Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bozek
I agree.
The 2004 version of the Flames was not a weak team. It was a young team that got stronger as the season progressed, with more toughness added around the trade deadline. It gets called a weak team by people who just look at goal scorers. They were a hard checking team, great at cycling and control of the boards. The defense was young and as a group was starting to be considered one of the best in the league. There were several analysts who said at the start of the playoffs that nobody wanted to play against them in the first round. The remnants of that team were good enough to win their division 2 years later. Contrast that with what happened to the 2007 Oilers or the Panthers. As Ville Niemenen said in his interview last week, that was areally good team that was really hurt by the lockout the next year. If they had been able to play in the locked out season, I think they would have been near the top of the league.
|
Missing 04/05 really did hurt that team. Also worth noting that we would have had a great backup in Roman Turek that year. Maybe we would have never gotten to the point of Kipper playing 70+ games per year if he had didn't decide to stay home after the lockout;.