Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 06-03-2018, 11:42 PM   #401
Harry Lime
Franchise Player
 
Harry Lime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Exp:
Default

Good ol' number 26.

And Lucky Number 7s, we used to call 'em.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
Harry Lime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 08:42 AM   #402
Classic_Sniper
#1 Goaltender
 
Classic_Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
As has been shown to you already, the only net cost of buying him out this year is the $1.5M in 21/22. Are there contracts due at that time? Of course. But there will also be young replacements on the D-corp, and also in net.
$1.5M in 2021/22, when the cap will probably be between $85 and 90M, is not a concern.

If Treliving sees an opportunity to improve the team his year, he is going to take it. And even though there is a fair amount of cap space available for a move, he would probably still want to have room to make another move as the season unfolds.

I agree that if nothing happens this summer, and they have miles of cap space, then it makes sense to let Brouwer eat popcorn and wait until next year to buy him out.

But the cost of buying him out is minimal, and gives Treliving lots of flexibility. Suggesting he sees it your way is short-sighted.
No, I'm just extremely confident. I've already looked into this months ago, this wasn't something I just saw and responded to. I looked at our future cap situation just after the new year and it makes sense to me to wait it out another year.

I know the chances of a buyout is theoretically equal, but I also know that GMs don't like saddling themselves with dead cap space, so you might as well try to minimize the impact. Only time will tell, but I just don't see a buyout happening.
Classic_Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 08:45 AM   #403
spuzzum
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Exp:
Default

How large of an impact did Engelland have on the Flames the season before last? The Flames certainly had a lot more success while he was here including several playoff dances.

At the time of his signing, it was viewed as the worst FA signing of the summer. No offensive production, extremely slow and immobile, and a gritty type player being phased out of the league.

I wonder if he had a much larger impact on this team and if the Flames need a similar type defenseman going into next season.
spuzzum is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to spuzzum For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 09:11 AM   #404
Mattman
First Line Centre
 
Mattman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YYC
Exp:
Default

I could get behind signing Vanek and Derek Ryan. Both very useful bottom 6 RHS.

BUT

I would like to see a right hand shot added to our top 6 and preferably our 1st line before getting depth guys.

Ferland - Janko - Vanek
Mangiapane - Ryan - Foo
__________________
Mattman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 09:20 AM   #405
Jiri Hrdina
Franchise Player
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Adding Vanek is adding another guy who isn't a good all around player.
Until the Flames add guys who can consistently produce while not being horrible two way players - they have no chance of competing.
Jiri Hrdina is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 10:08 AM   #406
Toonage
Taking a while to get to 5000
 
Toonage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Exp:
Default

The morning show on 960 has mentioned on several occasions (and I believe they have legit inside info on this) that management doesn't like Vanek and would never entertain having him on the team.
Toonage is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Toonage For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 10:16 AM   #407
Mattman
First Line Centre
 
Mattman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YYC
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toonage View Post
The morning show on 960 has mentioned on several occasions (and I believe they have legit inside info on this) that management doesn't like Vanek and would never entertain having him on the team.
There's gotta be a reason. Did someone on our management ever coach him or were they ever close to him in some way?
__________________
Mattman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 10:39 AM   #408
Classic_Sniper
#1 Goaltender
 
Classic_Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toonage View Post
The morning show on 960 has mentioned on several occasions (and I believe they have legit inside info on this) that management doesn't like Vanek and would never entertain having him on the team.
Maybe management needs to start thinking outside their incredibly rigid box though. Maybe we wouldn't have ended up missing the playoffs this season because we care so much more about character and grit over actual talent and skill. I'm not saying Vanek is the answer, but this same garbage thinking over the last 2 decades cannot continue. The horse has been beaten, it's already dead.

Explore all and any options that makes this team faster and more skilled and maybe we can actually win a playoff round for once when we're expected to rather than just winning one out of the blue.
Classic_Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Classic_Sniper For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 10:44 AM   #409
Toonage
Taking a while to get to 5000
 
Toonage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Exp:
Default

No idea why they seem to dislike him (or allegedly dislike him). Playoff disappearances maybe? Seems to put up the points in the regular season but who knows, could be bad in the room? All I know is I've heard his name come up a few times and its been shot down each time with that reason either hinted at or outright said.

Also maybe it was Burke advising Treliving to stay away, and that could be gone now. Really, who knows. Just wanted to point it out though that given what we do know, he likely isn't on the radar.
Toonage is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 10:48 AM   #410
GoJetsGo
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
Maybe management needs to start thinking outside their incredibly rigid box though. Maybe we wouldn't have ended up missing the playoffs this season because we care so much more about character and grit over actual talent and skill. I'm not saying Vanek is the answer, but this same garbage thinking over the last 2 decades cannot continue. The horse has been beaten, it's already dead.

Explore all and any options that makes this team faster and more skilled and maybe we can actually win a playoff round for once when we're expected to rather than just winning one out of the blue.
This is such a over-dramatic leap / reach.

Because it's speculated they don't like one player notorious for being streaky, one dimensional and a terrible two-way player, you get to "garbage thinking"?

GoJetsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to GoJetsGo For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 10:48 AM   #411
Red
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toonage View Post
No idea why they seem to dislike him (or allegedly dislike him). Playoff disappearances maybe? Seems to put up the points in the regular season but who knows, could be bad in the room? All I know is I've heard his name come up a few times and its been shot down each time with that reason either hinted at or outright said.

Also maybe it was Burke advising Treliving to stay away, and that could be gone now. Really, who knows. Just wanted to point it out though that given what we do know, he likely isn't on the radar.

The Flames would be Vanek's 6th team in 2 years.

This isn't just Burke and Treliving, he is a player that people keep shipping out of town. Good skillset keeps him in the NHL, but there seems to be something about him that people don't like.
Red is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Red For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 10:54 AM   #412
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
No, I'm just extremely confident. I've already looked into this months ago, this wasn't something I just saw and responded to. I looked at our future cap situation just after the new year and it makes sense to me to wait it out another year.

I know the chances of a buyout is theoretically equal, but I also know that GMs don't like saddling themselves with dead cap space, so you might as well try to minimize the impact. Only time will tell, but I just don't see a buyout happening.
Oh, I know you're confident. Unfortunately, increased confidence does not make us more correct.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 11:04 AM   #413
Classic_Sniper
#1 Goaltender
 
Classic_Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoJetsGo View Post
This is such a over-dramatic leap / reach.

Because it's speculated they don't like one player notorious for being streaky, one dimensional and a terrible two-way player, you get to "garbage thinking"?

No, the garbage thinking has been prevalent for the last 2 or 3 decades and it's the likely the cause of our incredibly mediocre results over the same time period. This was a team once littered with Hall of Famers on the same roster and now, we might have just 1.

It's not like this is not the first time I've stated this. I don't have a problem with them disliking that specific player. But it's the line of thinking that I have a problem because it's the same reason we've ended up with "character" guys instead of players who can actually score and contribute. We were one of the lowest scoring teams in the league, if someone can help improve the Flames' ability to score more goals, then management needs to look into it.
Classic_Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Classic_Sniper For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 11:10 AM   #414
Classic_Sniper
#1 Goaltender
 
Classic_Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
Oh, I know you're confident. Unfortunately, increased confidence does not make us more correct.
Listen, if Troy Brouwer is bought out this summer, I have no problem coming out and admitting I was wrong. But until it is done, I'll continue to be extremely confident that he won't. If Treliving has shown me anything in his tenure here, it's that he's very fiscally responsible and risk adverse, so I just don't see him taking the buyout plunge yet.
Classic_Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Classic_Sniper For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 11:16 AM   #415
GoJetsGo
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
No, the garbage thinking has been prevalent for the last 2 or 3 decades and it's the likely the cause of our incredibly mediocre results over the same time period. This was a team once littered with Hall of Famers on the same roster and now, we might have just 1.

It's not like this is not the first time I've stated this. I don't have a problem with them disliking that specific player. But it's the line of thinking that I have a problem because it's the same reason we've ended up with "character" guys instead of players who can actually score and contribute. We were one of the lowest scoring teams in the league, if someone can help improve the Flames' ability to score more goals, then management needs to look into it.
This is utter nonsense. You just took a rumour about an individual player we don't even know is true and used it to validate your biased, over-dramatic negative feelings spanning two decades and several management regimes.

I don't really care if you have pent up frustrations and an inherently negative outlook. But using the example of Vanek above as a jumping off point to spew it and act like that validates it was both weak and painful to read.
GoJetsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 11:16 AM   #416
Bingo
Owner
 
Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
Maybe management needs to start thinking outside their incredibly rigid box though. Maybe we wouldn't have ended up missing the playoffs this season because we care so much more about character and grit over actual talent and skill. I'm not saying Vanek is the answer, but this same garbage thinking over the last 2 decades cannot continue. The horse has been beaten, it's already dead.

Explore all and any options that makes this team faster and more skilled and maybe we can actually win a playoff round for once when we're expected to rather than just winning one out of the blue.
How can you just jump inside their heads and deem it character and grit?

Vanek is soft and one dimensional. The game isn't played that way anymore.
Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 11:17 AM   #417
Bingo
Owner
 
Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
No, the garbage thinking has been prevalent for the last 2 or 3 decades and it's the likely the cause of our incredibly mediocre results over the same time period. This was a team once littered with Hall of Famers on the same roster and now, we might have just 1.

It's not like this is not the first time I've stated this. I don't have a problem with them disliking that specific player. But it's the line of thinking that I have a problem because it's the same reason we've ended up with "character" guys instead of players who can actually score and contribute. We were one of the lowest scoring teams in the league, if someone can help improve the Flames' ability to score more goals, then management needs to look into it.
Honestly I think it's garbage thinking to try and put any regime in the same package as all others and think it's a 30 year thing.
Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
Old 06-04-2018, 11:26 AM   #418
Classic_Sniper
#1 Goaltender
 
Classic_Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo View Post
How can you just jump inside their heads and deem it character and grit?

Vanek is soft and one dimensional. The game isn't played that way anymore.
Because through the last couple decades, the GMs who have been employed have put heavy emphasis on these traits. This isn't something that I conjured up from thin air, this is taken from the Horse's mouths.

If people here don't want Vanek, that's fine. It's like he's anywhere near the top of my list. I'm just saying, this management group needs to think differently from years past because all we've seen is a whole of mediocrity. So sorry everybody for trying to think outside the box a little.
Classic_Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 11:29 AM   #419
GoJetsGo
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
Because through the last couple decades, the GMs who have been employed have put heavy emphasis on these traits. This isn't something that I conjured up from thin air, this is taken from the Horse's mouths.

If people here don't want Vanek, that's fine. It's like he's anywhere near the top of my list. I'm just saying, this management group needs to think differently from years past because all we've seen is a whole of mediocrity. So sorry everybody for trying to think outside the box a little.
And what you're not getting is just because the present group may dislike Vanek as a player (which we don't know) it in no way correlates to anything thinking separate, previous management groups had. Philosophical or otherwise.

You're connecting dots that aren't there to validate your own frustrations / narrative.
GoJetsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 11:31 AM   #420
Bingo
Owner
 
Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper View Post
Because through the last couple decades, the GMs who have been employed have put heavy emphasis on these traits. This isn't something that I conjured up from thin air, this is taken from the Horse's mouths.

If people here don't want Vanek, that's fine. It's like he's anywhere near the top of my list. I'm just saying, this management group needs to think differently from years past because all we've seen is a whole of mediocrity. So sorry everybody for trying to think outside the box a little.
Treliving thinks what he thinks.

You can agree with his thinking or disagree for sure ... but I'm more than certain that Risebrough, Coates, Sutter and Button have little to do with his decision process.

The guy has drafted the likes of Mangiapane and Phillips in recent drafts. The guy isn't all in on grit.
Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:07 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy