Intellectual Honesty...

[Henry Fool]

The number one center discussion is one thing, but you can't possibly argue that Feaster didn't leave the center position unfilled. It was plain as day for everyone that looked at the lineup. As we see now they are one Backlund injury away from Stajan being their best center. Even with Jokinen they had bad centers.

Again, if you're going to rebuild, fine, let the veterans move on. But if you're not going to rebuild, wtf kind of purpose does this addition by substraction logic serve? I'll tell you: it serves a cosmetic purpose. You let go Jokinen because you can and you're too scared to make any of the tougher decisions.

[Street Pharmacist]

http://kings.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=655362

A good read for flames fans

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Jones was 50% before last night

Jones 3 attempts to Oli's 50 so thats a bit skewed by sample size. Thats why I used total shootout goals for the rankings.

[Vinny01]

You let Jokinen go because you don't want to pay a 34 year old $4.5M per. Feaster targeted Hudler with that money and I think it was the smarter purchase. I guess he could have kept Olli for the sake of Stempniak and Sarich. I just think organizationally they wanted to walk away from Olli

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

http://kings.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=655362

A good read for flames fans

can't thank, needs more attention.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Psytic

Jones 3 attempts to Oli's 50 so thats a bit skewed by sample size. Thats why I used total shootout goals for the rankings.

fair enough but its not like Ollie had been good lately

[Komskies]

Originally Posted by zukes

Okay, 14th place with 9 points, however here is how many games teams 13-8 (all within 4 points) have played: 13, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12.

All of those teams are passed or tied with 2 wins in those games in hand.

Now they have to win those games, but for argument sake, let's pretend they somehow had those tow games done already and had won them.

They would currently sit in 8th, one point back from Phoenix (with a game in hand still) and Nashville. I wonder how different this board would be reacting? We, as a collective, are jumping the gun here.

I would much rather have wins in hand than games in hand, you know, like every single team above us.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Karl Racki

Correct. So what teams often have to do is practice some intellectual honesty at the right time and trade REALLY good but aging assets (while they are still REALLY good) and obtain either very high draft picks or recently drafted highly skilled, future stars in return. Not sure we have that option anymore for what its worth.

agree but Feaster wasn't/isn't allowed to trade the big two so its pretty hard to blame him. He has done well considering the circumstances. I would rather have Cervenka and Hudler over Ollie anyway

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Komskies

I would much rather have wins in hand than games in hand, you know, like every single team above us.

Exactly, Flames have 3 wins in 10 games and we are counting games in hand as wins?

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

http://kings.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=655362

A good read for flames fans

Makes a lot of sense - good read. Also points to if you are going to blow it up, do it all at once.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by COGENT

You're right and it has caused mass oddness IMO. Who would have thought that San Jose would be this good? I'm not using it as an excuse for the Flames, I'm just saying comparing this start to a 'normal" start isn't completely fair.

Originally Posted by COGENT

The season started in January

Dude...that's not what you were talking about, you were saying it was odd (mass oddness??) that a team like San Jose is so good....I am saying there is no oddness to that...it's quite understandable since they have a long serving coach and barely any turnover to their roster, which has a lot of good players on it.

The season starting in January is odd, agreed, but that isn't what you were inferring.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

You let Jokinen go because you don't want to pay a 34 year old $4.5M per. Feaster targeted Hudler with that money and I think it was the smarter purchase. I guess he could have kept Olli for the sake of Stempniak and Sarich. I just think organizationally they wanted to walk away from Olli

I'll take Oli over Comeau and Jackman being re-signed if the money was the issue.

[Enoch Root]

good article.

but I think Lombardi forgot a couple things:

Carter for Johnson + 1st (in 12 or 13)

Richards for Simmonds, Schenn + 2nd (in 12)

I fully agree, however, that the BACKBONE of building a team is through the draft and development.

The Flames have been horrible at this for the past 20 years. Improvement has come, but even if it is real improvement, it will be years before the good fully pushes out the bad.

By the way, Lombardi isn't talking about a rebuild, he is talking about an ongoing commitment to it in order to maintain a solid franchise. And I 100% agree with him.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by dino7c

fair enough but its not like Ollie had been good lately

Neither has Iginla for 2.5 mill more. I don't think re-signing him for another year for insurance would of been a bad idea.

[COGENT]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Dude...that's not what you were talking about, you were saying it was odd (mass oddness??) that a team like San Jose is so good....I am saying there is no oddness to that...it's quite understandable since they have a long serving coach and barely any turnover to their roster, which has a lot of good players on it.

The season starting in January is odd, agreed, but that isn't what you were inferring.

What I said originally and what I'm still talking about is that comparing the beginning of this season to last 3 seasons beginnings doesn't seem like a fair comparison. I believe the late start has created some odd outcomes, which more or less stems from a percentage of the players playing for the last 3 months elsewhere and others not. It's truly an argument with no end. We're all just throwing out opinions where facts aren't available. I believe the late start has created some odd conclusions... you believe otherwise.

Regardless, the Flames are losing and it sucks.

[Dr. Pepper]

It helps me to keep thinking of what Flames ownership/management have said and hinted at over the years with respect to their overall philosophy in building the team. You may disagree with it, but it is what it is.

#1 is being in contention every year. They will never ever gut the team or willingly tank a season - being in contention to them means butts in seats.
#2 is having players people know and cheer for. Iggy is untouchable. He'd have to demand a trade in order for it to happen.

They are going for the Red Wings model. Good scouting, and fill in the blanks trades when required. Problem is, both scouting and trading have been suspect for 10+ years (with a few exceptions sure). But that's what they are going for.

If anyone here is expecting things to happen outside of that philosophy, they'll be waiting a long time. Rant if you want, but it's the truth. Or at least the truth as far as I can tell.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

good article.

but I think Lombardi forgot a couple things:

Carter for Johnson + 1st (in 12 or 13)

Richards for Simmonds, Schenn + 2nd (in 12)

I fully agree, however, that the BACKBONE of building a team is through the draft and development.

The Flames have been horrible at this for the past 20 years. Improvement has come, but even if it is real improvement, it will be years before the good fully pushes out the bad.

By the way, Lombardi isn't talking about a rebuild, he is talking about an ongoing commitment to it in order to maintain a solid franchise. And I 100% agree with him.

I believe this to be exactly what Calgary is doing now.

People are upset about the bad start, and not 'blowing it up'. Fans want a rebuild. The 'rebuild' started a few years ago under Darryl - he laid the foundation for the drafting and development program. Without this foundation, we would eventually become the Oilers - one year would have been 'horrible', with a few more bad years to come whereby we don't draft much beyond the '1st overall'.

So the Flames started their rebuild with the scouts and their development program - wise place to start! A lot of teams that are 'lost in the desert' for years are teams with small hockey ops departments, and affiliations with AHL teams that really don't do a whole lot to develop a player. They just want to win.

Scouting - even under Darryl, things went from 'absolutely horrible' to 'below average' I thought. The last few drafts started getting better, with his last one a pretty decent draft. I am starting to see this as one of the few (if only) organizational strengths now. Not a strength in the quality and quantity of prospects, but a strength in how much better they have been drafting and developing (and Calgary is increasingly ranked higher - though still NOT even in the top 2/3rds of the league).

As for 'winning now' - this philosophy has dramatically changed. Flames would in the past borrow from the future to pay for the now. All 'contenders' do this. I can't think of one Stanley Cup winner since the lockout that hasn't - to varying degrees. They trade prospects/picks for players to push them over the hump. It was doubly hard for Calgary in trying to remain a contender - their development program sucked, and so did their drafting. They simply were not drafting enough good players.

Now the 'bleeding' has stopped. Flames no longer trade away picks to win 'now' - and if they do, they are usually as part of a package in getting young-ish players in return in packages. No longer do you see the Flames pull out all the stops in trying to get themselves into the playoffs.

Flames are relying on drafting, development + good free agent signings/occasional trades. The average age of the Flames have dropped substantially. Our most effective players for the most part are under 30, though our 'most talented' players are over that. Iginla, Tanguay and Kipper are the only players that could be called 'core' that are over 30. Look back 2 years ago, and you would see more.

So, Flames have 'stopped the bleeding'. They don't trade youth for vets, and they are seemingly drafting and developing much better (and for those that argue that we are not, look back at our drafting and outside of an occasional pick that 'wowed' us, the Flames haven't been drafting this CONSISTENTLY WELL since the 80's). Just look at how many scouts and development personnel they have. The Flames invest a LOT more money into this area, and it is just a matter of time before it really starts showing results.

"The Iginla Situation" - I don't really see why everyone is getting so 'angry' for at the moment when it comes to him. Don't worry "Blow it up" crowd - you may get your wish yet. Iginla not signing a contract yet is very telling. I don't think it was just Iginla, or just the Flames. I think they had a discussion in the off-season, and figured this may be the best way to proceed this season. "Don't sign a contract yet, see how the Flames are doing in the standings. If they are legitimately a playoff team (not a bubble team), then sign a contract then. If not, give us your 2, 3, 4 or whatever teams you would like to go to, and we will trade you to the one that makes the best sense to us. If you don't re-sign with the team you were traded to, we will always take you back here on the Flames as a free agent."

Question is, who else goes if the Flames continue their current path?

This team is NOT as bad as people make it out to be. There is a lot of talent here. There just isn't enough 'impact' players left. I do think Gaudreau and Jankowski have a very solid chance of becoming impact players, but they are probably still at least 2 years out from either even joining the team (Jankowski) or being an impact forward on the Flames. There is a LOT of supporting players coming up too. Baertschi, Backlund and Brodie look like a very solid trio coming in. Things are not 'horrible'.

Now look at the standings year-to-year. Most contenders and winners didn't spend years at the bottom since the lockout. Boston and LA are both teams that FINISHED bottom 5 in the league. Don't argue the stupid Toronto trade as part of building a contender - a rookie Seguin vs a more prime Kessel hurt more than helped - but their future is much more bright with either Seguin or Hamilton, nevermind both of them in exchange for Kessel. Just that playoff run, Boston would have been an even 'stronger' team had they not made that trade. Philly picked JVR 1st or 2nd one year as well.

It seems that both our pro and minor scouts are doing a much better job now. I used to love Darryl because he could find that 'diamond in the rough' and turn that player into an impact player - Bourque, Husselius come to mind. All of the Flames' off-season NEW acquisitions seem to be great - Wideman, Hudler and Cervenka. Begin is 'so-so' for me - adequate and cheap enough. Comeau was just a good PK'er and brought some much needed grit that is VERY lacking on this team. Overall, I think the talent level on the Flames this season is BETTER than last season - and once again (besides Begin) there was no 'old vets' brought in.

I hope that if the Flames do not get into the playoffs, they finish bottom 3 (scared of the draft lottery - I think the top 4 picks this year will be closer to franchise types, and then there is a slight drop-off). One year is all it really takes. There is enough 'support' coming down the pipe (Reinhart, Horak, Arnold, Ramage, Breen, Seiloff, Wotherspoon) that there should be at least some decent 3/4 line 4/5/6 defencemen in that bunch to fill holes in the roster. Jankowski, Gaudreau, MAYBE Granlund could be 'go-to' guys in the future to compliment Baertschi, Hudler and Cervenka, plus this year's 1st(s) and whatever prospects come from any trades.

I think this is as bad as it is going to get. Last few games the Flames have remained competitive with a rookie goalie who is NOT ready to be a #1 and a top line that has not been a factor and has been outplayed by the 2nd line (and would have been by the 3rd line had Backlund not been hurt in almost certainty, as it was regularly when Backlund was in the lineup). The wheels didn't all completely fall off, and the effort wasn't even all there! Not saying this is a 'good thing', but in my opinion, this was the 'worst case scenario' and the Flames are staying alive.

I just take solace in the fact that no matter what happens, the Flames are committed to their drafting and development program. As long as they stay the course, this team will eventually start going up again - even if they never trade Iginla and company. NO TEAM succeeds any longer without one. Very few (If any at all!!) are constant failures when they decide to invest in those areas, regardless of what they do with their current 'vets'.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

http://kings.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=655362

A good read for flames fans

Basically you need one home run per draft and one good trade per year. Prior to 2003 the Kings drafts were awful, and since have been good, mostly based on where they've picked and some loaded talent pools. The biggest thing for the Kings to me is some of the trades they've pulled off over the years which are just as important.

Pittsburgh "They won a lottery and got the best player in the game." LA, Chicago, Philly all bulit through the draft, and made good trades to compliment the players they developed. But for every success in drafting there is Columbus, Florida, NYI, who have all squandered top picks and have a history of maaking poor trades.

Boston and San Jose have traded for most of their key components and the drafts have complimented their trades for the most part.

In the case of the Flames, you have a poor record with draft picks, and a poor history of getting a good return for your assets. Will not be successful this way. The Flames are 3 top 5 draft picks , two good sigings/ trades and about 5 years away. Or 15 players away via trade/ free agency if you don't "blow it up."

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pepper

They are going for the Red Wings model. Good scouting, and fill in the blanks trades when required. Problem is, both scouting and trading have been suspect for 10+ years (with a few exceptions sure). But that's what they are going for.

When was the last time that the Red Wings drafter a player that turned out to be any good? If you want to follow the Red Wings model, first step is drafting one of the best defensemen of all time. The second step is hoping that he never retires. Outside of step one, we aren't much different from the Red Wings, to be honest.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So far, same style as Keenan.

Hmm.

Okay, the offensive game has some similarities, but I don't think that's enough to make Hartley similar to Keenan. Hartley preaches a much more structured game than Keenan did, especially in the defensive zone. He also has a much more positive way to approach the team (based on his interviews etc).

I'm sure there are other differences too.