[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

if i understand his premise, it is that:
1) Flames have some high skill forwards but haven't added enough around them to help drive possession/offense. Note: Author questions how skilled given that HALF the forwards from last year's roster are >50% CF (isn't half a reasonably ok number btw) & isn't convinced Monahan does anything possession wise (... other than be a ~30g/~60pt player every year mind you)

So first, yes, half your forwards being in the black is "reasonably ok", but you have to remember that this article is being written from the perspective of the Flames being a cup contender, or being a team that could be a cup contender if a few things were different. Second, he praised Monahan, noting that his only weakness as a #1C is his ability to drive possession in that role - other #1Cs around the league, the very best ones, have that club in their bag as well. Which is true.

2) Goaltending was below average last year, but even then the team scraped into the playoffs, yet, with average goaltending they would have only 6 more points..... I don't quite understand this point he's trying to make either. First he claims the goalies are below average and they haven't done much to improve this, but at the same time, he marginalizes the overall impact better goaltending would make.

6 points is a lot of points in a tight playoff race. It puts them up in 3rd in the Pacific, playing the Oilers rather than the Ducks. It's the difference between a sweep and a winnable series, particularly given the matchup.

3) Calls out 8 players as the flames core, and mentions that "basically all those guys....are in their mid to late 20s". Interestingly enough, only 3 of the players mentioned fall into that categorization.

Yup, true, I'd say the window is open wider than he suggests, though it'd be nice to start trying to get through it while Gio is still in his early 30's. The point is, there's no real reason they can't contend now if they fix a couple of things.

4) flames offseason was flawed in solidifying defence by getting a middling dman rather than augmenting the forwards..... ummm, k.

He didn't say that. He said that adding Hamonic is a good thing because he may well excel in a middle pairing role, but that it doesn't address the areas where the Flames were weakest, because they already had a strong blue line. That's, again, true.

I mean, I'm stuck defending Ryan Lambert here. That's how knee-jerk the reactions are when negative stuff is written about this team, even in the context of "the core here is so good that this team is borderline elite on paper".

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

There are always criticisms to be made in regard to the make up of any team, and I agree to some degree to the points that you have made. But Lambert takes this to the extreme. Even the title "window slamming shut" is ridiculous hyperbole, when the make up of the team is not static.

Yeah, I never put much stock in the title as it's usually hyperbolic for strict clickbaity reasons.

1. Forward quality: Looking "past" 5/6 of the top two lines is silly. The Flames have an excellent foundation. Writing off Bennett is equally ridiculous. Ignoring Jankowski, Foo and Lazar leaves the impression there is an absolute black hole in the bottom 6. There are questions, but it isn't unreasonable to assume that the bottom 6 will be better than last year and will be better in future years.

Again, I don't know that he wrote off Bennett. He called him a disappointment, which I think is fair, though that doesn't have to remain the case. As has been mentioned, Bennett's 21, there's no reason to think he doesn't break out this year. If he does, that goes a long way to solving the problem, but it remains a problem unless he does.

As for ignoring Jankowski, Foo and Lazar, this is just magic beans talk. None of those guys have done anything at the NHL level yet. Again, if they do (which no one is saying is impossible) it solves the forward depth problem immediately. Until they do, it's a problem.

2. Goaltending is the biggest question mark. I doubt anyone would argue that point. Lambert makes a couple of logic errors in a) assuming average goaltending would be a step down from past years. I would argue it would be a huge upgrade, and 2) ignoring the possibility that Parsons/Gillies/Rittich might replace the current duo in the next few years, thereby opening (not closing) the window even further.

Again, I think you're misreading him. I think he's saying that average goaltending would be an improvement, on the order of 6 or so points. He's also talking specifically about the next two to three years, while Smith is signed for starter's money. I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that none of the three you mentioned are taking over the NHL starting job before the end of next season. It's not a complete impossibility, but I'd certainly consider it unlikely. Maybe Smith provides .915 to .920 tending and Lack is a capable backup once he's allowed to play the way he's comfortable playing. Again, until that happens, it's still an area of major uncertainty, especially after last year.

3.Overall goal scoring doesn't seem to be that big an issue for the Flames. Sure you want more goals, but if that is one of their biggest problems, then they should be well situated.

It was a problem last year, though it's basically the same issue as #1 over again. If you solve the forward depth thing, you solve this. It's just worth highlighting given the quality of transitional play that should be expected with the blue line the Flames have.

I guess I'll stop there because I don't want to be the guy defending the article everyone hates viscerally, but even if you think he was over the top, I just think the central criticisms have, at least, a ring of truth about them.