[News] Brandon Bollig drops some fat and adds some optimism

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor

Not even the best coaches have perfect foresight. Hartley is awesome, but he did play Setoguchi in 12 games last year and McGratton in 8 before allowing Jooris to more or less step up as the 3/4 line guy on the right side.

Sure you follow the Flames?

Seto was signed in the off-season by Treliving as a way to help throw darts at the board to help shore-up offence. That was the one thing that was keeping Treliving up at night. Seto didn't work - but Hartley managed his time - both minutes and games - and eventually was relegated into the AHL. What's so wrong with that?

As for McGrattAn, I was a bit surprised that Hartley didn't use him more. I thought he balanced responsibility with what McGrattan brought to the team on and off the ice. Hartley has a history of really loving those tough guys, but 8 games sure seems like he kept himself in check and didn't allow his own biases or preferences to interfere with ice-times.

Jooris - ahem, who did he replace? When did he join the roster? Hint: It was WAY BEFORE Setoguchi ever got sent down.

[Conroy4Mayor]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

You do though.

Seriously 3/4 of your posts so far have either been condescending or tongue in cheek remarks. I recommend you change your tone or you will continue to get piled on, and rightfully so.

My exact point is that no-one's foresight is perfect. We all watch the same hockey games and yet still have have differences of opinion. I get it that some of you like Bollig. I just happen to like other players better.

I think it is healthy having people argue against an overabundance of truculence. I think Burke has a very strong opinion on the matter, that other people in the organization are hesitant to challenge. Feaster wasn't perfect, but I bet he argued for skill (and tangible results) over truculence (and immeasurables).

[Locke]

See, this is what Raymond needed to do.

"That didnt work so well, so I'm going to switch things up."

As opposed to same old, same old.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor

My exact point is that no-one's foresight is perfect. We all watch the same hockey games and yet still have have differences of opinion. I get it that some of you like Bollig. I just happen to like other players better.

I think it is healthy having people argue against an overabundance of truculence. I think Burke has a very strong opinion on the matter, that other people in the organization are hesitant to challenge. Feaster wasn't perfect, but I bet he argued for skill (and tangible results) over truculence (and immeasurables).

Why does it have to be one or the other? Seems to me that Hartley and Treliving are trying to find a good balance of both.

[Conroy4Mayor]

Originally Posted by Zevo

Why does it have to be one or the other? Seems to me that Hartley and Treliving are trying to find a good balance of both.

Of course. That begs the question though of what a "good balance" is. I think that is the issue being debated. Gio adds some. Ferland and Bouma add more. Bollig brings a whole bunch. But do we need a whole bunch, given that Bollig may contribute less in other ways than a more skilled replacement?

[Conroy4Mayor]

To be clear, the more skilled replacement I have in mind (Garnet Hathaway) also brings some size (6'2") and toughness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pO-OZsmggMI