[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by magicpixels

Would be awesome for the oilers if they did finish last and pick Mckinnon because in two or three years they'vd have back2back2back2back stanley cups.

You'd need to be a blind fool not to recognize the level of talent on their team and in their organization. Only chance they have at the 1st overall pick will be through the lottery. Same as the Flames.

So, the theory you are promoting then is that success for an NHL teams comes via a multiplication of #1 draft picks. Is that right?

If so, I have serious problems with the theory. Basically, and like most things in sports, this idea suffers for variability: in other words, history shows that sometimes it works, but most often it does not. So far for their troubles the Oilers have turned three first-round draft picks into star players, but have very, VERY little to show for it beyond Eberle, Hall and Nugent-Hopkins. If this team is indeed a force to soon be reckoned with as you proclaim, then I would expect much more impressive results from their drafting in rounds 2–7. The Oilers have a few nice pieces, but practically nothing past the top line. I remain unconvinced that their strategy for success is a good one.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

The Flames need.....

Iginla to continue to contribute more and more as he ages.

I disagree. Rather on the contrary, I think the Flames need Iginla to be a top-line player this year, and he is certainly capable of that much. They don't need him to keep improving as he gets older, but I think the organisation is hoping that he is able to incrementally and gradually move down the depth chart as he ages, and as their younger players begin to emerge. This is a reasonable expectation, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

Kiprusoff has to play 46 games and be even better and not get hurt.

In a shortened season Kiprusoff can and should be better. He is still one of the best goalies in the world, and his problem in recent years has been the toll taken by playing +70 games. Even if he does somehow play every game this season, which I think is highly unlikely, and just as unnecessary, he will still have played ALOT less than he has since the 2004 season by a wide margin. A pretty reasonable goal in my opinion.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

Hudler, Cervenka, Baertschi, Backlund need to prove they belong.

"Belong" in what sense? On the top line? In the top-six? In the NHL? This is a nonsensical statement without much more clarification as to what you mean. I think that each player likely has something different to prove: E.g. for Baertschi, it is a place in the NHL; for Backlund, it is a place in the top-six. Without knowing what the coaches expect, or how they plan to use each of these players this season and into the near future, it is really difficult to make such a generalised measure for success as you have done, and apply it equally to all four of them.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

Hartley must prove he can coach a team that isn't an all star team.

Well, he still is the only coach in Thrashers/Jets franchise history to coach that team in the playoffs, and only one of three coaches in franchise history to post a +.500 record. The sample size is fairly small, but it certainly qualifies to counter your assertion: Hartley's teams in Atlanta were far from All-Star quality, and I think that the Thrashers futility following his tenure actually speaks positively to his coaching abilities.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

My problem here is we have 4 BIG factors. The chances we hit a home run and go 4/4 aren't so great.

If the Flames hit 4/4 according to your measure, then I expect the result would likely be home-ice advantage in the playoffs.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

I'm not sold on Hartley. He was average with Atlanta and did well in Colorado when of course he had one of the best teams. History would tell me he doesn't do so well with fringe teams.

What is a "fringe" team? Is Hartley's sample-size really even large enough to make these sorts of conclusions? I'm not sure I'm "sold" on Hartley either, but there are a number of things that I like about what he is currently doing, and they provide me with a sense of optimism for the upcoming season. For one thing, I like what I hear about how he runs his practices; I like that he has Iginla working on the PK; I like that his own projection of self-confidence, and his infectious energy and charisma; I like that Martin Gelenis is a member of his coaching staff.

Originally Posted by magicpixels

Between Hudler, Cervenka, Baertschi and Backlund I think only Backlund will be a success. I can see Baertschi putting up respectful numbers however I think Hudler is going to be Stajan #2.

Is this just your "gut", or do you have something quantifiable or rationally formulated to support your notion?

Originally Posted by magicpixels

My money is on that Cervenka doesn't even play a single game in a flames uniform.

Well, you are completely wrong about this. There is simply no other way to put it. Cervenka is at camp, and is currently penciled into the roster. The ONLY thing at this point that is preventing him from making the team is his medical status. As soon as he is cleared to play HE WILL PLAY. Whether he succeeds or not is another matter entirely, but there is absolutely no reason to expect that he will not play in Calgary this season.

As usual, your post is adventuresome and entertaining, but extremely light on actual facts and their sensible interpretation. Your opinion of things is very quickly developing into a sure measure of the opposite.