[Rumour] Flames interested in Tobias Rieder

[Red]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Small sample? That was the entire tenure of the coaching staff I gave up until the injury. That’s an entire season, playoffs and a 1/3 of season where the PP and its systems was one of the better ones in the league.

You want to talk about small sample sizes? How about everyone here trying to fire the the coaching staff when the PP was struggling for a few weeks. That’s a small sample size. In fact, Dave Cameron was fired because of that short sample size because his PP was more good than bad through his time with the Flames.

I already looked at the numbers and watched every game and the hypothesis that I came up with was backed up by the final numbers when I looked at it at the end of the season. You can come up with any other theory you want, but when a good PP and good systems drops nearly 9% and down 20 spots, it’s pretty hard to ignore the correlation/causation.

I think the PP was either historically bad in bad times or average at best of times.

In no time was the Flames PP a strength of this team.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by 868904

This is why you are not an NHL GM because you are only focused on the short term.

Ferland was going to be a UFA and the Flames were going to be in a tough situation of re-signing Tkachuk, Bennett and Ferland.

It was always going to be a difficult choice and test. Treliving traded Ferland for a guy with greater control and a superior overall game (centremen, faceoffs, PK, PP).

I get what you are saying about Ferland, trust me, I am one of his biggest fans, he was my favourite Flame player, I think he's very skilled and was not just riding Gaudreau's coat-tails.

But the Ferland for Lindholm part of the deal is as much about asset management then anything else. Ferland can go anywhere he wants next year. Lindholm is "stuck" as a Flames for multiple years.

Flames traded a "40 point player" who had one year of control for another "40 point" player with multi years of control. To me, both players still have upside, and they each bring something a little differently, the big difference, and why the Flames win the deal, is because of player control.

You are too caught up on this goal replacement thing. If Hamilton isn't the trigger man on the powerplay, someone else will be. Giordano can shoot the puck, Andersson can shoot the puck. Both guys have a history of running powerplays. Hanifin can shoot the puck and has a history of running a powerplay.

Ferland's spot with Gaudreau and Monahan wiil get replaced by either Lindholm or Bennett. Both of those guys are capable of scoring 20 goals.

I understand completely why the trade was made and I knew full well that trading a soon to be UFA in Ferland and Dougie Hamilton was a likely move. If you looked through my post history you’d already know that I thought this move was good in an asset management standpoint.

But that doesn’t change the fact that we lost goals in the trade and the players we’re looking to add aren’t exactly going to help us enough in that department. We’re a below average goal scoring team and in my opinion, we need impact players if we want to contend. Not just replacing middle of the pack players for more middle of the pack players.

7 of the 8 teams that made it to the 2nd round this season finished top in 10 in goals in the league. That’s where I want this team to be. I’m of the opinion that teams who generally finish higher in GF, generally go deeper in the playoffs. In my opinion, the standards around here along with the Flames’ organization need to be raised if we ever truly want to be a consistent contender. I’m done with this mediocrity BS.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

There's a massive difference between having enough to get by and evolving into a 2 unit powerhouse. What exactly is this team striving for? A second unit consisting of the players the Flames currently have is just not good enough.

Grouping wingers together because they're wingers that score? Forgive me for taking such a leap of faith. Usage is what has lead Grabner to minimal PP production compared to Vanek

Grabner isn't a truly well rounded player. Look at his assist numbers. He's not a guy that creates a lot of chances for himself or his line-mates. Thus he's not a good PP guy.
He's a guy that has great speed, and reasonable finish when he gets a chance.
If you think adding him to the PP is going to really help it - in my view you are dead wrong. That's not what he is.

As for Vanek - there's a reason why he gets bounced around. His GAS meter is on 0. He's not a guy that winning teams need. He's a guy that produces for bad teams.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

I think the PP was either historically bad in bad times or average at best of times.

In no time was the Flames PP a strength of this team.

16-17 PP = Top 10
2017 playoffs = #1
17-18 Before Versteeg went down = #11
17-18 Without Versteeg = #30

For an average to below average scoring team in the league, this actually would be considered a strength. Up until the Versteeg injury, we were well above average and in 20%+ range. If we had the same powerplay performance throughout all of 17-18, we definitely would’ve been a playoff team.

[Samonadreau]

I know I'm in the minority but I think Rieder is overhyped a bit. I guess if you can pick him up for cheap.

[Red]

You talk about small sample sizes and bring up a sweep in the playoffs?

The other stats are as i said. Average are best.

There is top 3 PP
There is bottom 3 PP

Everything in between is mediocre. And probably not that different between the 5th best and 5th worse.

[Enoch Root]

By the way, in 16/17, Versteeg was 7th on the team in PP TOI behind Brouwer. Brouwer's PP ice time was cut substantially in 17/18. Perhaps the drop in PP production was because they took Brouwer off it.

(equally as ridiculous as your singular obsession)

[Enoch Root]

THe other thing that is funny about your obsession is that you continue to lament that we have traded Hamilton, who will be missed on the PP. While there is no doubt some reason to think that Hamilton's shot will in fact be missed, he wasn't on the PP for those periods where the PP was rolling and you are of the impression that it was great.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

...But that doesn’t change the fact that we lost goals in the trade and the players we’re looking to add aren’t exactly going to help us enough in that department.

These are not facts. I see no reason to conclude that the Flames will be worse offensively next season given their terrible team shooting percentage this year (on the backs of huge decreases from their career averages for several key players) and the awful powerplay which was frustratingly stationary and slow. All of that should change with a new coaching staff.

The Flames have traded away good players, but in exchange for really good players. Lindholm completely changes the dynamic of the forward group in such a way that his impact on scoring is going to be felt throughout the lineup. Unlike Ferland—who was really good on the top line—this is a player who can play anywhere and can drive his own line.

We’re a below average goal scoring team and in my opinion, we need impact players if we want to contend. Not just replacing middle of the pack players for more middle of the pack players.

Hanifin and Lindholm are at worst "middle of the pack players." Even if the Flames are not much better this year, in two or three years these players are almost certain to be a fair bit improved, and both could realistically be among the best players on the team.

7 of the 8 teams that made it to the 2nd round this season finished top in 10 in goals in the league. That’s where I want this team to be. I’m of the opinion that teams who generally finish higher in GF, generally go deeper in the playoffs. In my opinion, the standards around here along with the Flames’ organization need to be raised if we ever truly want to be a consistent contender. I’m done with this mediocrity BS.

Two years ago with essentially the same personnel the Flames were in the top-half of NHL scoring. That season Dougie Hamilton and Micheal Ferland combined for 28 goals. Last season Noah Hanifin and Elias Lindholm together scored 26 goals, and Hanifin was Carolina's top-scoring defenseman. The point is that there are a bunch of different ways to score, and the Flames certainly have personnel who is capable of generating offence well beyond Hamilton and Ferland—two players who had career years in goals by a factor of +10, and who are both already in their mid-twenties.

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

By the way, in 16/17, Versteeg was 7th on the team in PP TOI behind Brouwer. Brouwer's PP ice time was cut substantially in 17/18. Perhaps the drop in PP production was because they took Brouwer off it.

(equally as ridiculous as your singular obsession)

Also the biggest difference between last year's results and this year's is the production from the second unit.

So unless your assertion is that Kris Versteeg is some kind of magical powerplay talisman without whom we will never succeed your theory really doesn't hold water.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by AC

Good call, he has:
https://www.eliteprospects.com/team/...many/2016-2017
https://www.eliteprospects.com/team/...many/2016-2017
https://www.eliteprospects.com/team/...many/2015-2016
https://www.eliteprospects.com/team/...many/2014-2015

He also coached the German kid we signed, Yasin Ehliz.

We must be playing the long game for 2025 UFA Leon Draisaitl.

[agulati]

I'm perfectly fine getting him if its for a short term deal below 2M. He can potentially replace Ferland's scoring. It's good to hear he is looking for a short term show me contract. Maybe a 2 year / 1.5-1.75m contract?

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

16-17 PP = Top 10
2017 playoffs = #1
17-18 Before Versteeg went down = #11
17-18 Without Versteeg = #30

For an average to below average scoring team in the league, this actually would be considered a strength. Up until the Versteeg injury, we were well above average and in 20%+ range. If we had the same powerplay performance throughout all of 17-18, we definitely would’ve been a playoff team.

I wouldn't mind Versteeg back but this analysis is beyond flawed.

16-17 PP was top ten in power play percentage. That doesn't mean we even had an above average first unit. It means our second unit, primarily the four of Giordano, Tkachuk, Hamilton and our PPP leader Mikael Backlund, was the ~second best in the NHL after the Kadri line. Backlund's 8.08 On-Ice Goals Per 60 on the PP led the team that year with 150+ minutes played, and ranks him as the 56th ranked forward in the league in that regard. In other worlds, 55 forwards, were ahead of Backlund in terms of on-ice PP goals - even though he led our team. Buffallo, Boston, Washington, Edmonton, Tampa, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Toronto, Columbus, Philly, Minny, Nashville, New Jersey, and Ottawa all had a player ahead of Backlund. That means our second unit was roughly the fourteenth best power play unit in the NHL.

I'm not making this up. Backlund and Versteeg had the same number of power play points - 16 - but Backlund had 11 fewer PP minutes (or, roughly as many fewer power play opportunities if each is a minute long) and he wasn't the one playing with Monahan or Gaudreau.

Our first unit was actually not very good, and a huge part of that was the setup that you alluded to (having Versteeg on the Right Flank and Gaudreau on the Left Flank gave us zero threats and most of the goals that unit did score were the kind where the goalie wanted back - not the kind of goals you want to bank a power play design on). Between Backlund and Versteeg, you can add units from Anaheim, St. Louis, Montreal, San Jose, Rangers, and Carolina. In other words, our first unit was roughly the 21st most effective power play unit in the league that year - and that's ASSUMING none of the teams I listed didn't have multiple units ahead of Versteeg's unit, which would be a mess to look up.

2017 Playoffs - Yes it was it was a power play that technically scored. That primarily had to do with the fact that we got to face a Ducks team who had a bunch of rookie defensemen on their penalty kill getting positionally lost because guys like Lindholm and Fowler were injured. And do I need to point out it was a 4 game sample size?

2017-18 - Infinitesimal sample size. Where would our Power Play have ranked if you remove the Philadelphia Flyers game? You know, the game where Sean Monahan had a power play hat trick on his old goalie. It was an outlier game, again not something you build a power play around.

I agree our power play needs more RHS skill but let's not pretend we had a great power play. Not in 2016-17 where our second unit matched our first unit (which, while great, is not something you should ever bank on) and not in the other two tiny samples.

I wouldn't even mind Versteeg back, but I had to call a spade a spade.

[Harry Lime]

I don't know about these teams that let their young players grow at the NHL level. Boston, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh. They don't know what they are doing.

They should sign a bunch of proven bottom 6 guys, who play at the absolute peak of their ability to just be a bottom 6 guy.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

I don't know about these teams that let their young players grow at the NHL level. Boston, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh. They don't know what they are doing.

They should sign a bunch of proven bottom 6 guys, who play at the absolute peak of their ability to just be a bottom 6 guy.

Ten rookies played games for the Flames last season including two players who were permanently added to the roster.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

I don't know about these teams that let their young players grow at the NHL level. Boston, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh. They don't know what they are doing.

They should sign a bunch of proven bottom 6 guys, who play at the absolute peak of their ability to just be a bottom 6 guy.

There is a theory that has young guys protected by tougher vets so the kids don't eat "welcome to the bigs" elbows every other shift. Instead of shying away from contact and playing scared they play their game and develop.


Young players are great, but you need a healthy balance. Seeing people propose Foo, Magipane and Janko on a line makes me cringe. These guys would never play their game, they would play hot potato.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Ten rookies played games for the Flames last season including two players who were permanently added to the roster.

Done through necessity because every year we bring in vets for the bottom six and every year they bomb to varying degrees.

The rookies playing at all was always plan 'b'. Not that 10 rookies should be plan 'a', but one spot open to rotate a rookie or two in and out would be a positive step to the development of the team.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Done through necessity because every year we bring in vets for the bottom six and every year they bomb to varying degrees.

The rookies playing at all was always plan 'b'. Not that 10 rookies should be plan 'a', but one spot open to rotate a rookie or two in and out would be a positive step to the development of the team.

Some vets they brought in totally bombed. But if we look at it objectively, which rookies played well enough to win those jobs?
Janko and Kulak. Janko shlould have made the team out of camp. But even then, he fell off a cliff in the late season.
Rookies struggle. And probably more so than those vets.

The flames haven't been shy giving younger players spots. We just havent had any home runs. Tkachuk the exception.
Others have either been just ok or non impact.

I keep thinking that we dont provide a good enviroment to let them have some success. We lack leadership and toughness. Oilers did that for years and all the youngsters stagnated.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Red

Some vets they brought in totally bombed. But if we look at it objectively, which rookies played well enough to win those jobs?
Janko and Kulak. Janko shlould have made the team out of camp. But even then, he fell off a cliff in the late season.
Rookies struggle. And probably more so than those vets.

The flames haven't been shy giving younger players spots. We just havent had any home runs. Tkachuk the exception.
Others have either been just ok or non impact.

I keep thinking that we dont provide a good enviroment to let them have some success. We lack leadership and toughness. Oilers did that for years and all the youngsters stagnated.

Nature vs nuture, do we have a middle of the road scouting team led by the same man for 25 years. Or is it the way we develop them? I don't know, I wasn't sold on Huska either.

[sureLoss]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1012803575804825601