included, are still trying to find their way which isn’t a huge surprise nor a large concern yet imo. 
 

honestly this group just needs to find a way to get into the playoffs and try to get hot at the right time. I don’t think it’s realistic for a team with as much turnover as they had to have a really successful regular season. Takes time to learn to win as a group. 

 

I really don't know what to make of it.  The coach seems to believe that you follow up a strong shift with the 4th line.  It just seems like he just says next and the players go out.  No thought to who is out there or is maybe set to go out.  As a result (on the road at least) we are getting hemmed in and no chance to change.  Some minor forechacking and then back to our end.  Last two games, they have been sat more than not.  Poor results for them.

 

So coaching thinks that we have a strong 4th line.  It's one of the worst in the league.  There's a price for that old identity.  The goal was for the Dome to be a tough place to win, but it's become a place where we intentially put out the worst line out there given the other coach's choice.

 

Anyway, getting away from the point at hand.  Sutter criticized the entire team about CBJ game except Markstrom and Tanev.  Said they played opposite to the toles they have.  The D was really bad.  Even though it was a sad game, it looked like the team was trying to figure out how to play without coaching.  Trying to change a gameplan on the fly.  Maybe that is the cause of the up and down play?  Can't figure out how they are supposed to win 3-2 games or 2-1 games.    

[jjgallow]

On 12/10/2022 at 9:27 AM, travel_dude said:

 

I really don't know what to make of it.  The coach seems to believe that you follow up a strong shift with the 4th line.  It just seems like he just says next and the players go out.  No thought to who is out there or is maybe set to go out.  As a result (on the road at least) we are getting hemmed in and no chance to change.  Some minor forechacking and then back to our end.  Last two games, they have been sat more than not.  Poor results for them.

 

So coaching thinks that we have a strong 4th line.  It's one of the worst in the league.  There's a price for that old identity.  The goal was for the Dome to be a tough place to win, but it's become a place where we intentially put out the worst line out there given the other coach's choice.

 

Anyway, getting away from the point at hand.  Sutter criticized the entire team about CBJ game except Markstrom and Tanev.  Said they played opposite to the toles they have.  The D was really bad.  Even though it was a sad game, it looked like the team was trying to figure out how to play without coaching.  Trying to change a gameplan on the fly.  Maybe that is the cause of the up and down play?  Can't figure out how they are supposed to win 3-2 games or 2-1 games.    

 

 

I am starting to really love the negativity in here!  A warmer embrace by the day

 

Excited for when we get past the blame the coach part though.   We gone through a lot of coaches already, we know how that goes.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

As of now the Flames are a bubble team, personally thats where I want them. I know theres no correlation but when they dominated the regular season the eventual playoff performance was disappointing. Maybe engagement needs to be forced on them, maybe desperation hockey is whats needed. Having momentum going into the playoffs may not be a bad thing compared to locking up a spot early and playing safe.

 

/2cents

[The_People1]

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

As of now the Flames are a bubble team, personally thats where I want them. I know theres no correlation but when they dominated the regular season the eventual playoff performance was disappointing. Maybe engagement needs to be forced on them, maybe desperation hockey is whats needed. Having momentum going into the playoffs may not be a bad thing compared to locking up a spot early and playing safe.

 

/2cents

 

Perhaps.  Last season we knew we were going to make the playoffs by December and didn't play meaningful games down the stretch.  This is a change.  

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

I am starting to really love the negativity in here!  A warmer embrace by the day

 

Excited for when we get past the blame the coach part though.   We gone through a lot of coaches already, we know how that goes.

 

When the coach gets past simply rolling 4 lines on the road and thinking a line with Lucic bring it....

When the coach doesn't get outcoached by a rookie head coach in the playoffs.

Not saying we need to change coaches, just need to adapt.

This team is not the cup inning Kings team.

Nice to win 2-0 games, but scoring is way up since that team won.

 

The team to learn how to play without the top 2.

Scoring goals.  Executing on the PP.

Some of it is personnel being used.

Coaching needs to be better.

 

 

[DirtyDeeds]

I think it was wishful thinking  to expect the new Flames to fit in seamlessly and replace the production of Johnny and Chucky line right away. After all last year was a personal best year for them and we have to remember that Johnny Hockey had 8 years here to work out the bugs with his teammates. I would have loved it had we been able to just insert Hubs into the first line and have it be effortlessly replace what we had last year.

 

We can all see the growing pains early this season of our players learning the system and new teammates. However...

 

The coaching is also going through some difficulties too.  It appears to me the system needs some modifications to allow the new lines and players to adapt better. Or put another way find a style made for the players rather than adapt the players to the style a bit more.... i am not saying we need to change to Flames style to run and gun... Just need to adapt the style a bit.

 

The November schedule was brutal too. Not an excuse but for sure made a difference to our slow start.

 

I see glimpses of it coming together and can see the potential of a very good team but it will take more time to find that level of play.

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

When the coach gets past simply rolling 4 lines on the road and thinking a line with Lucic bring it....

When the coach doesn't get outcoached by a rookie head coach in the playoffs.

Not saying we need to change coaches, just need to adapt.

This team is not the cup inning Kings team.

Nice to win 2-0 games, but scoring is way up since that team won.

 

The team to learn how to play without the top 2.

Scoring goals.  Executing on the PP.

Some of it is personnel being used.

Coaching needs to be better.

 

 

 

Not disagreeing with you on the coach, nor would I disagree with those who consider Sutter top 5 all time.

 

The root of the issue runs much higher in the organisation, I think we all know.    As far as I can tell the next generational player isn't until 2025.  Would be cool if we didn't trade that pick away too.

[rickross]

On 12/11/2022 at 8:35 PM, jjgallow said:

 

Not disagreeing with you on the coach, nor would I disagree with those who consider Sutter top 5 all time.

 

The root of the issue runs much higher in the organisation, I think we all know.    As far as I can tell the next generational player isn't until 2025.  Would be cool if we didn't trade that pick away too.

A generational player is definitely what this organization has been lacking. Tough blow losing talents like Gaudreau and Tkachuk but we don’t have any elite players at the moment. Huberdeau has the skill set it just hasn’t come together for him here yet. The Flames have been a fairly average team for years now. Not saying we adopt a tank philosophy but our pipeline needs some fresh and preferably elite talent. Of course, it’s easier said than done!

[jjgallow]

On 12/13/2022 at 11:01 AM, rickross said:

A generational player is definitely what this organization has been lacking. Tough blow losing talents like Gaudreau and Tkachuk but we don’t have any elite players at the moment. Huberdeau has the skill set it just hasn’t come together for him here yet. The Flames have been a fairly average team for years now. Not saying we adopt a tank philosophy but our pipeline needs some fresh and preferably elite talent. Of course, it’s easier said than done!

 

I won't say that a generational player is the only or even best way to do it.   Their salary can make it hard (first few years are fine though).      In any case, they are entertaining

 

Generational player or not, the Flames are going to have many needs in the next few years and I am hoping quality choices are made.

[tmac70]

Who are the Flames this Year? Confussed,Mediocore, Undisiplined, Unmotivated, disorganized, talentless, lack depth, , soft, just a  maxed out cap below average team. 

 

Just like every year, they they will finish 11-14 in the draft. Make a poor draft choice or screw up the development. Trend upwards in 2026 only to be right in this same spot the year after.  

[The_People1]

On 12/11/2022 at 7:34 PM, DirtyDeeds said:

I see glimpses of it coming together and can see the potential of a very good team but it will take more time to find that level of play.

 

My main concern is that "time" is not what our core players have.  There isn't "8 years" to build chemistry and win together.  These aren't a young Gaudreau/Tkachuk who we can build around for years.  These are finished products, 29 to 32 years old.  It's kind of now or never.  And if it's going to take a year or three, OMG, please, we need to face reality and rebuild this thing now.

[redfire11]

But But But They'll be better next year !!!

[robrob74]

22 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

My main concern is that "time" is not what our core players have.  There isn't "8 years" to build chemistry and win together.  These aren't a young Gaudreau/Tkachuk who we can build around for years.  These are finished products, 29 to 32 years old.  It's kind of now or never.  And if it's going to take a year or three, OMG, please, we need to face reality and rebuild this thing now.

 

For some reason, the fan tuned in to the Vancouver station when I was streaming it on the Sportsnet app.

 

they talked about rebuilds. Vancouver is like Calgary, a forever middling team because owners will never accept rebuilds. 
 

the talked about the money they could possibly save by bottoming out. Or if they don't want to, taking draft capital for bad contracts when in a rebuild to speed things up. They're varying philosophies and I think there are about 3 or 4 of us on here who have the same when it comes to building the club. 
 

I agree, I think the core could be too old to wait 5 years. We have 3 or 4 and we see that the problems lie in the top 6. Where do we find a top6 player that galvanizes what we already have? Is it out there? 
 

I Kind of feel like the team is a piecemeal. We need better.

[DirtyDeeds]

11 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

For some reason, the fan tuned in to the Vancouver station when I was streaming it on the Sportsnet app.

 

they talked about rebuilds. Vancouver is like Calgary, a forever middling team because owners will never accept rebuilds. 
 

the talked about the money they could possibly save by bottoming out. Or if they don't want to, taking draft capital for bad contracts when in a rebuild to speed things up. They're varying philosophies and I think there are about 3 or 4 of us on here who have the same when it comes to building the club. 
 

I agree, I think the core could be too old to wait 5 years. We have 3 or 4 and we see that the problems lie in the top 6. Where do we find a top6 player that galvanizes what we already have? Is it out there? 
 

I Kind of feel like the team is a piecemeal. We need better.

Fan 960 is being managed out of Vancouver now. Ever since Boomer in the Morning moved on and 2 others left there was a shuffle. That might be what you ran into the restructure.

I use the web app for fan960 and not the sportsnet app to listen to fan960. Google fan960 radio and it comes up as the fan960 radio player.

 

I think the Flames Owners have been sold on the expression of  "just get into the playoffs and anything can happen"  thinking. That has been our marching orders even when "Mr Wandering in the desert" traded JBo and Iggy to start the rebuild. As a fan I can see why you might be okay with a couple years of tanking to get some higher draft picks but that will never be our fate with these owners. They want playoff revenues so  that is and will forever be our fate. Rebuild if you want but make the playoffs.

 

As an owner(putting on my Owners cap} I would want that too. I can blame them for wanting that.

 

After all look north and see the perfect example of how difficult that route has been for them and they still aren"t close......

[jjgallow]

27 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Fan 960 is being managed out of Vancouver now. Ever since Boomer in the Morning moved on and 2 others left there was a shuffle. That might be what you ran into the restructure.

I use the web app for fan960 and not the sportsnet app to listen to fan960. Google fan960 radio and it comes up as the fan960 radio player.

 

I think the Flames Owners have been sold on the expression of  "just get into the playoffs and anything can happen"  thinking. That has been our marching orders even when "Mr Wandering in the desert" traded JBo and Iggy to start the rebuild. As a fan I can see why you might be okay with a couple years of tanking to get some higher draft picks but that will never be our fate with these owners. They want playoff revenues so  that is and will forever be our fate. Rebuild if you want but make the playoffs.

 

As an owner(putting on my Owners cap} I would want that too. I can blame them for wanting that.

 

After all look north and see the perfect example of how difficult that route has been for them and they still aren"t close......

 

Never look North.  Do it in isolation and the natural conclusion is that NHL hockey teams should not exist.

 

Look elsewhere and rebuilds make perfect sense.  Like, looking at the Stanley cup winners.

 

Or, simply, not trading away all your first rounders and getting older on every trade.

 

All they need to do is implement a rule for the GM that all trades need to be net positive on picks, and not make us older.

 

5 years of that and we'd be contenders, with or without the rebuild

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Never look North.  Do it in isolation and the natural conclusion is that NHL hockey teams should not exist.

 

Look elsewhere and rebuilds make perfect sense.  Like, looking at the Stanley cup winners.

 

Or, simply, not trading away all your first rounders and getting older on every trade.

 

All they need to do is implement a rule for the GM that all trades need to be net positive on picks, and not make us older.

 

5 years of that and we'd be contenders, with or without the rebuild

 

Don't you get tired of saying the same thing over and over?

I get that you are frustrated and want the Flames to be some magical team that does all the right things, starting about 9 years ago.  But that ship has sailed.

 

I seriously doubt there is any GM that has a strict set of rules for trades.

You identify talent you want.  Mistakes are made.  

But there is little that you don't consider when making a trade.

Especially when you can't go far in the playoffs after a fab season.

Two years we were tops in the division and couldn't get past.

Last year should have been our year, but we messed up the TDL.

Even without that, we still didn't have the right players for the playoffs.

Goalie faltered, top D injured and our top line got quiet.

 

Every year a team hits it right and wins the cup.

They don't remain there the next year.

Cap doesn't allow it with the cheap ones needing new deals.

Every year the team that wins, wins it for a perfect combo for that year.

Tampa did it in two shortened years by exploiting the cap.

[DirtyDeeds]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Never look North.  Do it in isolation and the natural conclusion is that NHL hockey teams should not exist.

 

Look elsewhere and rebuilds make perfect sense.  Like, looking at the Stanley cup winners.

 

Or, simply, not trading away all your first rounders and getting older on every trade.

 

All they need to do is implement a rule for the GM that all trades need to be net positive on picks, and not make us older.

 

5 years of that and we'd be contenders, with or without the rebuild

This is interesting JJ however getting younger is not always an upgrade. Isn't that handcuffing your GM? We will never find a top 6 RW if the trade has to be net positive on picks and get younger really tough with those stipulations. How many years did we try to find Iggy a proper center?

 

Overall you can"t just look at a couple of successes { ie: Pens } and say this is right way to do things. They were a  small percentage of all who have tried that route to rebuild {fail for Nail anyone} and got lucky twice with a generational player from there

[tmac70]

57 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Never look North.  Do it in isolation and the natural conclusion is that NHL hockey teams should not exist.

 

Look elsewhere and rebuilds make perfect sense.  Like, looking at the Stanley cup winners.

 

Or, simply, not trading away all your first rounders and getting older on every trade.

 

All they need to do is implement a rule for the GM that all trades need to be net positive on picks, and not make us older.

 

5 years of that and we'd be contenders, with or without the rebuild

Grantred we have been guilty of trading 1st away but also look at the other narrative. Bennett (4), Chucky (6), Monahan (6) , Valimaki (16), Jankowski (21), Emile Poirier, (22) Korgan Klimchuck (28),Sven Baertschi (13) TIm Erixion (23), Greg Neimeis (25), Backlund (24) Irving (26), Pelech (26), Churko (24) on and on.  We have had top 6 picks to picks in the mid to high 20's, Backs is the only one that actually stayed. We had 3 years at the bottom and it provided us NOTHING for it.  I get the frustration but  we have difficulties 1) Developing and drafitng players. 2) Retaining better players 3) Attracting better players.  Tre for me has been better than the past GM's but not remarkably better. He does get some good contracts in place but also creates issues with trying to play hard ball like with JG and Matthew. Matthew should have never been allowed a bridge deal and JG being lowballed the year previously left a bad taste.  Now our hope is placed on  Huberdeau which it appears out of desperation was given JG money in hopes he would toss the cape on and run with the team seamlessly. Unfortunelty, Hubie has been completly underwhelming and Chucky and JG have not missed a beat. 

 

All in all long winded, tanking hasn't work nor has spend to the cap to make the playoffs. Your going to have to right this ship some where in the middle.  This club has made it 3 times to the finals since arriving in CGY in 1980, in 42 years winning once. Conversely,  Tampa has been in the league 30 years been to the final 5 times and has won 3 cups. What are they doing differently than others, They don't tank they have late draft choices trade picks. The only differnace I see is the recongnize talent better and the remove players who don't fit quickly and trade high on players fast. If anything I agree with on is that is where our weakness lies, failure to regonize talent, fire fast and trade high

 

[jjgallow]

57 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

This is interesting JJ however getting younger is not always an upgrade. Isn't that handcuffing your GM? We will never find a top 6 RW if the trade has to be net positive on picks and get younger really tough with those stipulations. How many years did we try to find Iggy a proper center?

 

Overall you can"t just look at a couple of successes { ie: Pens } and say this is right way to do things. They were a  small percentage of all who have tried that route to rebuild {fail for Nail anyone} and got lucky twice with a generational player from there

 

I like to blame the GM, but deep down inside I know it's the owners.   Leave me to my dreams that this is a solvable problem and we just need to set some rules for BT lol.   Then I can sleep at night.

Facing the reality that we have to wait for owners who care more about the team and the City, is not something I am willing to face.

 

If we look at it (and have), you'll find the that majority (not all) of Stanley cup winners were rebuilds.  It's not a small percentage it is the majority.

 

Now, I am NOT saying that the majority of rebuilds win Stanley cups lol.   Obviously, winning a cup is hard and rebuilding is not a free ticket.   I'm just saying there's more to it than just looking up north for ...wisdom

[jjgallow]

49 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Grantred we have been guilty of trading 1st away but also look at the other narrative. Bennett (4), Chucky (6), Monahan (6) , Valimaki (16), Jankowski (21), Emile Poirier, (22) Korgan Klimchuck (28),Sven Baertschi (13) TIm Erixion (23), Greg Neimeis (25), Backlund (24) Irving (26), Pelech (26), Churko (24) on and on.  We have had top 6 picks to picks in the mid to high 20's, Backs is the only one that actually stayed. We had 3 years at the bottom and it provided us NOTHING for it.  I get the frustration but  we have difficulties 1) Developing and drafitng players. 2) Retaining better players 3) Attracting better players.  Tre for me has been better than the past GM's but not remarkably better. He does get some good contracts in place but also creates issues with trying to play hard ball like with JG and Matthew. Matthew should have never been allowed a bridge deal and JG being lowballed the year previously left a bad taste.  Now our hope is placed on  Huberdeau which it appears out of desperation was given JG money in hopes he would toss the cape on and run with the team seamlessly. Unfortunelty, Hubie has been completly underwhelming and Chucky and JG have not missed a beat. 

 

All in all long winded, tanking hasn't work nor has spend to the cap to make the playoffs. Your going to have to right this ship some where in the middle.  This club has made it 3 times to the finals since arriving in CGY in 1980, in 42 years winning once. Conversely,  Tampa has been in the league 30 years been to the final 5 times and has won 3 cups. What are they doing differently than others, They don't tank they have late draft choices trade picks. The only differnace I see is the recongnize talent better and the remove players who don't fit quickly and trade high on players fast. If anything I agree with on is that is where our weakness lies, failure to regonize talent, fire fast and trade high

 

 

"tanking" isn't really the right word, that's more the word used by impatient fans who hate the idea of investing in the future lol.

 

"rebuilding" is a better word,

 

"investing in the future" is what we're really talking about.  and it doesn't have to be generational players although they are great.

 

Tampa has done 2 rebuilds, one before their first cup, then another before their next 2.

 

 

To be completely fair, the Flames also did 2 rebuilds in that time.  In the 90's and again  about 7 years ago.  Their first rebuild, which was better executed, got them to the cup finals once.  So actually not a total fail.

 

IMHO, it is going to be extremely, extremely hard for the Flames to avoid a rebuild, no matter what we or the owners think.

 

2 reasons:

 

1.  Recession.  spending to the cap could get ruled out as a strategy.   First sign of this was when we didn't buy out Lucic/Monahan.

 

2.  sacrifice your future long enough and it is the most straightforward path to a rebuild, even tanking.  reap what u sow.