Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
The Flames were a bottom-3 team after the trade deadline, and have since said goodbye to their starting goalie. Everything you could point to as why the Flames could be better than bottom-3 is something you could just as easily point to on the other bottom 10ish teams from last season - but the Flames don't have as much push in that high-end 20-24 year old age group than most of the other teams.
Is Bahl, Bean, and Lomberg really going to propel that "decent" forward group to something more significant than what they were?
Are the Flames worse than the:
Blackhawks? I think so.
Sharks? No. Bottom 3, alongside the Ducks and Flames.
Ducks? No. Bottom 3 alongside the Sharks and Flames.
Blue Jackets? I think so. Their youth has been stockpiling and could explode.
Canadiens? I think so.
Senators? I think so.
Kraken? I think so.
Utah HC? I think so.
I think you're looking at a Flames, Ducks, Sharks race to the bottom. You'll likely see a mid-ranged team collapse down closer to the bottom as well...although you could argue that Calgary probably is the most likely team in that range to tumble down.
|
Its not like Markstom played well after the deadline...I think the D is substantially better than what they were icing at that time. I honestly think the forwards are lacking high end but its a deep group. Now should they start trading guys you are probably right but as as I don't see them as bottom 5 as is. Goaltending is a big question mark to be sure though however I like both guys to be at least average. I mean the team started 2-7-1 last year and I'm betting they start better this season. The young and youngish players on the Flames are better than people think....I also think a few guys thrive with far less pressure (Huberdeau). The PP will be substantially better than last season with Kuzmeko and Barrie (maybe) Like what forwards did they lose? Lindholm who was awful and Mangi? Kuzmenko and Mantha certainly up them on skill.
This won't be a 60 point team IMO