In with the new.

[CraigV]

I just watched a youtube from Edmonton talking about 11 key players Calgary lost in the last 2 years.

They listed Toffoli, Tkachuk, Monahan, Bennett, Lindholm, Mangiapane, Hanafin, Gaudreau, Zadorov, Tanev and Markstrom. Then they went on and on about how this is a devatstating to the studs rebuild and even when the new arena comes around we won't have recovered. They actually missed some like Kylington but I digress.

 

It got me to thinking. So I countered with the following....

Point 1 Players we have added:  Huberdeau, Kadri, Kuzmenko, Sharangovich, Zary, Coronato, Pospisil, Lomberg, Mantha, Weegar, Wolf, Pelletier, Brzustewicz, Miromanov, Bahl, Pachal, Hanley and Cooley. Thats 18.

 

Point 2 combining this years draft and the next 2 we will have drafted 6 1st's 5 2nd's and 5 3rd's.

 

Point 3 We still have 20 million dollars of cap space which means we could add 2 more good players. Like Draisaitl and Marner.

 

Point 4  What I'm most excited about is Trevling and Sutter being gone and not having 5 of the bottom six filled up with 35 year old 4th liners because Sutter didn't trust any player under 30. We finally get to develop our prospects that being Coronato, Pelletier, Zary, Pospisil, Wolf, Solovyov, Kuznetsov, Brzustewicz and Grushnikov. We don't need even 1/2 of those players to make the team and if one forward is a 1st line player and 1 defensemen is 1st line then with the cap space and the current roster we will be fine.

 

Point 5 Counting all 10 players who left (not counting Markstrom) they got 167 goals this year and counting just ten of the new players (the first 11 I mentioned above including Wolf) they only got 167 goals this year. So that's a net difference of 0.

 

Point 6 The average age of the 11 players who are gone 29.63 average age of the 11 players I'm comparing 26.72 (same list as point 5) that's almost 3 years younger so next year how would you like to bet we are ahead of the players who left.

 

This rebuild seems to be about 10 years ahead of schedule based on the Edmonton model.

[Thebrewcrew]

There's a lot of luck involved when it comes to building a perennial contender.

 

Do you win the lottery? Yes? Ok, awesome. Is it a year where the best player is Juraj Slafkovsky or is it Connor Bedard. Not every #1 is created equal. It gives you the best chance, but it doesn't necessarily mean you get the best player. From 2010-2019, the 1st overall pick was the best player in the draft in 2013, 2015, 2016 and 2019. 40% of those drafts. Some of that is subjective, 2018 you can argue that Dahlin is the best player, but Brady Tkachuk and Bouchard are very good. 

Edmonton picked first in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Hall and RNH are very good players, but nowhere near franchise changing. 

 

The best way to go about it IMO, is do what the Flames and Utah have done. Accumulate as many picks as you can and hope to do well early in the draft, if you don't win the lottery. The more chances you have, the better. In the 2024 draft, I like what the Flames did. If they hit on 30% of their picks, that can be a franchise changing draft. Everyone talks about 2017 Dallas' draft, they went 3/7. 42% is incredible

 

I'm not as optimistic as some, when it comes to the timeline of the rebuild. Three years is a mighty, tight-turn.  If the Flames have an exciting team when that arena opens, I think that would be pretty good. Not necessarily, a sure-fire playoff team, but a team that can give the fanbase some hope. I say that knowing that, at some point, in the next three offseasons the Flames are going to be spending money on free agents. Every team does it, in a rebuild. Try to speed it along, because no ownership group wants to languish for 5+ seasons, 2-3 years, ok, anything longer than that, the GM has to go out of his way to improve the team. In order to keep his job.

 

EDIT- I think the Flames ownership group will have enough patience to be selecting high, the 2025, 2026 and 2027. 26 and 27 will feature significant WHL talent at the top of the draft, including Flames Alumni, Micki Dupont's son Landon. Exceptional Status player. By 27/28 I think it will be time for progression

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, CraigV said:

Then they went on and on about how this is a devatstating to the studs rebuild and even when the new arena comes around we won't have recovered. 

 

Well, they know first-hand how long rebuilds can take lol.

 

But, I'm not sure they fully understand how long construction delays can be in Calgary 😅

[cberg]

Saw that video also, wasn’t that impressed, but hey, they were trying.  I loved your summary above, more focused on what was coming versus what left.  I hadn’t tallied up the points but it is quite amazing they were even.  The devastating goodness of the changes is that Flames are now much younger and at the Cap floor rather than the ceiling.  The other thing is the whole management team is very good at what they are doing, has been consistent with good communication out to the fans.  Finally, the success to date has been accomplished without any crutches like lottery wins, even though we’d like a couple in the next three years… 

[conundrumed]

Wings (and Pistons) were god awful when Little Caesar's Arena opened. It didn't matter.

A new arena schedule doesn't affect a team's schedule. You're not running out buying the best free agents money can buy because you're opening a new arena.

 

I'm quite happy that we managed to shed everyone without taking bad contracts back. That is a feat in itself, as most went to cash-strapped contenders. Great job on the Vegas 1st rder. "Okay, if you still wanna use the 2025 1st in a trade, no protections on 2026".

With BT, when I heard the word "conditions", I'd be afraid to read how we would be on the losing end of conditions. I think he ignored the fine print just to race through a deal. An exaggeration, I know....but damn.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Wings (and Pistons) were god awful when Little Caesar's Arena opened. It didn't matter.

A new arena schedule doesn't affect a team's schedule. You're not running out buying the best free agents money can buy because you're opening a new arena.

 

I'm quite happy that we managed to shed everyone without taking bad contracts back. That is a feat in itself, as most went to cash-strapped contenders. Great job on the Vegas 1st rder. "Okay, if you still wanna use the 2025 1st in a trade, no protections on 2026".

With BT, when I heard the word "conditions", I'd be afraid to read how we would be on the losing end of conditions. I think he ignored the fine print just to race through a deal. An exaggeration, I know....but damn.

 

I'm still cringing at the conditions on the Monahan trade.  We have to hope this year that FLA is at least outside the top 10 pick.  With that it doesn't matter if we are 10th or 1st.  We just lose the FLA pick.  I'm okay with that.  Where it gets into migraine territory is both teams missing and FLA's pick being a lotto pick.  Yikes.  Connie, on the other hand, has conditions on the other team's picks.  We lost three conditional picks or upgrades because of the playoffs, but whatever.  The Vegas pick may have actually been the best result because it was this year.  We did well.

 

We have tons of cap and I am somewhat loathe to take a crap contract for just a pick.  I would prefer that if we do it at all, we take a prospects or a young player as part of the package.  We give back a late pick or future considerations.  I doubt you see a Monahan level trade getting us a 1st.  But we can easily do that if it's available.  

 

I am not as concerned with battling for a playoff spot as playing well in games.  Want to see the effort more than the results.  Get the prospects going.  Win some lose some.  If, by some miracle we end up in the playoffs, then MTL gets a lousy first.  Ideally, we end up in 9th or worse.  I only want us to win BOA games no matter what part of the season we are in.  I don't care about being the spoiler, except to the Oilers or teams we have pending picks coming to us and that somehow makes the picks better.  

[conundrumed]

31 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

I'm still cringing at the conditions on the Monahan trade.

To be frank, I swear that I've memorized it 4 times now and have to go back every 6 months to remember. I'm at the point of, just take the Blockchaining pick. I don't care anymore. Let's just get past BT's moves and move on. These legacy picks are annoying af. Just get them over with.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

To be frank, I swear that I've memorized it 4 times now and have to go back every 6 months to remember. I'm at the point of, just take the Blockchaining pick. I don't care anymore. Let's just get past BT's moves and move on. These legacy picks are annoying af. Just get them over with.

 

Even if we had of had a pick MTL could have taken in 2024, they would not have, knowing the pending sell off.

Like you I think I know what it is then have to go back.

I will be glad to get it over with and not have our picks involved any more.

Conditions coming back?  So be it.

We will gladly take Vegas next year.

They are like we used to be; strong one year weak the next.

 

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, cberg said:

Saw that video also, wasn’t that impressed, but hey, they were trying.  I loved your summary above, more focused on what was coming versus what left.  I hadn’t tallied up the points but it is quite amazing they were even.  The devastating goodness of the changes is that Flames are now much younger and at the Cap floor rather than the ceiling.  The other thing is the whole management team is very good at what they are doing, has been consistent with good communication out to the fans.  Finally, the success to date has been accomplished without any crutches like lottery wins, even though we’d like a couple in the next three years… 

 

a lot of people don't like the "rebuild" word.

 

It is...obviously hilarious that they have things to say on this.    

 

That aside, I don't think of most "rebuilds" as a new direction.   They are, in most cases and I think in ours, a return to normal business.

 

If your team has an aging or bad player on a bad contract, you deal with it.   If you have a player near contract expiry who is unhappy, you deal with it.  In both cases, you find a way to get assets back.  Usually in the form of picks, and sometimes prospects.

 

That's just normal business in healthy organisations.   Happens to a small degree each season, and they have some young player coming up in their pipeline to fill the spot.

 

 

When you have like, more than a dozen players who are aging or bad on bad contracts, or unhappy players near contract expiry, and you have nothing in your pipeline to replace them, at Some point....you have to... do the same thing every healthy organisation does with those players.     And the result is called a rebuild.

 

But to me, a rebuild is not defined by what we are doing now.   It is defined by what we were doing over the last decade the lead to so many player issues and so few quality assets in our pipeline.    This is a return to normal business.

 

From that perspective, when does the "rebuild" end?     Ideally never.    Maybe a brief pause if your team is the clear Stanley cup favourite one year.

[travel_dude]

We get too hung up on words.  I admit rebuild sounds depressing, but only because we were closer to being a playoff team than a cellar dweller.  I don't even care what you call it now.  Rebuild retool replacement....  I like to think we are changing the direction of the team because perennial non-contender was a drag.  It caused some overthinking by the GM.  Waste assets.

 

I like where we are.  Not close to a cup, but not too far from where we will pass a few teams and have a 1/16 shot.  You have to fail to see where you are.  We kept failing but never figured it out.  And spent to the cap to think we were close.

[medatswhoP]

22 hours ago, travel_dude said:

We get too hung up on words.  I admit rebuild sounds depressing, but only because we were closer to being a playoff team than a cellar dweller.  I don't even care what you call it now.  Rebuild retool replacement....  I like to think we are changing the direction of the team because perennial non-contender was a drag.  It caused some overthinking by the GM.  Waste assets.

 

I like where we are.  Not close to a cup, but not too far from where we will pass a few teams and have a 1/16 shot.  You have to fail to see where you are.  We kept failing but never figured it out.  And spent to the cap to think we were close.

100% correct, for some reason some fans don't like the word rebuild, its taken as a negative annotation.  I on the other hand look at it more of a positive, being the team is acknowledging it needs corrections to move forward to support a stronger future.  A rebuild or "retool" is happening every year with every team some are huge impacts and some are very little but they are still rebuilds.

My thoughts on rebuild: I retired early last year, after slaying a desk job for the last 15 years leaving the field work of 20 years I committed to "rebuild" myself and started to work full time for me, I called it "my rebuild", I started walking then climbing hills and now I can  run 10km per day (going 5-6 days per week average), losing 50 lbs. and having tons of daily energy now.  I have been "rebuilding" my body in a positive direction. (The pain was immense from day one albeit but no pain no gain as they say)!

Anyway we have lots of new blood coming into the ranks, some veterans to keep them straight , lots of cap space currently so lets just enjoy what we have.

I too am not pleased with some of the trades but we don't always know what's going on with Management/Agents/Players decisions.  Its going to suck for a few years but oh well and as TD stated sometime you have to fail to see where you are. 

Flames will be fine, wont be this year but I figure in the next 3-5 years we could be a contender again (However you want to define that is another one). Let the "Rebuild" commence.

 

[phoenix66]

3 hours ago, medatswhoP said:

100% correct, for some reason some fans don't like the word rebuild, its taken as a negative annotation.  I on the other hand look at it more of a positive, being the team is acknowledging it needs corrections to move forward to support a stronger future.  A rebuild or "retool" is happening every year with every team some are huge impacts and some are very little but they are still rebuilds.

My thoughts on rebuild: I retired early last year, after slaying a desk job for the last 15 years leaving the field work of 20 years I committed to "rebuild" myself and started to work full time for me, I called it "my rebuild", I started walking then climbing hills and now I can  run 10km per day (going 5-6 days per week average), losing 50 lbs. and having tons of daily energy now.  I have been "rebuilding" my body in a positive direction. (The pain was immense from day one albeit but no pain no gain as they say)!

Anyway we have lots of new blood coming into the ranks, some veterans to keep them straight , lots of cap space currently so lets just enjoy what we have.

I too am not pleased with some of the trades but we don't always know what's going on with Management/Agents/Players decisions.  Its going to suck for a few years but oh well and as TD stated sometime you have to fail to see where you are. 

Flames will be fine, wont be this year but I figure in the next 3-5 years we could be a contender again (However you want to define that is another one). Let the "Rebuild" commence.

 

I think many see rebuild and tank as the same word and meaning.  Losing on purpose .. which has too many negative endings ..

 

Retool..means playing the best players in an effort to win . Are they contenders ? No of course not .. but it also means not throwing a player into the deep end before they are ready.  If one of these kids can't beat out Mantha for the top line , then so be it .. you don't force the kid in there...if the effort isn't there you still bench them..

If a Coronato still isn't ready..he goes back to the a.. you don't keep throwing him out there 

Id Vladar is outplaying Wolf .he gets the net .. if they both aren't handling it then changes are made ..

 

If signing a vet D or 2 makes us more competitive..great.. it's not " holding back the kids" its showing them what it takes to win.. 

 

Just listening to an interview with Francis ..says he ran into Daniel Tkachuk from the young guns days ..says he was thrust into a 2nd line role and he was not ready.. killed his confidence and his development..of course he didnt see it then and even if he did he wouldn't have said no..but he needed more farm time in hindsight .. 

 

Legitimately a 10 yr rebuild came to an end when Johnny pulled the pin on the grenade jusr as the window was legitimately opening..

Now let's learn from the hindsight mistakes and shave some years off .. 

If you can get a Dougie Hamilton for a 2nd and 1st again.. do it .. but dont the same for another Hamonic ..

These kids overachieve and make the playoffs ?  Great! But don't overreact to the overachievement and start all in moves again.. 

[cross16]

I don't think it's fan that dislike the word rebuild it's clubs. I think the vast majority of fans actually like the word because it provides direction and provides excitement. Clubs don't like it because it call into question their desire to win. It's all just a really, really silly semantical situation that has been created. 

 

Some in the media seem to want to try and spin this as Flames fans being mad and that is not my experience. I find most, be it online or those I chat with in person, like the direction here.

[Thebrewcrew]

I find it funny that 960 will never use the word rebuild. It's always retool, process, or pivot. 

 

To me, a retool is what Washington is doing. They're a team that's older and just good enough to make it. If they wanted to tear the team apart, nobody would blame them. Instead they're adding younger NHLers to keep the team competitive. That's not what the Flames have done and I'm just find with that.

 

I think the fanbase is very open to a rebuild. All you have to do is look at Edmonton and you can see what picking at the top of the draft can do for your franchise. It's no guarantee, but at this point in the franchise's history, it's worth a shot.

 

There are going to be some really ugly nights for the team. That's the nature of the beast. But just because you're rebuilding, doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable to watch. I enjoyed the 13/14 Flames. They weren't a good team but they played hard. What you don't want is to be the Sharks from 23/24, it worked, they got their man but that was dreadful hockey.

[phoenix66]

I think the only question I keep having , and it's a general one, not directed to anybody here specifically.. just the "tank" crowr in general .

 

When we say the fanbase wants it.. are we driving at the paying fans who buy tickets and go to games ? 

Or the mainstream fans who watch on tv..and let's face it if it the game is bad can just change the channel . It's easy to be patient and say it's gonna get better when it's costing you nothing ..

My fear is the paying ones.. it's expensive to take your family to a game .. are they gonna pay knowing they likely are gonna lose most nights? .. I personally know 3 people not renewing their season tickets next season already .. saying they will be back when they are good again .. take their chances on being able to buy them again. 

And speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..that's who the Flames focus the most on ..and this is gonna be unpopular..but as they should .

They've already been paid for you to watch the game on CBC or Sportsnet whether you watch or not .. 

But if they make the playoffs that's a guaranteed minimum 2 full buildings of revenue ..

 This is why I don't think you will ever see a teardown..or a drawn out rebuild process that doesn't have some hope of a playoff appearance 

[tmac70]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

I think the only question I keep having , and it's a general one, not directed to anybody here specifically.. just the "tank" crowr in general .

 

When we say the fanbase wants it.. are we driving at the paying fans who buy tickets and go to games ? 

Or the mainstream fans who watch on tv..and let's face it if it the game is bad can just change the channel . It's easy to be patient and say it's gonna get better when it's costing you nothing ..

My fear is the paying ones.. it's expensive to take your family to a game .. are they gonna pay knowing they likely are gonna lose most nights? .. I personally know 3 people not renewing their season tickets next season already .. saying they will be back when they are good again .. take their chances on being able to buy them again. 

And speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..that's who the Flames focus the most on ..and this is gonna be unpopular..but as they should .

They've already been paid for you to watch the game on CBC or Sportsnet whether you watch or not .. 

But if they make the playoffs that's a guaranteed minimum 2 full buildings of revenue ..

 This is why I don't think you will ever see a teardown..or a drawn out rebuild process that doesn't have some hope of a playoff appearance 

This has always been my concern, nobody and I mean nobody likes losing or watching losing clubs. It's easy to spend other people's money, and tanking is just that, it's a huge cost at someone else's expense. I get some markets can get away with having Satoshi Nakamoto for years, TOR, MTL, EDM whereas other markets can not. The roster on paper does look to stellar and everyone projects them to be in the bottom 5 this year. However, what if they defy expectations and play above their heads, wouldn't that make some heads explode. 

[sak22]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I find it funny that 960 will never use the word rebuild. It's always retool, process, or pivot. 

 

To me, a retool is what Washington is doing. They're a team that's older and just good enough to make it. If they wanted to tear the team apart, nobody would blame them. Instead they're adding younger NHLers to keep the team competitive. That's not what the Flames have done and I'm just find with that.

 

I think the fanbase is very open to a rebuild. All you have to do is look at Edmonton and you can see what picking at the top of the draft can do for your franchise. It's no guarantee, but at this point in the franchise's history, it's worth a shot.

 

There are going to be some really ugly nights for the team. That's the nature of the beast. But just because you're rebuilding, doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable to watch. I enjoyed the 13/14 Flames. They weren't a good team but they played hard. What you don't want is to be the Sharks from 23/24, it worked, they got their man but that was dreadful hockey.

It's unfortunate, but the 13/14 team still finished 25 points ahead of Buffalo and 11 over Florida who took the lottery, both those teams were pretty bad, Buffalo's leading scorer was Cody Hodgson at 44 points, Florida's was Nick Bjugstad at 38 points.  The unfortunate nature of the beast is to be lottery bad you need to be pretty awful to watch, only once in the cap era has the worst team finished with 71 points and that was the Lightning in '08, still a decently fun team offensively with St. Louis and Lecavalier but defensively and in net they were a trainwreck.  Recent trends suggest it is almost better to be under 60 points if you want good lotto odds.  But I do prefer they be entertaining, it is draining trying to keep yourself interested when there is no entertainment value and I would feel there is better things I could spend my money on then my season tickets but won't want to give them up this late in the Dome's life and the new arena closing in.

[Thebrewcrew]

40 minutes ago, sak22 said:

It's unfortunate, but the 13/14 team still finished 25 points ahead of Buffalo and 11 over Florida who took the lottery, both those teams were pretty bad, Buffalo's leading scorer was Cody Hodgson at 44 points, Florida's was Nick Bjugstad at 38 points.  The unfortunate nature of the beast is to be lottery bad you need to be pretty awful to watch, only once in the cap era has the worst team finished with 71 points and that was the Lightning in '08, still a decently fun team offensively with St. Louis and Lecavalier but defensively and in net they were a trainwreck.  Recent trends suggest it is almost better to be under 60 points if you want good lotto odds.  But I do prefer they be entertaining, it is draining trying to keep yourself interested when there is no entertainment value and I would feel there is better things I could spend my money on then my season tickets but won't want to give them up this late in the Dome's life and the new arena closing in.

Speaking of bad hockey. I actually went and saw the Sharks play in Vegas this year.

 

I was a little apprehensive because VGK tickets aren't cheap. To my surprise, they lost 5-4 in a shootout.

 

This was on a Sunday evening, after I had spent 500 bucks to watch the Raiders lose 3-0 to the Vikings.

[The_People1]

22 hours ago, sak22 said:

It's unfortunate, but the 13/14 team still finished 25 points ahead of Buffalo and 11 over Florida who took the lottery, both those teams were pretty bad, Buffalo's leading scorer was Cody Hodgson at 44 points, Florida's was Nick Bjugstad at 38 points.  The unfortunate nature of the beast is to be lottery bad you need to be pretty awful to watch, only once in the cap era has the worst team finished with 71 points and that was the Lightning in '08, still a decently fun team offensively with St. Louis and Lecavalier but defensively and in net they were a trainwreck.  Recent trends suggest it is almost better to be under 60 points if you want good lotto odds.  But I do prefer they be entertaining, it is draining trying to keep yourself interested when there is no entertainment value and I would feel there is better things I could spend my money on then my season tickets but won't want to give them up this late in the Dome's life and the new arena closing in.

 

What do you mean by "entertaining"?  Because I find it troubling any fan would celebrate a 71-point season over a 51-point season...

 

Like, what if we play run and gun to a 51-point season vs we play boring defense first hockey trying to win 1-0 every game but end up losing 2-1 all the time?  What is entertaining? ...maybe it's being mathematically within reach of the playoffs until the final month vs done by January?

[jjgallow]

On 7/9/2024 at 6:44 PM, phoenix66 said:

I think the only question I keep having , and it's a general one, not directed to anybody here specifically.. just the "tank" crowr in general .

 

When we say the fanbase wants it.. are we driving at the paying fans who buy tickets and go to games ? 

Or the mainstream fans who watch on tv..and let's face it if it the game is bad can just change the channel . It's easy to be patient and say it's gonna get better when it's costing you nothing ..

My fear is the paying ones.. it's expensive to take your family to a game .. are they gonna pay knowing they likely are gonna lose most nights? .. I personally know 3 people not renewing their season tickets next season already .. saying they will be back when they are good again .. take their chances on being able to buy them again. 

And speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..that's who the Flames focus the most on ..and this is gonna be unpopular..but as they should .

They've already been paid for you to watch the game on CBC or Sportsnet whether you watch or not .. 

But if they make the playoffs that's a guaranteed minimum 2 full buildings of revenue ..

 This is why I don't think you will ever see a teardown..or a drawn out rebuild process that doesn't have some hope of a playoff appearance 

 

just like you need great players, you need great marketing guys.

 

Flames are, and will be, drafting players who will get a draw league-wide.  both in local tickets and over the network.    We don't know if it's Parekh yet but there's a very real chance we get a player like this out of the 2024 draft with how we did it.   2025 probably moreso.
 

You want a front row seat?   You gotta buy now.  There's a waitlist.   Reality is the city is growing and you are gonna have to pay years in advance if you want to see those guys rock the NHL up front.    There will be turnover, but it's also very likely that seat holder IQ will go up these next few years.   Highly marketable if done right and lots of successful examples out there.

 

The entertainment value is absolutely there, and if the marketing guys can't figure out how to leverage it, quite honestly...need new marketing guys.  Not that I think it would come to that.

[sak22]

51 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

What do you mean by "entertaining"?  Because I find it troubling any fan would celebrate a 71-point season over a 51-point season...

 

Like, what if we play run and gun to a 51-point season vs we play boring defense first hockey trying to win 1-0 every game but end up losing 2-1 all the time?  What is entertaining? ...maybe it's being mathematically within reach of the playoffs until the final month vs done by January?

What exactly was entertaining about Chicago and San Jose this year? they were in the bottom in both goals for and goals against.  I wouldn't call those, run and gun awe shucks we lost but it was a fun game for the fans, type games.  They were generally getting their Hash Rate kicked on a nightly basis.  Entertaining to me involves wanting to watch the entirety of the game.  As you said many times, you need the pain to get the gains and the pain is having a team that is dreadful to watch.  There has never been a fun 51 point season.

[The_People1]

5 minutes ago, sak22 said:

What exactly was entertaining about Chicago and San Jose this year? they were in the bottom in both goals for and goals against.  I wouldn't call those, run and gun awe shucks we lost but it was a fun game for the fans, type games.  They were generally getting their Hash Rate kicked on a nightly basis.  Entertaining to me involves wanting to watch the entirety of the game.  As you said many times, you need the pain to get the gains and the pain is having a team that is dreadful to watch.  There has never been a fun 51 point season.

 

The difference between a fun 51-point season and a fun 71-point season is about 2 months.  Right?

[robrob74]

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/calgary-flames-lines-next-season

 

 

 

just saw this and decent lines. I would still like to try Zary with Huberdeau but like the 4th line suggestions. I think Huberdeau needs a guy with some hockey IQ and guess that will go to the net and scoring areas. I would even try Pospisil at center with Huberdeau. 
 

 

Huberdeau, Zary, Sharangovich

Mantha, Kadri, Kuzmenko

Coronato, Backlund, Coleman

Pelletier, Pospisil, Lomberg

 

the D will be the weakness so far, but this is as is so far. Guys will have to fight for the remains...

 

 

[sak22]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

The difference between a fun 51-point season and a fun 71-point season is about 2 months.  Right?

Who said anything about 71 points being fun?  I mentioned Tampa being a 71 point team more as an anomaly that you can’t expect great lottery odds with 71 points based on recent years.  I said they had 2 fun players, but reality is it was still an offence in the bottom half of the league because they were a one line team with no defence or goaltending, doesn’t make them fun overall .  Bedard is fun to watch, the Blackhawks last year as a team were not.

 

I don’t have a preference of 51 or 71, my preference is always winning.

[420since1974]

6 hours ago, sak22 said:

What exactly was entertaining about Chicago and San Jose this year? they were in the bottom in both goals for and goals against.  I wouldn't call those, run and gun awe shucks we lost but it was a fun game for the fans, type games.  They were generally getting their Hash Rate kicked on a nightly basis.  Entertaining to me involves wanting to watch the entirety of the game.  As you said many times, you need the pain to get the gains and the pain is having a team that is dreadful to watch.  There has never been a fun 51 point season.

 

The fewest points that the Flames have ever had since moving to Calgary was in the 1997/1998 season - 26-41-15 = 67 points.

If I recall correctly, that was only two years after the NHL instituted the Canadian Assistance Program to "help" small market Canadian teams stay afloat.

By then, the Flames had lost nearly all of their star players.

Fleury (78) and Stillman (49) were the top dogs points wise.

Tabaracci - 0.893, 971 SVs was the top goalie.

I was not at all entertained that season.

 

Barring multiple major injuries, I just can't see the 2024/2025 Flames finishing that poorly.

I do see some entertaining players likely on the team for this upcoming season.

If they are going to finish in the bottom 10, I'd rather watch them lose 6-5 instead of 2-1.