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)
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.
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. Gio is over, yet Gaudreau, Tkatchuk, hamilton, monahan aren't even at their mid-20s yet (by year of birth). So, actually half of the core he calls out, has yet to even HIT their mid-20s as yet. A complete failure to consider any concept of organic growth of the youth, as he blasts a 21 year old bennett for failing to hit 30 points, not to mention considering it "charitable" to consider ferland to provide offensive production before lumping lazar in as well. it's like the author is void of any concept of youth/prospect progression.
4) flames offseason was flawed in solidifying defence by getting a middling dman rather than augmenting the forwards..... ummm, k.
It was a truly stupidly written article. How do writer's like these still have jobs?? Like such poorly thought out arguments, that are articulated in an even worse fashion.
I would have respected the article more if it kept the same exact thesis that the "flames window could be slammed shut" but formulated flat out smarter and more reasonable arguments to back it up:
1) Goaltending has been an issue, the solutions in place are questionable at best.
2) The forwards, is built upon an ok group, around gaudreau, monahan, and 3M line. However, will fall short if the young guys don't progress and deliver (bennet, ferland, lazar), leaving the team underskilled compared to other upper echelon Western Conference teams.
That's a perfectly justifiable position to take on why the flames may not materialize to a cup contender. However, the author's analytic thinking and/or writing ability leaves a pretty dumb article.
Hope he comes here and tries to justify such a poor piece of work
