24-25 Training Camp

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

That's what I'm thinking there yes, I see it as a win-win because he could potentially get minutes he normally wouldn't get playing for Calgary this year.   So, yes, from a minutes point of view, I don't think the Flames should nickel and dime.  They should give their youth opportunities.

 

I another "advantage" so to speak, for players that might be interested, is that if a player like Pelletier plays Really well, they might get to join a playoff team at the trade deadline.    Some will like this, others won't.   But for a player like Pelletier, you would think that means more games and more experience and a chance to get established before he hits his prime.

 

I kind of see 2024 as the first draft-year of our rebuild, with a few exceptions like Wolf, in terms of acquiring our new core.     When it comes time to sign those guys to meaningful contracts, which won't be a for a while,  I would hope we'll be in an excellent cap position But Even Then, not go crazy.    Guys want long term?  Maybe you give it to them.  Guys want a huge fat contract to "stay in Canada"?   Let them leave Canada and trade them for loads while they are valuable top prospects.

 

Back to camp talk, yeah.   The players I am most interested in, I'm not expecting to make the team (yet).  Parekh, Honzek, Gridin, Basha, Battaglia, Misa, and a Lot more from the 2024 draft...  any chance of Zarubin?  I suppose not.

Hopefully some PTO surprises too.

 

Thumbs up for the profile pic.  I used to have the one from his Hobey days.  Can't seem to locate.

Your pic does make me sad.  All good.  The hurt will go away.

[jjgallow]

23 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Thumbs up for the profile pic.  I used to have the one from his Hobey days.  Can't seem to locate.

Your pic does make me sad.  All good.  The hurt will go away.

 

Me too.   It's not fair.

 

2012 training camp man....  that's why we can't call this one the best ever.  Even if it stands to be pretty great.

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

Speaking of PTOs lots of rumors the Flames are brining in Tyson Barrie on one. Think they've held off announcing it for obvious reasons.

 

Also an annual reminder before we panic about PTOs, you are required to dress a certain amount of veterans (8 to be exact) for every game in the pre-season and the Flames will have a split squad games during the pre season. 

 

Well, unless we have breakout season by the young guys (Solo and maybe Poirier) and solid seasons by Bahs, Weegar and Ras, we may be looking at 28th place.  It makes sense to bring in a vet.  Also good asset management to have guys on short deals that you can trade.  I know we are just talking PTO at this point, but I think it makes sense.  

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well, unless we have breakout season by the young guys (Solo and maybe Poirier) and solid seasons by Bahs, Weegar and Ras, we may be looking at 28th place.  It makes sense to bring in a vet.  Also good asset management to have guys on short deals that you can trade.  I know we are just talking PTO at this point, but I think it makes sense.  

 

PTO doesn't mean we sign him after.  We might be short on vets to play in preseason and Barrie fills that temporary need.

 

But who knows.  Rumours regarding Andersson, Weegar, and Kadri likely won't stop all season.  If Barrie plays well enough then maybe we sign him and move one of our D.

[Thebrewcrew]

I don't mind bringing Barrie in. Barrie is what he is, Miromanov is 27, there's a chance he's not an NHL regular. Not sure how much more room for improvement there is. Pachal is 25, like Miromanov, he may not be a regular. 

 

I wouldn't be upset if Barrie won a job. He would be taking a spot from a Pachal or Miromanov. He wouldn't be blocking a young player. Parekh and Brzustewicz still need time. I think it's going to be a long year in Calgary. Barrie is renowned as a great locker room guy, there's value in that and he would help the PP. Pachal and Miromanov could split time as the #6 D. I'm not sure you "need" to have either in the lineup 82 times. Whoever is playing the best stays in the lineup.

 

Also of note, Barrie played for the Kelowna Rockets. He was the captain for a year. His coach? Ryan Huska. Another teammate of his, in Kelowna? Mikael Backlund.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

PTO doesn't mean we sign him after.  We might be short on vets to play in preseason and Barrie fills that temporary need.

 

But who knows.  Rumours regarding Andersson, Weegar, and Kadri likely won't stop all season.  If Barrie plays well enough then maybe we sign him and move one of our D.

 

I get what it is.  We signed a guy out of EDM's PTO a few years back.  

 

I think he is a possible extra man, but we have quite a few.

Ras, Weegar, Mirmanov, Bahl, Bean, Pachal, Hanley and need to sign Solo.  

That's 8 that need waivers.

Barrie would be 9.

I have no bones about waiving Hanley.

Not as happy to waive Pachal, but he was a waiver pick up.

 

[Otown72]

Barrie coming in is smart on a PTO. It potentially fills a need and can be moved for a pick plus at the deadline. It might block Porier or Soly, but it's not a big deal; Porier could use a full healthy season in the AHL.
Losing Hanley or Pachal is not a real concern.

[robrob74]

We are a top pair, or even middle pair away from competing. The forward group isn't terrible. Although, a top center and line as well. 
 

guess that is far. But I think we'd be out of the playoffs with two top 4 D but barely out. 
 

I hope this isn't a step towards making the Flames mediocre again...

 

I don't think so... but maybe if the Flames trade a D or two, or see him as getting a chance at cup as a TDL piece that would be cool. 

[conundrumed]

14 hours ago, cross16 said:

Speaking of PTOs lots of rumors the Flames are brining in Tyson Barrie on one. Think they've held off announcing it for obvious reasons.

 

Also an annual reminder before we panic about PTOs, you are required to dress a certain amount of veterans (8 to be exact) for every game in the pre-season and the Flames will have a split squad games during the pre season. 

It had become apparent this was happening, now it's official. My attitude went from, "can't stand him as a dman", to, "he might be one of the best PP dmen to ever lace them up" in <24 hours. lol

I know it's a PTO. I'll start the panic machine with really liking Brayden Pachal's game as a bottom pair RD. 25, hard-working dman, undrafted, and earning his chances the old-fashioned way.

Pretty solid for a waiver claim.

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, robrob74 said:

We are a top pair, or even middle pair away from competing. The forward group isn't terrible. Although, a top center and line as well. 
 

guess that is far. But I think we'd be out of the playoffs with two top 4 D but barely out. 
 

I hope this isn't a step towards making the Flames mediocre again...

 

I don't think so... but maybe if the Flames trade a D or two, or see him as getting a chance at cup as a TDL piece that would be cool. 

 

We are a few years away from contending, but that doesn't mean we need to bottom out first.  While the top pick might be a compelling reason, it's too hard to recover from that.  We are going to be mediocre until we aren't.  I don't think we are taking steps to go down the path towards that as a goal.  Even when it happened, it was more that the moves we made didn't take us to contender.  It's what all teams do, but only a few do it 100% right.

[robrob74]

11 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

We are a few years away from contending, but that doesn't mean we need to bottom out first.  While the top pick might be a compelling reason, it's too hard to recover from that.  We are going to be mediocre until we aren't.  I don't think we are taking steps to go down the path towards that as a goal.  Even when it happened, it was more that the moves we made didn't take us to contender.  It's what all teams do, but only a few do it 100% right.

ya, but there are teams in your description of getting it "right" did bottom out. Not many that got it right didn't bottom out. Even Dallas, who seems to be doing it right, bottomed out for a year and got a bonafied #1 D for it. But albeit, they are drafting very well. They're doing something good, at least for a couple of years.
 

maybe the Flames have that in Parekh. Zary and Pops are good future mid-6 pieces. Hope a few of this past draft picks pan out.
 

this is why i don't think we are Edmonton or Buffalo. We don't have their drafting records. Even Bennett, who hadn't lived up to his draft expectations was a big part of their cup. While someone that is typically drafted later in the first round, we still got that pick right... 

 

trick is finding the pastranaks, the Robertsons (Dallas), and continue to hit on D like we did on Andersson. 
 

"we" point out that the team traded picks away why the drafting isn't as good, more proof we are not Edmonton, Buffalo, or even Arizona/Utah.

 

but many teams that get it right had to bottom out to do it. Maybe we find a Petterson at 5th overall. With the crew they currently have, I  think that is where the Flames will drift, between 5-8.

[sak22]

17 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

ya, but there are teams in your description of getting it "right" did bottom out. Not many that got it right didn't bottom out. Even Dallas, who seems to be doing it right, bottomed out for a year and got a bonafied #1 D for it. But albeit, they are drafting very well. They're doing something good, at least for a couple of years.
 

maybe the Flames have that in Parekh. Zary and Pops are good future mid-6 pieces. Hope a few of this past draft picks pan out.
 

this is why i don't think we are Edmonton or Buffalo. We don't have their drafting records. Even Bennett, who hadn't lived up to his draft expectations was a big part of their cup. While someone that is typically drafted later in the first round, we still got that pick right... 

 

trick is finding the pastranaks, the Robertsons (Dallas), and continue to hit on D like we did on Andersson. 
 

"we" point out that the team traded picks away why the drafting isn't as good, more proof we are not Edmonton, Buffalo, or even Arizona/Utah.

 

but many teams that get it right had to bottom out to do it. Maybe we find a Petterson at 5th overall. With the crew they currently have, I  think that is where the Flames will drift, between 5-8.

Dallas did have the luck though, they didn't really bottom out they moved from 9 to 3 in the lottery.  But still can't take away what they did that draft with Oettinger and Robertson with their next picks.  Can never forget the lottery though especially from 2016-2020, some teams got extremely lucky (Jets, Flyers, Stars, Devils, Hurricanes, Blackhawks, Rangers).

[cross16]

If Barrie can earn a spot great but I think he is here more to ease travel and provide a body. Flames are not deep on D, in terms of experience, so not surprising they'd want a veteran to give them some flexibility. 

 

Be a little surprised if he winds up signing unless Hanley struggles or something. 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

We are a few years away from contending, but that doesn't mean we need to bottom out first.  While the top pick might be a compelling reason, it's too hard to recover from that.  We are going to be mediocre until we aren't.  I don't think we are taking steps to go down the path towards that as a goal.  Even when it happened, it was more that the moves we made didn't take us to contender.  It's what all teams do, but only a few do it 100% right.

 

We don't "need" to bottom out obviously and there are examples of success without doing so.  That said, I think we "want" to bottom out because the math favours those who do.  Simply getting to pick top 3 instead of 5-9 makes a big difference... Again, with the understanding that there are outliers and how some of the best players picked in drafts are not from the top 3.  Still, just playing the math here, it really doesn't hurt to bottom out hardcore for a top pick.

 

Again, not saying we need to, but I think it's the more sound path to do so.

 

Also, it depends on the draft too.  Some drafts don't have a Gavin McKenna.  I don't know much about James Hagens but people are saying he's the next Jack Hughes/Patrick Kane.  And a few others in the top 5 seem to have franchise player potential.  And then there's Landon Dupont three years from now.  So 3 drafts in a row will have superstar potential at the top of the draft class.  

[sak22]

8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

We don't "need" to bottom out obviously and there are examples of success without doing so.  That said, I think we "want" to bottom out because the math favours those who do.  Simply getting to pick top 3 instead of 5-9 makes a big difference... Again, with the understanding that there are outliers and how some of the best players picked in drafts are not from the top 3.  Still, just playing the math here, it really doesn't hurt to bottom out hardcore for a top pick.

 

Again, not saying we need to, but I think it's the more sound path to do so.

 

Also, it depends on the draft too.  Some drafts don't have a Gavin McKenna.  I don't know much about James Hagens but people are saying he's the next Jack Hughes/Patrick Kane.  And a few others in the top 5 seem to have franchise player potential.  And then there's Landon Dupont three years from now.  So 3 drafts in a row will have superstar potential at the top of the draft class.  

A little early on this one, the potential is always there but people pegged Shane Wright as a clear #1 for 2022 back in 2019, same with Misa a couple years ago and now Hagens is projected higher.  Joe Veleno was a late first and Sean Day never panned out.  A lot can happen, these are still kids.

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It had become apparent this was happening, now it's official. My attitude went from, "can't stand him as a dman", to, "he might be one of the best PP dmen to ever lace them up" in <24 hours. lol

I know it's a PTO. I'll start the panic machine with really liking Brayden Pachal's game as a bottom pair RD. 25, hard-working dman, undrafted, and earning his chances the old-fashioned way.

Pretty solid for a waiver claim.

 

If I was a GM trying to get high draft picks ....   I would probably give Tyson Barrie a PTO 😅

 

Great move from my point of view.   And they can always sell him to Edmonton for 3  future first rounders at the TDL, because Edmonton is so close and all they need is more offense....

[medatswhoP]

On 9/3/2024 at 10:49 AM, cross16 said:

Speaking of PTOs lots of rumors the Flames are brining in Tyson Barrie on one. Think they've held off announcing it for obvious reasons.

 

Also an annual reminder before we panic about PTOs, you are required to dress a certain amount of veterans (8 to be exact) for every game in the pre-season and the Flames will have a split squad games during the pre season. 

On Barrie, He gives up pucks too often, has a overall career of -75 (plus-minus rating),  he only lastly put up one goal and 14 assists with the Predators last season (41 GP). As a PTO I get the risk is low and should still have some gas left in his engine being 33 years old but the one thing I don't like also is that he is not very physical on ice.  My .05 cents...

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

ya, but there are teams in your description of getting it "right" did bottom out. Not many that got it right didn't bottom out. Even Dallas, who seems to be doing it right, bottomed out for a year and got a bonafied #1 D for it. But albeit, they are drafting very well. They're doing something good, at least for a couple of years.
 

maybe the Flames have that in Parekh. Zary and Pops are good future mid-6 pieces. Hope a few of this past draft picks pan out.
 

this is why i don't think we are Edmonton or Buffalo. We don't have their drafting records. Even Bennett, who hadn't lived up to his draft expectations was a big part of their cup. While someone that is typically drafted later in the first round, we still got that pick right... 

 

trick is finding the pastranaks, the Robertsons (Dallas), and continue to hit on D like we did on Andersson. 
 

"we" point out that the team traded picks away why the drafting isn't as good, more proof we are not Edmonton, Buffalo, or even Arizona/Utah.

 

but many teams that get it right had to bottom out to do it. Maybe we find a Petterson at 5th overall. With the crew they currently have, I  think that is where the Flames will drift, between 5-8.

 

Dallas is not really any closer to a cup than they were when they played us, and I would argue they have much of the same team for years now.  Robertson was a great pickup but almost a non-factor for much of the playoffs.  Did FLA get it right?  They traded for two players that were a big part of their win.  The other winners so long ago "bottomed out" that it is almost a completely different team.  When did STL ever bottom out?  COL did in some ways but it was also realizing that you have to make smart moves to take advantage of the top stars you have.  WAS is such a long ago thing.  PITTS was and managed to draft two + a goalie that was part of a winning team.  

 

Anyway, my point was were will look middling for some years, but it's not a conscious plan to strive for that.  We have some good pieces that a contending team needs, but you don't win Better Homes & Garden awards for having the best completer pieces until you buy the rest of the set of dishes.  

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

If Barrie can earn a spot great but I think he is here more to ease travel and provide a body. Flames are not deep on D, in terms of experience, so not surprising they'd want a veteran to give them some flexibility. 

 

Be a little surprised if he winds up signing unless Hanley struggles or something. 

It probably can't be discounted that Barrie has A LOT to play for. Hopefully it just ups the competition level. I'm sure we could get Holl and a 2nd for Future Considerations. lol Walman would have been fantastic...

In Army's post-OS success presser, I really liked one thing he touched on. To the effect of the prospect pool being talented and vets have to stop treating camp like 2 weeks of lollygagging their way back into game shape.

I get that's GM-speak, but it would be nice to actually see everyone treat it like tryouts. As opposed to, "I’m under contract, so whatevs".

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

It probably can't be discounted that Barrie has A LOT to play for. Hopefully it just ups the competition level. I'm sure we could get Holl and a 2nd for Future Considerations. lol Walman would have been fantastic...

In Army's post-OS success presser, I really liked one thing he touched on. To the effect of the prospect pool being talented and vets have to stop treating camp like 2 weeks of lollygagging their way back into game shape.

I get that's GM-speak, but it would be nice to actually see everyone treat it like tryouts. As opposed to, "I’m under contract, so whatevs".

 

Sutter used to operate that way and it always miffed me.  Lucic gets a spot.  That kind of thing.  And I wasn't even PO'd that much over Lucic.  If anything he was a vet that had a defined role nobody else could do.  To a lesser extend Huska did that, but he did at least consider the young guys weren't banished to the AHL, just a numbers game.  We should have a camp where guys like Hanley are not a given.  Where Rooney has to beat out Morton or Pelletier for the 12th F spot.  There is no cup on the line by picking vets to get us there.  It's open to get us the best team for the near and long term future. 

 

Saying that, if Barrie is able to WIN a spot, then fine.  The concerning impact would be waiving Solo and/or Pachal.  Two guys we are just seeing the beginning of.  

[conundrumed]

This is a bit disheartening:

 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

This is a bit disheartening:

 

 

Please send Pelletier to MTL for our 1st round pick back.

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

This is a bit disheartening:

 

 

I had mentioned his agent looking at the deal as being strategic.  I don't know if it was a connected dude saying this, but it sounded plausable.

There really isn't a good reason for him to delay the signing, so it has to be a hold out on 2-way vs 1-way.

It means that if he gets waived, then he faces getting low wages in the AHL or getting claimed.

 

I don't know, but you are right it's too bad.

[tmac70]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Please send Pelletier to MTL for our 1st round pick back.

He isn't worth a first. Kadri to MTL for our first back + would make sense. The fact that Pelts thinks he is dealing from a position of strength is funny. If I am Conroy, don't sign him and let him rot. 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I had mentioned his agent looking at the deal as being strategic.  I don't know if it was a connected dude saying this, but it sounded plausable.

There really isn't a good reason for him to delay the signing, so it has to be a hold out on 2-way vs 1-way.

It means that if he gets waived, then he faces getting low wages in the AHL or getting claimed.

 

I don't know, but you are right it's too bad.

I forget where I saw but some were saying he wants a deal that allows him to be easily claimed? Maybe my interpretation is wrong ? 
 

is he worth a 2nd? 
 

i dunno, this bothers me a bit. Like what has he done? Did ok so far, and hasn't really solidified a spot. 
 

I wish in some cases a team could get compensated for losing a waiver player, but every team goes through it...