Building The 2018/19 Flames Roster

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think the Flames offensive woes are a little exaggerated by how poorly the season ended. I agree, they absolutely need more scoring next year, but I suspect that the core group of forwards is not nearly as offensively inept as they are made out to be by some.

Something to consider:

In the second week of December the Flames were in the middle-of-the-pack in terms of team scoring. At the time, Johnny Gaudreau was scoring at a 1.22 pts/gp rate, and Sean Monahan was averaging 0.94 pts/gp. It is now reported that Monahan began receiving injections in his wrist just after Christmas. From in the third week of December to the end of the season Gaudreau's production dropped a full quarter-point to 0.94 pts/gp, Monahan dropped to 0.81 pts/gp, and the Flames plummeted to 28th in the League in scoring through the final 50 games. From mid-February until the end of the season they were dead last. Through the final three weeks of the season after Monahan was shut down, Gaudreau scored one goal and one assist. It is worth considering how much Monahan's health affected the entire team.

Once again, yes, I agree that the Flames need to add some pieces to improve their scoring depth, and they need more offence overall. But by the same token, I don't believe that a player like Vanek is the answer. There is still good reason to expect much of the improvement to come from within.

But I think you're saying that at their very best, Flames were average in scoring. Other teams in the league have injuries and peaks and valleys too. So I think its a little too homerish to explain away the Flames valleys without trying to do so for every other team.

[CliffFletcher]

Neal is a good example. A consistent goal-scorer who plays with a physical edge. Also said to wear out his welcome with teammates, which is likely a factor in why three teams parted ways with him before his 30th birthday, even though his on-ice play was strong.

Should that stop the Flames from signing him? It should probably be a consideration. But just one of many. If management think he can help the team score goals and win games, they'll sign him and hope the personality issues don't disrupt the locker room much.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think the Flames offensive woes are a little exaggerated by how poorly the season ended. I agree, they absolutely need more scoring next year, but I suspect that the core group of forwards is not nearly as offensively inept as they are made out to be by some.

Something to consider:

In the second week of December the Flames were in the middle-of-the-pack in terms of team scoring. At the time, Johnny Gaudreau was scoring at a 1.22 pts/gp rate, and Sean Monahan was averaging 0.94 pts/gp. It is now reported that Monahan began receiving injections in his wrist just after Christmas. From in the third week of December to the end of the season Gaudreau's production dropped a full quarter-point to 0.94 pts/gp, Monahan dropped to 0.81 pts/gp, and the Flames plummeted to 28th in the League in scoring through the final 50 games. From mid-February until the end of the season they were dead last. Through the final three weeks of the season after Monahan was shut down, Gaudreau scored one goal and one assist. It is worth considering how much Monahan's health affected the entire team.

Once again, yes, I agree that the Flames need to add some pieces to improve their scoring depth, and they need more offence overall. But by the same token, I don't believe that a player like Vanek is the answer. There is still good reason to expect much of the improvement to come from within.

Between the start of the season and November 1st, the flames were 30th in Goals For.

Between the start of the season and November 15th the flames were 21st in goals for.

Between the start of the season and december 1st the flames were 11th in the league on the PP and 20th in the league in goals for.

Even with one of the top powerplays in the NHL, the Flames still could not score enough goals to just be average.

By December 15th, the Flames were still 20th in the league in goals for.

By January 1st the Flames were 24th in goals for.

By February 1st, the flames were 21st in goals for.

By February 15th, 20th in goals for.

By March 1st, 15th in the league in goals for. By March 15th, back to 20th.

By April 1st, 27th in the league in goals for.

You can call that middle of the pack if you'd like but it's not accurate. They were in the bottom 3rd of the league in scoring from the outset of the season and stayed there for for an 82 game schedule.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

But I think you're saying that at their very best, Flames were average in scoring.

Well, yeah, I actually conceded twice in my post that the Flames need to improve scoring.

Other teams in the league have injuries and peaks and valleys too. So I think its a little too homerish to explain away the Flames valleys without trying to do so for every other team.

This was not the intent of my post. I was merely pointing out that despite their awful finish it is likely that the Flames are much better than bottom-five in NHL scoring. With the same essential personnel the Flames have been considerably more productive in previous seasons, so I tend to think that their #27 finish in NHL scoring is an outlier. That is all.

[Flash Walken]

nm.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

...You can call that middle of the pack if you'd like but it's not accurate. They were in the bottom 3rd of the league in scoring from the outset of the season and stayed there for for an 82 game schedule.

Are the Flames a bottom-five scoring team? Or are they a #15–20-scoring team? In the 2016–17 season they finished #17.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

nm.

Yes. Like I said: this last season was an outlier.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Are the Flames a bottom-five scoring team? Or are they a #15–20-scoring team? In the 2016–17 season they finished #17.

Well 17th isn't good enough either so I'll leave that to you to decide whether a team worse than more than half of their competition at scoring goals doesn't need a ton of help scoring goals.

This comparison to other bad Flames teams as a sign of something good is baffling. It's a very Flames Fan quality.

Other teams have problems too, finishing 27th in the league is indicative of where they were all season in terms of scoring, whether healthy or unhealthy.

Being 30th in the league in scoring at the start of the season and finishing 27th at the end of the season is probably an indication that yes, they were a bottom 5 scoring team.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Do you see a decline?
.

I do, because I'm not looking at a stat line.

You've yet to answer the question posed several times as to why if he's so wonderful why so many teams kick him to the curb to the tune of six in the last few years alone.

Bingo was right on the last page. It's borderline insane a couple of you are outright fixating on a player like this at the point of the off season.

Sights and expectations for improvement should be set much, much higher.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This comparison to other bad Flames teams as a sign of something good is baffling. It's a very Flames Fan quality.

lol, do you ever get tired of being the way you are? You are one of the worst Flames fans there are, constantly berating the franchise and it's fans with sinde comments exactly like this. Why do you even follow this team with how much spite and loathing you have?

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Inconsistent players that disappear get lots of chances if they have skill, but then at some point they move to the next point in their career ... that of offensive guy for really bad teams.

Val Bure was a great example

Vanek is a current example.

Cammalleri

Tanguay

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Neal is a good example. A consistent goal-scorer who plays with a physical edge. Also said to wear out his welcome with teammates, which is likely a factor in why three teams parted ways with him before his 30th birthday, even though his on-ice play was strong.

Should that stop the Flames from signing him? It should probably be a consideration. But just one of many. If management think he can help the team score goals and win games, they'll sign him and hope the personality issues don't disrupt the locker room much.

The problem with Neal is that he's never put up big numbers and his game does not seem like one that will age well. If the Flames could sign him for 2-3 years, I'd be for it, but the reality is that someone will likely offer him a 5 year deal and at that term, he is a huge risk to turn into another boat anchor.

Trade is the most logical approach to fix the offensive woes.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

The problem with Neal is that he's never put up big numbers and his game does not seem like one that will age well. If the Flames could sign him for 2-3 years, I'd be for it, but the reality is that someone will likely offer him a 5 year deal and at that term, he is a huge risk to turn into another boat anchor.

Trade is the most logical approach to fix the offensive woes.

Neal could be the next Brouwer. Especially if he loses another step.

[DJones]

Did a quick look and it's probably been beaten to death but where did everyone end up with Derek Ryan?

Seems like he would be a good utility player for the bottom six.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by DJones

Did a quick look and it's probably been beaten to death but where did everyone end up with Derek Ryan?

Seems like he would be a good utility player for the bottom six.

Many seem like they aren't interested.

I think it's a solid idea, and won't be surprised if it happens, given the Peters' connection.

Good depth scoring C, right hand shot, strong at face offs.

[GoJetsGo]

Yea Neal seems like a good fit as it sits now but the contract dollars and especially length would be frightening. I'd steer clear for that reason alone.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This comparison to other bad Flames teams as a sign of something good is baffling. It's a very Flames Fan quality.

That is such a painfully weak thing to say.

Everyone here is a sports fan. As a sports fan you pick a team. You cheer for them. You hope their warts are small and the good signs are huge. You are probably biased.

There's nothing "Flames fan quality" about hoping a season is an aberration.

That's just a smug, arrogant way of looking down on others that you seem to assume are beneath you in objectivity and/or intelligence.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Well 17th isn't good enough either so I'll leave that to you to decide whether a team worse than more than half of their competition at scoring goals doesn't need a ton of help scoring goals.

And I have answered this by agreeing that the Flames definitely need to improve offensively. But I take issue with the insinuation that the team is presently a bottom-five scoring team.

This comparison to other bad Flames teams as a sign of something good is baffling. It's a very Flames Fan quality.

Yeah, this clearly went right over your head—your condescension helps to demonstrate as much. The point is to show a considerable variation in offence which strongly suggests that a team consisting of essentially the same personnel finishing a full ten places below their four-year scoring average is probably an outlier.

Other teams have problems too, finishing 27th in the league is indicative of where they were all season in terms of scoring, whether healthy or unhealthy.

I am not interesting in anything more than how we measure the Flames's offensive potential moving forward, which includes other teams's problems. I continue to maintain that the Flames are better than their scoring returns from this past season.

Being 30th in the league in scoring at the start of the season and finishing 27th at the end of the season is probably an indication that yes, they were a bottom 5 scoring team.

It could be, but for a team that ranks #16 in scoring through 328 games in the past four seasons I would argue that this is more likely an outlier.

[Karl]

Flames bottom-6 was not good enough last year.

If they want to be better then they should move on from at least Hathaway and Brouwer. Hathaway does not have NHL level skill and Brouwer no longer has NHL level skill.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

I do, because I'm not looking at a stat line.

You've yet to answer the question posed several times as to why if he's so wonderful why so many teams kick him to the curb to the tune of six in the last few years alone.

Bingo was right on the last page. It's borderline insane a couple of you are outright fixating on a player like this at the point of the off season.

Sights and expectations for improvement should be set much, much higher.

I agree that the Flames could get RWs or Cs much better than Vanek. But at what cost? Are the Flames to shovel out next year's picks or the team's prospects or trade Brodie and rely on LHD that may not be ready? It's not as simple as saying: we have a need and let's fix it with the best possible solution because the best possible solution will cost a lot.

I think the Flames should aim for a quiet summer of
-trading Stone for a pick or young, speedy and skilled bottom 6 forward,
-picking up undervalued FAs such as Vanek or Grabner for cheap, and
-drafting skilled and speedy players with perceived problems such as lack of size.

If the Flames go in on big FAs or try to acquire big assets via trades, the players and teams will see them coming from a mile away and take advantage of their desperation.