April 14 Practice - Ramo & Byron on the ice. Monahan leaves practice early...

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yeah, I'm not a big believer in "he brings different things". A guy either contributes more to you winning the game, or he doesn't. I don't care if he does it through hitting or scoring goals or skating around with the puck for his entire shift doing nothing and then dumping it in (which is better than being a liability). How you accomplish the goal of contributing to team success is secondary to accomplishing the goal itself.

And for me, Raymond advances the cause of a Flames victory more than does Bollig owing to defensive play, even if he's largely invisible. Then there's the chance he has a game where he creates a goal or two.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yeah, I'm not a big believer in "he brings different things". A guy either contributes more to you winning the game, or he doesn't. I don't care if he does it through hitting or scoring goals or skating around with the puck for his entire shift doing nothing and then dumping it in (which is better than being a liability). How you accomplish the goal of contributing to team success is secondary to accomplishing the goal itself.

And for me, Raymond advances the cause of a Flames victory more than does Bollig owing to defensive play, even if he's largely invisible. Then there's the chance he has a game where he creates a goal or two.

I disagree. Raymond is a weak turnover machine, plays die on his stick. Bollig brings a physical factor and can hold guys accountable. The Flames really need to find a way to dump Raymond this off season.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yeah, I'm not a big believer in "he brings different things". A guy either contributes more to you winning the game, or he doesn't. I don't care if he does it through hitting or scoring goals or skating around with the puck for his entire shift doing nothing and then dumping it in (which is better than being a liability). How you accomplish the goal of contributing to team success is secondary to accomplishing the goal itself.

And for me, Raymond advances the cause of a Flames victory more than does Bollig owing to defensive play, even if he's largely invisible. Then there's the chance he has a game where he creates a goal or two.

I'll counter that with different jobs require certain tools. You've got Raymond who certainly could bring an additional secondary scoring which a more tangible benefit to winning games. Bollig's physicality over a 4+ game series isn't as obvious on the score sheet. However Raymond's inability to continue or convert on simple plays is a liability in its own. Bollig could be less counterproductive in comparison simply by chipping and chasing while throwing his weight around. As a 4th line energy guy, I like Bollig's chances of making a difference in both the short and long term over Raymond's.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I disagree. Raymond is a weak turnover machine, plays die on his stick. Bollig brings a physical factor and can hold guys accountable. The Flames really need to find a way to dump Raymond this off season.

I'm arguing against myself a bit but Bollig is a strong turnover machine. Problem is, Raymond's turnovers occur mostly in the offensive end because he's stripped or intercepted. But that happens with creative guys (look at JG's turnover rate). Bollig's turnovers happen in the D zone - that's bad.

Raymond is actually a bit better defensively due to superior positioning and hands. Bollig will try a hit but get out of position.

"Holding guys accountable" isn't as much of a factor in POs - not much fighting and you don't want a roughing penalty.

I'm not saying start Raymond over Bollig. I don't think the minutes suit Raymond's game. I'd rather see Shore down there.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm arguing against myself a bit but Bollig is a strong turnover machine. Problem is, Raymond's turnovers occur mostly in the offensive end because he's stripped or intercepted. But that happens with creative guys (look at JG's turnover rate). Bollig's turnovers happen in the D zone - that's bad.

Raymond is actually a bit better defensively due to superior positioning and hands. Bollig will try a hit but get out of position.

"Holding guys accountable" isn't as much of a factor in POs - not much fighting and you don't want a roughing penalty.

I'm not saying start Raymond over Bollig. I don't think the minutes suit Raymond's game. I'd rather see Shore down there.

Me too, but a choice between Bollig or Raymond, I am taking Bollig every time.

[sureLoss]

Tomorrow's Sun

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Plays may die on Raymond's stick, but if they consistently do so in the offensive zone, he's essentially playing defense by being an offensive black hole. The other guys aren't scoring if the puck's in their end being carried ineffectively along the perimeter. It's frustrating to watch because you'd like to see a scoring chance, but there are much worse things a 4th line player could do.

EDIT: I think GioForPM and I are saying more or less the same thing.

[sa226]

Sitting Raymond is a win/win situation for the series. He was brought here to use his speed and score goals. He has been average at both of those things.

If you sit him. He gets pissed off and potentially returns to the lineup motivated to stay.

[GioforPM]

BTW, I sure am tired of "plays die on his stick". Plays die on someone's stick 90% of the time. They die on Gaudreau or Monahan's stick a lot. Why? Because not every play works.

In other words, if you don't like a player and are looking for times when he is bodied off the puck or intercepted or lose control, you will find them.

On the Flames forwards, Gaudreau is the turnover king, not only in raw numbers, but in numbers per minutes played (.05). Then Backlund at .045, then Stajan at. 04, then Monahan, Raymond and a bunch of otehrs at the same .03 level (in turnovers per minute).

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Anduril

I'll counter that with different jobs require certain tools. You've got Raymond who certainly could bring an additional secondary scoring which a more tangible benefit to winning games. Bollig's physicality over a 4+ game series isn't as obvious on the score sheet. However Raymond's inability to continue or convert on simple plays is a liability in its own. Bollig could be less counterproductive in comparison simply by chipping and chasing while throwing his weight around. As a 4th line energy guy, I like Bollig's chances of making a difference in both the short and long term over Raymond's.

We are all aware of who plays on the 4th line, right?
Be interesting to see the Flames lineup.
I'm good with whatever Hartey decides.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by sa226

Sitting Raymond is a win/win situation for the series. He was brought here to use his speed and score goals. He has been average at both of those things. If you sit him. He gets pissed off and potentially returns to the lineup motivated to stay.

What if, during the game you sit him, the Flames fourth line gets outscored by the Canucks' fourth line or whoever is playing against them and the Flames lose the game on depth?

The Canucks' fourth line has 33 goals in 179 gp this year. The Flames' has 21 in 170 gp. There's a delta there. This is the kind of thing that can lose you, probably not a series, but a game and possibly two. I'd just rather have the safer pick there.

Plus wouldn't Raymond be motivated to beat his former team?

Anyway this is an argument about a fourth line spot, which isn't the end of the world either way, you'd hope.

[HOWITZER]

Every time I hear/see Monahan leaving the ice early, I end up picturing this...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by sa226

Sitting Raymond is a win/win situation for the series. He was brought here to use his speed and score goals. He has been average at both of those things.

If you sit him. He gets pissed off and potentially returns to the lineup motivated to stay.

You'd have thought Raymond would be motivated against the Canucks but his stats don't say so. Maybe their D knows how to play him better than he knows how to play them (plus he doesn't know their goalies).

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

BTW, I sure am tired of "plays die on his stick". Plays die on someone's stick 90% of the time. They die on Gaudreau or Monahan's stick a lot. Why? Because not every play works.

In other words, if you don't like a player and are looking for times when he is bodied off the puck or intercepted or lose control, you will find them.

On the Flames forwards, Gaudreau is the turnover king, not only in raw numbers, but in numbers per minutes played (.05). Then Backlund at .045, then Stajan at. 04, then Monahan, Raymond and a bunch of otehrs at the same .03 level (in turnovers per minute).

Turnovers and "plays die on their sticks" are different things. I think it's something that is easily describable as a player, discussing a teammate. Everyone who played hockey for a good chunk of time knows the difference between a dead weight linemate that doesn't positively impact your offensive attack, vs a linemate that makes risky decisions that either crash and burn or work beautifully. Also, they know the difference between players who intentionally take on that risk in a setting where backup is available, vs those who make costly brain farts.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

Turnovers and "plays die on their sticks" are different things. I think it's something that is easily describable as a player, discussing a teammate. Everyone who played hockey for a good chunk of time knows the difference between a dead weight linemate that doesn't positively impact your offensive attack, vs a linemate that makes risky decisions that either crash and burn or work beautifully. Also, they know the difference between players who intentionally take on that risk in a setting where backup is available, vs those who make costly brain farts.

I love the assumption I haven't played and that there's some geenral definition of that phrase. I would think that the difference in stats between Colborne, Raymond and, say Byron, shows that plays tend to live equally on the former two players' sticks and not on Byron's (who contributes a lot in other ways).

On this team IMO the riskiest plays that either crashed and burned or worked great have been made by one TJ Brodie.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I love the assumption I haven't played and that there's some geenral definition of that phrase. I would think that the difference in stats between Colborne, Raymond and, say Byron, shows that plays tend to live equally on the former two players' sticks and not on Byron's (who contributes a lot in other ways).

On this team IMO the riskiest plays that either crashed and burned or worked great have been made by one TJ Brodie.

Oh I never assumed that, I'm sorry if it offended you. I was referring to the context in which I find it most relatable.

Again though, risky players such as Brodie and Gaudreau aren't described as players who let plays die on their sticks. They being a net contribution. As a player yourself, I'm sure you know the difference.

I'm not sure what Colborne or Byron have to do with this.

[Vinny01]

This would be the lineup I hope plays tomorrow

Gaudreau-Monahan-Hudler
Bennett-Backlund-Byron
Ferland-Stajan-Jones
Colborne-Granlund-Jooris

The BBB line would have so much speed and a high compete level. I could see that line generating energy all night. Until the Canucks try and get tough/physical no need to dress Bollig. I agree with those that want Raymond gone

[BurningSteel]

Came to read about practice think I got into the Raymond signing thread by accident.

[azzarish]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This would be the lineup I hope plays tomorrow

Gaudreau-Monahan-Hudler
Bennett-Backlund-Byron
Ferland-Stajan-Jones
Colborne-Granlund-Jooris

The BBB line would have so much speed and a high compete level. I could see that line generating energy all night. Until the Canucks try and get tough/physical no need to dress Bollig. I agree with those that want Raymond gone

Great set of lines. Not sure if Hartley will put Byron back in straight away, but he's the type of player that can get under the skin of the opposition.

[canflip_101]

Benzo on that 2nd line eh?