The Formula and the Flames

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Fire

Ramage is in tough to make the parent club. He's 23 already so he'll probably need to make the jump in the next two seasons or become a AHL lifer.

...Smid and Engelland are all sign for another 2 seasons after this one...

That's where I think Treliving has to make some moves. Both those guys are creating a log jam, and not the good kind that drives competition, but the bad kind that rewards veterans for being on long contracts.

I would rank Culkin, Kulak and Hickey higher than Ramage for NHL potential. Sieloff would be battling Ramage for a bottom pairing spot as well.

All three of those guys are offensive-guys, but Ramage is probably the best "stocky, hard-hitting defensive guy" among that pack. Sieloff.. well.. he's going to be a project at this point - I think he has a higher ceiling than Ramage but also a much lower floor. Ramage seems like a steady poorman's Regehr replacement. Maybe he's not in the long term plans, but he ought to get a chance to show whether or not he belongs.

It seems to me that Hartley/Treliving are really committed to letting these guys stay in the A and really hone their game. I hope that means they retain Ramage's rights at the very least if he goes to Europe.

[FlamesAddiction]

I thought last night's game was a near perfect display of the Flames formula as team that implements a counter-attack style.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by darthma

Stopped reading after no Backlund. It made me sad. Guy is a stud.

I was focusing in on the prospects. Backlund is a little to far a long to far along to be included. Great depth player but will he be here in three years? I also didn't include Giordano for the same reason. Thinking futures and the building process.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by New Era

Backlund...Great depth player but will he be here in three years?

Yes.

You know he is 25 right.

He fits in perfectly with our long term plans as our 3rd line C.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by heep223

Yes.

You know he is 25 right.

He fits in perfectly with our long term plans as our 3rd line C.

Which is spectacularly good news since he is already beginning to look like a really good second line centre.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by New Era

Backlund is a little to far a long to far along to be included. Great depth player but will he be here in three years?

A great-skating, puck-handling, constantly cycling, defensively excellent high IQ 28 year old...

Hell yeah he'll be here, and possibly with an A on his Jersey.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Scoutski

Why does nobody see Monahan as being at the top of the line up? He's shown solid improvement this year over last and he's still only 20. If things go as they are right now he will hit around ~50 points. I don't think it's a stretch to think he will improve still.

Is it just that he doesn't dangle and make pretty plays? Is it crazy to think Monahan will still end up being a better player than Bennett? They don't have crazy different junior stats (Bennett's are higher, but was on a much better team)

Most, if not everybody, saw Monahan has that guy. Having Bennett who many project to have a higher offensive ceiling than Monahan has taken over the future #1 center role from Monahan. It doesn't mean Monahan gets taken down a notch. It allows expectations of Monahan to be more realistic. I see Monahan being our version of Bergeron. He may not be the top contender for the Selke each year, but he will likely score more points each year.

Also, we know what we have in Monahan and have a better idea of what he'll do for us in the future. Bennett is now the new shiny toy that we can't wait to unwrap and see what it will do.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

I was focusing in on the prospects. Backlund is a little to far a long to far along to be included. Great depth player but will he be here in three years? I also didn't include Giordano for the same reason. Thinking futures and the building process.

If this team peaks in five years, Backlund will still be at an age where he will be in range of his physical apogee. He is already emerging as not just a good, but a very good second line centre. How good could he be anchoring the third line even after he starts to slowly regress in his thirties?

Backhand is part of this team's long term plans.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Buff

Most, if not everybody, saw Monahan has that guy. Having Bennett who many project to have a higher offensive ceiling than Monahan has taken over the future #1 center role from Monahan. It doesn't mean Monahan gets taken down a notch. It allows expectations of Monahan to be more realistic. I see Monahan being our version of Bergeron. He may not be the top contender for the Selke each year, but he will likely score more points each year.

Also, we know what we have in Monahan and have a better idea of what he'll do for us in the future. Bennett is now the new shiny toy that we can't wait to unwrap and see what it will do.

Bennett was drafted nearly a full year earlier than Monahan was. At the same age he posted +0.4 points/game (1.6), and showed a 62% improvement (128%) over his previous season's totals compared to Monahan (1.26, 66%).

Monahan looks like he could be a top line centre some day. But Bennett looks like he very realistically could be better than Monahan. How amazing is this?

[Coach]

Good write-up, although I agree with most in regards to Backlund. If Brodie is included, so is Backlund (only a year older). He is important for releasing Monahan and (future)Bennett from the duties of going against top-lines and getting them better match-ups. People tend to underrate these types of players in regards to them not being "core" pieces. They are essential.

In regards to the centre depth, I think an important omission is the centre depth on the wings. This is something that is a strength of teams like Chicago and Boston. Not only is the organization deep at true centreman, they also have guys like Bouma, Colborne and Byron who can slot in as C's if needed in-game, or if they are better options there than farmboys. Having versatile players is key to going through the marathon of the NHL schedule.

[GioforPM]

I think Colborne is wasted as a 4C. I like him as a top 6 RW (probably 2nd line after Poirier). He's getting better all the time, and you need some size up front on the top lines.

I think Jooris or maybe Shore will eventually (not now) be able to play a 4th line C when Stajan moves on. I'm not sure Granlund will be a centre on this team - maybe a winger or 13th general forward.

I'm thinking:

Gaudreau, Bennett, Poirier
Sven or Ferland, Monahan, Colborne
Byron, Backlund, Shore
Bouma, Jooris, Wolf/someone else.

My issue is still defence depth. I think it needs bolstering, since you can only expect one out of 5 of those prospects to make it. I don't know them very well, but there's little to no buzz at all. I wouldn't mind a solid D man at the draft this year.

[djsFlames]

Yeah, when people talk about Backlund being old, it makes me feel old, as we're the same age. Please don't do that.

He's definitely in the plans for the next 5+ years IMO. Honestly is the best possible candidate to fill a 3rd center spot on a contending team.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Yeah, when people talk about Backlund being old, it makes me feel old, as we're the same age. Please don't do that.

He's definitely in the plans for the next 5+ years IMO. Honestly is the best possible candidate to fill a 3rd center spot on a contending team.

I'm older than two Backlunds, so don't feel old.

[neo45]

Goaltending is very hard to evaluate but all 3 of Ortio, Gilles, and MacDonald sound good to me. I like the philosophy of drafting a goalie every 2 years that scouts think can be a starter. Brossoit was another good pick we had in net

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by neo45

Goaltending is very hard to evaluate but all 3 of Ortio, Gilles, and MacDonald sound good to me. I like the philosophy of drafting a goalie every 2 years that scouts think can be a starter. Brossoit was another good pick we had in net

A lot of teams do better grabbing underappreciated backups or prospects of other teams. Drafting goalies is IMO like throwing darts badly. Sometimes you get a bullseye, but not very often.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/team-team-...nder-drafting/

[Mony]

Originally Posted by neo45

Goaltending is very hard to evaluate but all 3 of Ortio, Gilles, and MacDonald sound good to me. I like the philosophy of drafting a goalie every 2 years that scouts think can be a starter. Brossoit was another good pick we had in net

I think our goal prospects are fine for now - at least until Ortio moves up. I think 3 awesome goaltending prospects is enough to have in the pipeline - there should only be more if the goalies are not that strong. I'd rather we spend our picks on D and RW for now, just because Ortio, Gillies, and McDonald have all stablized that goaltending prospect pool. I'm so high on all three.