Call Ups

[CheersMan]

I wish Valimaki all the best too. ARI dressed 7 dmen last night, Valimaki got the fewest minutes with no SH or PP time, looks like he is still a work in progress and fighting for ice time on one of the weaker teams in the league. I think the knock on him is that we doesn’t evade the big hit and he’s not the fastest, he might have a decent career if he can avoid sick bay.

[zima]

Another waisted first round pick we should give up all our firsts and trade for 4 and 6th rounders. We seem to fail miserably on first round picks. 

[sak22]

What I think hurt Valimaki the most here was not having the option to start in the AHL on his return to North America, by the time that league started the NHL was already a month in.

 

As far as 1st round picks go, we had one miss (Bennett), one unfortunate circumstance (Valimaki), one derailed by injuries (Monahan), and one who many here deemed not worth $9.5M without Gaudreau.  We can be butthurt about players leaving, but the fanbase held the door open at points for all those players.

[flames for life]

Monahan followed the path of many first rounders before him in the league.  He gave us some really good years before being derailed by injuries.  His trade was to start afresh as much as giving cap space for the team.  We can attempt to call Monahan’s tenure with Calgary a failure, or his trade abysmal, but if all players in the trades were playing their potential then this conversation would not exist.  Monahan gave us some of the best years of his career, and I for one, am grateful.  Truthfully, if Monahan is available at the end of this year, at a third of the cost, I would take him for even the 4th line centre.  He would be a huge upgrade on Lewis and Rooney combined!

[cross16]

I don't even think you can call Bennett a miss now either. 49 points last year and 21 in 25 this year. The miss was on developing him and not the pick IMO. He is currently 9th in goals and points in his draft year, for the 4th overall pick that isn't terrible.  They also turned him into Toffoli and turned Baertschi into Rasmus Andersson. 

 

Should also point out that Valimaki tore his ACL which is still a pretty major injury in hockey. Before he did that he was trending well and was their best defender against Colorado in the payoffs that year. 

 

 

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I don't even think you can call Bennett a miss now either. 49 points last year and 21 in 25 this year. The miss was on developing him and not the pick IMO. He is currently 9th in goals and points in his draft year, for the 4th overall pick that isn't terrible.  They also turned him into Toffoli and turned Baertschi into Rasmus Andersson. 

 

Should also point out that Valimaki tore his ACL which is still a pretty major injury in hockey. Before he did that he was trending well and was their best defender against Colorado in the payoffs that year. 

 

 

 

My regrets with Bennett come from poor usage on the team, resulting in him wanting out.

Regrets with Valimaki was simply the loss of a depth defender where Mackey hasn't exactly proven to be any better.

We made a choice to waive Valimaki over Mackey or Stone.

Or even waiving a 4th line player to have roster depth on D.

 

The Rooney signing hasn't exactly worked out.

If you aren't going to call up guys like Pelletier or Phillips for the top 9, then why not Zohorna for the bottom line.

He wasn't a top 6 player during camp, but he has to be at least able to do something at C or wing.

[flames for life]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

My regrets with Bennett come from poor usage on the team, resulting in him wanting out.

Regrets with Valimaki was simply the loss of a depth defender where Mackey hasn't exactly proven to be any better.

We made a choice to waive Valimaki over Mackey or Stone.

Or even waiving a 4th line player to have roster depth on D.

 

The Rooney signing hasn't exactly worked out.

If you aren't going to call up guys like Pelletier or Phillips for the top 9, then why not Zohorna for the bottom line.

He wasn't a top 6 player during camp, but he has to be at least able to do something at C or wing.

Z would be better, imo, than what Lucic has shown.  Maybe use Lucic to mentor Zahorna into what his role was.

[sak22]

46 minutes ago, flames for life said:

Z would be better, imo, than what Lucic has shown.  Maybe use Lucic to mentor Zahorna into what his role was.

Zohorna is big but your not turning him into a Lucic.  I don't mind Zohorna with the Wranglers, but he's a sold AHLer and that's all I see as his upside, if we were just making a call up to add size to the 4th line I would go with Duehr or Pospisil before Zohorna, and saying that I still want to see more out of Pospisil offensively.  But I think you either call up a top prospect or leave it as is.

[cross16]

I'd literally lose it if the Flames called up Zohorna before Pelletier, Zary or Phillips. Be a massive slap in the face to those guys, and honestly all prospects down there. 

 

I've only watched him a handful of times but I don't see an NHLer in Zohorna. 

[flames for life]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I'd literally lose it if the Flames called up Zohorna before Pelletier, Zary or Phillips. Be a massive slap in the face to those guys, and honestly all prospects down there. 

 

I've only watched him a handful of times but I don't see an NHLer in Zohorna. 

I would agree, but sad to say, but all three are missing what Zahorna has that Sutter drools over— size!  I may come off as over simplifying, but it’s been mentioned too often to ignore that Phillips and Pelletier both lack size to earn call ups, regardless of points or Ahl play.  
Sorry, my frustration is showing.  I have often advocated for Phillips to be brought up, as he has proven to have earned the opportunity, but too often the argument is he is too small to be considered.  Pelletier gets some of the same comments.  As a result, in this case, clearly size does matter.
 

[sak22]

27 minutes ago, flames for life said:

I would agree, but sad to say, but all three are missing what Zahorna has that Sutter drools over— size!  I may come off as over simplifying, but it’s been mentioned too often to ignore that Phillips and Pelletier both lack size to earn call ups, regardless of points or Ahl play.  
Sorry, my frustration is showing.  I have often advocated for Phillips to be brought up, as he has proven to have earned the opportunity, but too often the argument is he is too small to be considered.  Pelletier gets some of the same comments.  As a result, in this case, clearly size does matter.
 

Having size is one thing, making that an asset is another my limited viewings of him he isn't a difficult player to play against, and he is being carried by Phillips and Pelletier.  I think this whole topic is good discussion, but nothing discussed here is getting as much thought as we would like from Flames management.  It will take either the team falling apart in the standings or due to injury before anyone is up IMO.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I'd literally lose it if the Flames called up Zohorna before Pelletier, Zary or Phillips. Be a massive slap in the face to those guys, and honestly all prospects down there. 

 

I've only watched him a handful of times but I don't see an NHLer in Zohorna. 

 

I agree with you in principal but the situation is actually a bit worse than this because I honestly don't see an NHLer in Any of the above.   Philips with a very, very, very outside shot right now, definitely should be given a chance, but that's it.

 

Sutter is a problem when it comes to development, but we have a bigger problem.

 

Like giving away a first round pick to trade away Monahan, who is probably now worth a couple first rounders.  Or basically any of the first rounders we've recently gambled away.  Etcetera.   If we actually had draft picks and prospects then Sutter wouldn't be in a position to make the aweful calls that he is making.

[flames for life]

11 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree with you in principal but the situation is actually a bit worse than this because I honestly don't see an NHLer in Any of the above.   Philips with a very, very, very outside shot right now, definitely should be given a chance, but that's it.

 

Sutter is a problem when it comes to development, but we have a bigger problem.

 

Like giving away a first round pick to trade away Monahan, who is probably now worth a couple first rounders.  Or basically any of the first rounders we've recently gambled away.  Etcetera.   If we actually had draft picks and prospects then Sutter wouldn't be in a position to make the aweful calls that he is making.

I’m never a big fan of giving away first rounders, and I get why we did with Monahan.  But realistically Calgary has had a habit for decades of trading away first rounders.  The biggest difference that I’ve seen is we have been able to recover with some really good later round drafts, Gaudreau, Andersson, Kylington, etc. 

So imo, I have gained some trust in Calgary’s scouting.  The biggest concern now is that we are not developing for replacement of aging players; regardless of whether they play well or not.  We are developing for trade bait.

At what stage does a team management start to realize a player is aging out, or not playing at a level desired by the team?  And when do they start to plan to replace for further development.

As much as Lucic is a leader on the team, he is no longer effective.  Lewis are interchangeably the same, mediocre at best.  Add Ritchie to the mix, and we have 20% of the forward players that need to be addressed. 
Are we then saying that none of our developed players in the minors are capable of supporting the main team?  It has been stated that the Nhl is far and away a more advanced league than the Ahl.  As such then why consider the Ahl at all in the terms of development?  What are we drafting for?

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, flames for life said:

I’m never a big fan of giving away first rounders, and I get why we did with Monahan.  But realistically Calgary has had a habit for decades of trading away first rounders.  The biggest difference that I’ve seen is we have been able to recover with some really good later round drafts, Gaudreau, Andersson, Kylington, etc. 

So imo, I have gained some trust in Calgary’s scouting.  The biggest concern now is that we are not developing for replacement of aging players; regardless of whether they play well or not.  We are developing for trade bait.

At what stage does a team management start to realize a player is aging out, or not playing at a level desired by the team?  And when do they start to plan to replace for further development.

As much as Lucic is a leader on the team, he is no longer effective.  Lewis are interchangeably the same, mediocre at best.  Add Ritchie to the mix, and we have 20% of the forward players that need to be addressed. 
Are we then saying that none of our developed players in the minors are capable of supporting the main team?  It has been stated that the Nhl is far and away a more advanced league than the Ahl.  As such then why consider the Ahl at all in the terms of development?  What are we drafting for?

 

Unfortunately, it starts at the very very top.  Ownership is chasing a Cup and is clearly in win-now mode.  Almost all of our players on the roster are in their prime (and some are past their prime) but it's now or never.  The kids, well, they can either wait or they are trade bait.

 

Agree or disagree with the orders from the very very top, this will either result in,

1. A Cup win.  After which, the team's play quickly falls off a cliff.

2. Team falls off a cliff without a Cup.  Core players get old.  Best prospects and picks traded away.  No bluechippers coming up the system for years, etc.  It will be the waning Iginla/Kipper years all over again.

[robrob74]

19 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Unfortunately, it starts at the very very top.  Ownership is chasing a Cup and is clearly in win-now mode.  Almost all of our players on the roster are in their prime (and some are past their prime) but it's now or never.  The kids, well, they can either wait or they are trade bait.

 

Agree or disagree with the orders from the very very top, this will either result in,

1. A Cup win.  After which, the team's play quickly falls off a cliff.

2. Team falls off a cliff without a Cup.  Core players get old.  Best prospects and picks traded away.  No bluechippers coming up the system for years, etc.  It will be the waning Iginla/Kipper years all over again.

3. end up like Minnesota and continue to be a middling team. We've been in the playoffs, miss the playoffs, in the playoffs, and hover on just making it or winning the division. I feel like we are somewhere in the middle. 
 

on the fan someone said early last year teams were taken by surprise at the Flames structure and so won a lot early based on not being ready to play them. 
 

plus it was a down year for Vegas and that was an outlier. 
 

is ***Seattle legit? As we stay the same, other teams like LA and Seattle leapfrogged us. Is Edmonton worse than those teams?

 

I dunno. It gets frustrating this back and forth. I like winning divisions, but I'd prefer it to be a norm than everything having to align. 
 

***edited, I said San Jose but meant Seattle. 

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

I'd literally lose it if the Flames called up Zohorna before Pelletier, Zary or Phillips. Be a massive slap in the face to those guys, and honestly all prospects down there. 

 

I've only watched him a handful of times but I don't see an NHLer in Zohorna. 

 

Just don't be too surprised if it happened.

If it was a top 9 spot they wanted to fill then yes, it's obvious who should be there.

A 4th line spot is harder to gauge.

Especially if you continue to play Lucic and Lewis.

Zary would be a waste there.

Get rid of Lucic and actially ice a line of competutive players and I would be fine with it.

 

So we lose some identity but we have a line of...

Pelletier-Zary-Phillips

Not sure how that is worse than the present line.

 

[travel_dude]

36 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Unfortunately, it starts at the very very top.  Ownership is chasing a Cup and is clearly in win-now mode.  Almost all of our players on the roster are in their prime (and some are past their prime) but it's now or never.  The kids, well, they can either wait or they are trade bait.

 

Agree or disagree with the orders from the very very top, this will either result in,

1. A Cup win.  After which, the team's play quickly falls off a cliff.

2. Team falls off a cliff without a Cup.  Core players get old.  Best prospects and picks traded away.  No bluechippers coming up the system for years, etc.  It will be the waning Iginla/Kipper years all over again.

 

I do think it's more than just win a cup.

It's get into the playoffs and win a couple of rounds every year.

But you need a few young guys added in every year to do that.

 

The reason I say win rounds is that's where the excess revenue comes from.

Half arsed builds don't win games and don't go far.

Key is finding the next Backlund before he ages out.

And the next Tanev and Markstrom.

 

[cross16]

9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Just don't be too surprised if it happened.

If it was a top 9 spot they wanted to fill then yes, it's obvious who should be there.

A 4th line spot is harder to gauge.

Especially if you continue to play Lucic and Lewis.

Zary would be a waste there.

Get rid of Lucic and actially ice a line of competutive players and I would be fine with it.

 

So we lose some identity but we have a line of...

Pelletier-Zary-Phillips

Not sure how that is worse than the present line.

 

 

 

I don't agree. Sutter plays his 4th line usually between 6-10 mins a game. A player like Zary can make an impact there in that amount of time and still develop, IMO. 

[travel_dude]

17 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I don't agree. Sutter plays his 4th line usually between 6-10 mins a game. A player like Zary can make an impact there in that amount of time and still develop, IMO. 

 

You really think he would make an impact with Lucic and Lewis?

I think back to the games last year where Ruzick got shifted to the 4th line.

Wasn't particularly effective in the role and ended up scratched for a bunch of games.

Was 3rd line or bust and when Jarnkrok came in, he went down.

Yeah, it was cap and roster spots, but he never got another game.

 

Then I look this year when Dube played on the line.

 

If the standard was you will play 8-10 minutes and not just have to crash and bang, and the results of the line didn't determine your staying or going back down, then fine.  I just don't believe Sutter has that same belief.  He would want to use Zary in a top line role.  His view of the 4th line seems to be heavy forecheck and not get scored on.  And that isn't exactly happening.  This isn't the same as when we had Hathaway and Jooris and Mangiapane on a line.

[sak22]

51 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

This isn't the same as when we had Hathaway and Jooris and Mangiapane on a line.

I think you mean this guy Derek Ryan Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

 

the other guy Josh Jooris Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com only briefly played with Hathaway in the AHL and was out of the organization by the time Mangiapane turned pro.  

 

 

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I think you mean this guy Derek Ryan Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

 

the other guy Josh Jooris Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com only briefly played with Hathaway in the AHL and was out of the organization by the time Mangiapane turned pro.  

 

 

 

My memory fails me.

Perhaps it was just Hathaway.

Would need to go back to lines from 4-5 years ago, which isn't easy.

The point was more that we used to have more effective 4th lines.

We are basing the 4th line now on past glory and leadership in the room.

Ritchie has been the best player on that line and Lewis (IMHO) has been just ok on the PK.

 

 

[sak22]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

My memory fails me.

Perhaps it was just Hathaway.

Would need to go back to lines from 4-5 years ago, which isn't easy.

The point was more that we used to have more effective 4th lines.

We are basing the 4th line now on past glory and leadership in the room.

Ritchie has been the best player on that line and Lewis (IMHO) has been just ok on the PK.

 

 

To be honest that's really the only 4th line that pops in my head as being too effective, but while the 4th was good, the 3rd was not so it was what it was.

[conundrumed]

It all comes down to you don’t really know until you try. Camp squads were, here’s the NHL team, here’s the AHL team.

Is that an indicator that there really isn’t much of a chance?

Lucic needs to sit. His best pass all year was to the ARI fwd the other night. I hope he comes around, but he shouldn’t be playing every night right now, he’s been a detriment too often.

Not harping on him, but he needs to get more focus in his game.

I’m kinda with cross, Zary won’t hurt by comparison.

Gotta try new things. I feel like we keep trying to fit squares into circles, relentlessly.

[redfire11]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Pelletier-Zary-Phillips

Yes shelter these 3 (Pelletier-Zary-Phillips) on the 4th line. Let them create some chemistry. Give them some time and you could see results. Having the toughest and slowest 4th line hasn't helped us a whole lot

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It all comes down to you don’t really know until you try. Camp squads were, here’s the NHL team, here’s the AHL team.

Is that an indicator that there really isn’t much of a chance?

Lucic needs to sit. His best pass all year was to the ARI fwd the other night. I hope he comes around, but he shouldn’t be playing every night right now, he’s been a detriment too often.

Not harping on him, but he needs to get more focus in his game.

I’m kinda with cross, Zary won’t hurt by comparison.

Gotta try new things. I feel like we keep trying to fit squares into circles, relentlessly.

 

yup! I've been a firm believer that you gotta try those guys with guys in positions you expect them to play with in the line up. If he meshes, he's breaking down the door....

 

I look at Morrison, Bertuzzi and Naslund. I feel Morrison was a 2nd line C and they propped him up as a 1st liner.... with them he was, much like Lindholm last year.