[Trade] Toffoli to Flames for 2022 1st *, 2023 5th, Heineman, and Pitlick

[Monahammer]

I have always heard -ginch-, personally.

[Lumby Lager]

Your bump of this thread and they way you are acting does not support your claim.

Originally Posted by jjgallow

I'm truly shocked



Not buying it. But even if it's true, the reality is you are allowed to use any insult on here you want and if people defend themselves in any way they are blocked. Specifically with you. Not cool.





Yes there is and you know it lol. Which would be totally fine if I didn't have to tip-toe around it just to stay on the forum. I'm not asking for truth social here lol. Somebody is just super afraid of counter-opinions.




If taking L's is funny to you then this whole Flames season you must find just hilarious.
Just like you found it hilarious when I said a 30-something RW would not solve our defense and goaltending needs and thus was not worth sacrificing our future for.




Because I have a life.



Sorry but it wasn't just multiple paragraphs, it was my entire contribution to the thread. At no point did I say "we don't need a RW". My entire arguement was that he can't make the team better, can't bring us playoff success because:

1. He doesn't address our highest needs
2. Old, won't be around long enough to be here when he does

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=1144

Have a look, this was all about the following logic:

1. When should you give up first rounders?
Answer: When you think they can increase your cup chances. Otherwise, better to keep your future.

2. Does Toffoli increase our cup chances?
Answer: No, before the trade, definitely no.

Now: Even more definitely no, in all ways absolutely not.

[Samonadreau]

[FanIn80]

Had to go back a few pages to see the initial bump. Was worth it for the lol though.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by jjgallow

While it's true we're not "basement dwellers"...yet....

our lack of defense and goaltending should not have come as a surprise and I brought it up many, many times in this thread, and was laughed at for it.

We have no defense to speak of. And we knew that before the trade.

The conversation should end there, without even getting into the goaltender topic.

Here's the reality, Markstrom had one good season. One. In his career, and we expected him to repeat it all following seasons. But let's say he did. Let's say he had a similar season this year. With the defense we have, it wouldn't matter.

And even if it mattered, he'd be worn out and spent by playoff time, with how we are structured and ran.


That doesn't change no matter how many first round picks you throw at it for RWs.

The Flames were 4th in xGA last year and added Weegar, brought back both goaltenders, and the defensive forwards from last year's roster.

Not sure what you mean by the team has no defense.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I have always heard -ginch-, personally.

Sasky variation.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Sasky variation.

Sasky? A good sasky?

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Sasky variation.

Makes sense that flatlanders would have trouble making Os with their mouths.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Makes sense that flatlanders would have trouble making Os with their mouths.

Have their bunny hugs tucked into their gonch

[jjgallow]

Originally Posted by Lumby Lager

Your bump of this thread and they way you are acting does not support your claim.

The Flames are doing that part.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by jjgallow

The Flames are doing that part.

He's tied for 3rd in team scoring you idiot

[jjgallow]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Flames were 4th in xGA last year and added Weegar, brought back both goaltenders, and the defensive forwards from last year's roster.

Not sure what you mean by the team has no defense.

Our goalie was hot last year, yes. For the one year. It didn't eliminate our defensive needs, it just covered them up.

I started a thread on Weegar too on another forum, at the time of the trade. Didn't think people could bare it here.

I have my thoughts on Markstrom too but there is enough evidence on D that it's not needed.

Hanifin, Hanifin, Hanifin.

Hanifin.

They have Rasmus. That is all.


Their forward lines were completely gutted and revamped in the off-season. People said Monahan wasn't a two-way player. Those people were wrong.

Our forward line got older. Quite a bit older. It shows, particularly defensively. Other players who were two-way players dropped off and become 0-way players, like Lucic, which was expected at his age and what is expected to happen when you bump up your team age for short term gain.

[jjgallow]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

He's tied for 3rd in team scoring you idiot

Would be a pretty big deal if wins didn't matter.

[Lanny'sDaMan]

Originally Posted by jjgallow

I started a thread on Weegar too on another forum, at the time of the trade. Didn't think people could bare it here.

.

LOL. Why don't you take your hot takes back on to HF then.

[Geeoff]

i would say gitch or gotch with a t not an n

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

i would say gitch or gotch with a t not an n

This is the real debate. People just straight up making up words in here like it’s no big deal.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Editorial Note: According to Katherine Barber of the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, as quoted in the Edmonton Journal in 2004, this word takes a variety of spellings: “In Saskatchewan, it's gauch, gitch or gotch, but in Alberta it's gaunch, ginch and gonch.

https://www.waywordradio.org/gonch/

Wiktionary gives a slightly more specific version with location:

gitch. (Saskatchewan, Manitoba, slang) Underwear

ginch. (Canada, Alberta and British Columbia, slang) Underwear, especially men's briefs.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

This is the real debate. People just straight up making up words in here like it’s no big deal.

We are anaspeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericombobulation.

[Radio]

It's gonch.

That's it, that's the list.

[Coach]

There is only gitch.