2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

Yes, pretty much everything here is speculation with no insider knowledge (to the team or the position).


Here is what I think we know:
1- Tre is unafraid to make drastic changes even if things look good (firing Hartley a year after he wins the Adams; trading Hamilton the year he ties the league lead in goals for a d-man)

2- The Flames have change their NHL tandem 3 times in 4 years - using 10 different goalies in that time.



Is Sigalet the problem? maybe/maybe not. Is the current tandem the problem? maybe/maybe not. But, they have changed the tandem before. Sigalet doesn't seem to be part of the solution, and if you're not part of the solution.....

We do not know this.

Hard is watching 8 bad goalies (jury still kind of out on GIllies & Rittich).
Time for easy.

No. The moment the General Manager opts for the easy solution that will placate fans instead of the right thing to do is the moment he should be fired.

[Bleeding Red]

So.....we don't know if Sigalet is the solution. We don't know if Sigalet is the problem.
We don't know if Smith has an attitude problem. We don't know if Smith is just aging out. We don't know if Rittich can handle starter duties in the NHL or AHL. We don't know if Gillie or Parsons is improving. We don't know if a goalie coach has a small or large effect on how the position is played. We don't know if Sigalet and Peters are on speaking terms (I've never seen them talking to each other).

We really don't know anything and should just log off and resign ourselves to watching whatever shows up on tv on game night and hope for the best.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yes, and that is part of the problem in my opinion. Fans want the goalie coach fired because it is easy. I am most concerned about whether or not it is the right thing to do. It may be, but I remain unconvinced mostly because I have so little information about the situation. We all have so little information—why are there such strong feelings from so many posters with so little information? I think the answer is obvious.

Your constant schtick of "Well, none of us know" is really ringing hollow. I can see BleedingRed is scathingly posting about it already.

I've posted it earlier, but he's too much of a 'yes-man' coach. His methodologies indicate as much.

Pats on the back, pucks at the head: Inside the life of a goalie coach

“Does he feel like he’s getting better? Does he feel like there’s a good connection there? Can he trust you?” said Sigalet. “I’m sure at the end of the year, management sits down with the goalies. I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t that way. It’s a huge relationship thing.”

“I’ll do drills on the ice, but I won’t tell them why we’re doing it,” said Sigalet. “I don’t want to be like, ‘We’re doing this because you’re struggling here,’ because then they’ll be over-thinking. So it’s doing it secretly to work on a certain part of their game.”

“If a goalie has a bad game, I usually don’t even show him the clips,” said Sigalet, “unless there’s a serious teaching point.”

People are free to believe or turn a nose up to the rumors about his attitude, here's the OP from Reddit (remember, this guy broke the Peters hiring and the Bryout™ - I am choosing to believe this one)

I just heard that Neal and Smith had a little argument in the dressing room right after the game. Apparently Neal was not happy with something Mike Smith said about defensive miscues in the game. Neal told him and I quote "make a ####ing save".

I've heard they are friends off the ice but they've had words twice now in less than a week. Players are not happy with Mike Smith.

[H2SO4(aq)]

haha I love that. Smith needs to be held accountable. Flames need a cocky attitude like neal so badly. Now, Smith could also say to him, "score a ####ing goal".

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

Bottom line is this, and it's been posted by some others as well: yes our goalies have ducked, yes some of them regressed, but since moving on, no one have really showed bouncebacks after getting new goalie coaches on new teams. I'd conclude that maybe it's just the goalies themselves that are bad, or on the downturn in their career, and less so because of how Sigalet has coached them.

The point is that we have had no goalies actually stay consistent or improve aside from Ramo, and he was not that great at the same time a decent 1B option.

We went with an unproven goalie coach, and so far, we have yet to see any positive results in 4 years.

Dwayne Roloson
Sean Burke
Bob Essensa
Andrew Allen
Jordan Sigalet
David Marcoux
Jimmy Waite
Francois Allaire
Ian Clark
Jeff Reese
Jim Bedard
Dustin Schwartz
Robb Tallas
Bill Ranford
Bob Mason
Stephane Waite
Ben Vanderklok
Chris Terreri
Mike Dunham
Benoit Allaire
Rick Wamsley
Kim Dillabaugh
Mike Bales
Johan Hedberg
Jim Corsi
Frantz Jean
Steve Briere
Roland Melanson
Mitch Korn
Wade Flaherty

Most of these coaches have either played in the NHL for extensive periods or had a prolonged goalie coach career

Sigalet is at an age that he could have been playing still if not for his illness. Sigalet has nowhere near the pedigree of some of these guys. We need to try something different...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

So.....we don't know if Sigalet is the solution. We don't know if Sigalet is the problem.
We don't know if Smith has an attitude problem. We don't know if Smith is just aging out. We don't know if Rittich can handle starter duties in the NHL or AHL. We don't know if Gillie or Parsons is improving. We don't know if a goalie coach has a small or large effect on how the position is played. We don't know if Sigalet and Peters are on speaking terms (I've never seen them talking to each other).

We really don't know anything and should just log off and resign ourselves to watching whatever shows up on tv on game night and hope for the best.

For god's sake, this is NOT what I have been saying. I keep repeating myself on this point, and am on record numerous times conceding that Sigalet could be the root of the problem. My issue is not at all with speculating about Sigalet's job performance. Rather, my issue is and always has been the level of vitriol and certitude that posters have applied to their opinions on this matter in the face of an utter vacuum of useful information. As if this is an obvious problem that management is stubbornly refusing to address, and that those of us who don't see it are somehow unabashedly biased.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Your constant schtick of "Well, none of us know" is really ringing hollow.

I can see that, and I suspect the reason for it is because for a good number of posters their own vitriol and certitude is a comfortable placebo.

I can see BleedingRed is scathingly posting about it already...

And here is the problem: people are way to worked up about this specific point given the information that we have.

I've posted it earlier, but he's too much of a 'yes-man' coach. His methodologies indicate as much.

Pats on the back, pucks at the head: Inside the life of a goalie coach

That's your opinion and you are welcome to it. But with how strongly you feel about this, forgive me for not being altogether impressed by the bases of your speculations.

People are free to believe or turn a nose up to the rumors about his attitude, here's the OP from Reddit (remember, this guy broke the Peters hiring and the Bryout™ - I am choosing to believe this one)

Sure. I fail to see what any of this has to do with whether or not Sigalet is doing his job.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I can see that, and I suspect the reason for it is because for a good number of posters their own vitriol and certitude is a comfortable placebo.


And here is the problem: people are way to worked up about this specific point given the information that we have.


That's your opinion and you are welcome to it. But with how strongly you feel about this, forgive me for not being altogether impressed by the bases of your speculations.


Sure. I fail to see what any of this has to do with whether or not Sigalet is doing his job.

Bottom line is. There's a line that has to be drawn in the sand to whats an acceptable limit to anything. Eventually Sigalet will be replaced because few goalies come out breathing afterwards.

It doesn't take rocket science and hard data proof to figure out that if the goaltending continues to struggle, changes will be made. I just don't understand why your hackles are up when myself and others see the writing on the wall and would prefer it to happen sooner rather than later.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Bottom line is. There's a line that has to be drawn in the sand to whats an acceptable limit to anything. Eventually Sigalet will be replaced because few goalies come out breathing afterwards.

It doesn't take rocket science and hard data proof to figure out that if the goaltending continues to struggle, changes will be made. I just don't understand why your hackles are up when myself and others see the writing on the wall and would prefer it to happen sooner rather than later.

I think that's still not getting his point. It's the assumptions about Sigalet, backed up by little if any facts, and the conversion of those into rigid conclusions about him and his methods, and about Treliving and his staffing decisions, that are getting at Textcritic.

The goaltending situation could be: Smith, Hiller and Elliott fell off a cliff. It happens. Or Treliving misjudged each of them. Or Sigalet isn't good. Or some combination. I agree with TC that none of us know what is happening and what Treliving's decision points are here.

That said, if he's let go tomorrow simply because a change is needed, without denigrating his work, great. If he's fired because Treliving decides he's not good with Smith, OK. Good coaches can get fired. Bad coaches should be. A change is needed, either in goal or in the approach.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Bottom line is. There's a line that has to be drawn in the sand to whats an acceptable limit to anything. Eventually Sigalet will be replaced because few goalies come out breathing afterwards.

It doesn't take rocket science and hard data proof to figure out that if the goaltending continues to struggle, changes will be made.

Not rocket science, but it does require a good deal more insight than we have to figure out whether changes will be made, and where they will occur. Maybe it's Sigalet; maybe it's not. But I refuse to surrender any ground on this notion that somehow the issue is obvious. It is not.

I just don't understand why your hackles are up when myself and others see the writing on the wall and would prefer it to happen sooner rather than later.

Because I don't believe that any of you actually see something meaningful enough to conclude that Sigalet is certainly part of the problem.

I am also really fascinated by this point: how much fans's feelings on a matter can drive what they see and what they think that they know. People are so frustrated by the Flames goaltending that they have absolutely convinced themselves the coach is not doing his job. In a near vacuum of information about his job performance a good number of intelligent posters have formed VERY strong opinions about Jordan Sigalet. Am I the only one who finds this really interesting?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Not rocket science, but it does require a good deal more insight than we have to figure out whether changes will be made, and where they will occur. Maybe it's Sigalet; maybe it's not. But I refuse to surrender any ground on this notion that somehow the issue is obvious. It is not.


Because I don't believe that any of you actually see something meaningful enough to conclude that Sigalet is certainly part of the problem.

Prove he is a part of the solution then. He's not. And don't condesend so much as to imply that we don't have a mind of our own to come to conclusions.

You were an obtuse Gully defender last season. Went well. You're being just as obtuse now. More so blatantly ignorant actually.

Ask yourself these questions. Has any goalie succeed here to the point they kept their jobs? Has any goalie truly succeeded anywhere else after being in CGY. Has the team enjoyed any sort of consistent goaltending since Sigalet joined the team as a coach. Has ANY TEAM RAN THROUGH TEN GOALIES?

Again. It's staring at you right in face despite your stubborn deference on the subject.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Bottom line is. There's a line that has to be drawn in the sand to whats an acceptable limit to anything. Eventually Sigalet will be replaced because few goalies come out breathing afterwards.

It doesn't take rocket science and hard data proof to figure out that if the goaltending continues to struggle, changes will be made. I just don't understand why your hackles are up when myself and others see the writing on the wall and would prefer it to happen sooner rather than later.

I think Textcritic and I see this similarly, so I am going to take a risk and attempt to speak for him as well, but this does NOT have anything to do with “hackles” being up.

To a man, you’ll find not one poster who genuinely thinks Sigalet is an unfireable godsend as a goalie coach. Not one. What you will find, and which you and others should probably stop ignoring, is that the issue stems not from “seeing the writing on the wall” but instead from suggesting a long list of borderline ridiculous critiques is based on anything but pure guesses. The level of certainty that everything is his fault, the “Sigalet is responsible for Smith’s attitude,” the over reliance on a trend that may or may not be his responsibility as proof of his ineptitude, is dumb. It looks bad. It’s kind of embarrassing to read.

I’m fully willing to admit Sigalet is probably on the hot seat, or should be, because regardless of what he’s had to work with, the results aren’t good, and eventually the coach goes because of them. But everything Sigalet is being critiqued on as being “obvious” or his firing being long overdue because he’s not a good goalie coach, are just poorly reasoned fits from people looking for something to blame.

People are acting like they know a lot more than they know, more than they could possibly know, because they’re forming an opinion backed by very little evidence. It’s silly, so people aren’t afraid to call it silly.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Prove he is a part of the solution then. He's not. And don't condesend so much as to imply that we don't have a mind of our own to come to conclusions.

You were an obtuse Gully defender last season. Went well. You're being just as obtuse now. More so blatantly ignorant actually.

Ask yourself these questions. Has any goalie succeed here to the point they kept their jobs? Has any goalie truly succeeded anywhere else after being in CGY. Has the team enjoyed any sort of consistent goaltending since Sigalet joined the team as a coach. Has ANY TEAM RAN THROUGH TEN GOALIES?

Again. It's staring at you right in face despite your stubborn deference on the subject.

This is just a whole lot of nothing. Why don’t we say this is all Treliving’s fault
and fire him?

[GioforPM]

If I'm guessing, and this is purely a guess, I would imagine that, whether Sigalet is good or bad, he's probably not the source of the particular problem at hand - Mr. Smith. Simply because Smith is a longtime vet, been through many coaches, seems to be pretty independent-minded, etc. It's hard to see a guy who has played that long, with decent success, being wrecked by a coach he's had for a little over a year.

This has nothing to do with whether Sigalet has done well or not developing the kids.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This is just a whole lot of nothing. Why don’t we say this is all Treliving’s fault
and fire him?

Well, most of what he does has been for the better of the team. Things tend to improve with the changes Treliving makes. The only thing that has not changed and is not improving is.... you guessed it. Goaltending. The point is, it's 2/3rds on the players and 1/3 on the guy tasked with keeping them at their best. We've turned over many players and kept the same coach.

It's not a whole lot of nothing.

[FiveSeven]

Siglet "I don't tell him what or why we're doing a certain exercise"

Oh hmmm we're doing 5 hole exercises, wonder what that means? Now were doing high glove exercises, wonder what that means!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Prove he is a part of the solution then. He's not. And don't condesend so much as to imply that we don't have a mind of our own to come to conclusions.

How convinced are you about your conclusions on this matter? And why should I be expected to prove something that I don't even necessarily believe?

You were an obtuse Gully defender last season. Went well. You're being just as obtuse now. More so blatantly ignorant actually.

Ah, yes. I had actually meant to comment earlier on the Gulutzan situation and its outcome.

I still don't believe that most people understood fully the problems with Gulutzan's coaching—I sure didn't. I never believed the biggest issue was his systems, and I was also dubious about anecdotal evidence which suggested that he was ineffective to motivate or will his charges to perform. I probably badly underestimated the importance of having a strong personality on the bench, and that certainly seems to have been a positive change with the Peters hire. I still think the biggest problems last year stemmed from a disconnect between what Gulutzan wanted and how players delivered it. I also think that while he set the appropriate level of importance on controlled movement of the puck in five-man units, it was far too slow overall.

So, all that to say, you are right—I was wrong about Gulutzan, but I don't think I was wrong to hold people to higher standards in their evaluations and assertions of his performance.

Ask yourself these questions. Has any goalie succeed here to the point they kept their jobs? Has any goalie truly succeeded anywhere else after being in CGY. Has the team enjoyed any sort of consistent goaltending since Sigalet joined the team as a coach. Has ANY TEAM RAN THROUGH TEN GOALIES?

I am pretty sure my answers to these questions would look very much like your own. The difference being that in spite of the results I still don't feel like I know much of anything useful about what Sigalet is doing, and I sure don't feel strong enough about him to draw a conclusion one way or the other.

Again. It's staring at you right in face despite your stubborn deference on the subject.

I have addressed this. What is "staring me right in the face" is a lot of correlation and anecdote. It's still not enough for me to form a strong opinion.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

...It's not a whole lot of nothing.

It's not?

Where did you come up with these numbers?

The point is, it's 2/3rds on the players and 1/3 on the guy tasked with keeping them at their best.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It's not?

Where did you come up with these numbers?

Same place corsi came from? nowhere?
You're relying too much on the number I said, instead of the general meaning it. make it whatever number you want. 99/100 on the players 1/100 on the coach, whatever makes you happy. It doesnt matter. Coach has influence, if he didn't the title wouldnt exist.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by FiveSeven

Siglet "I don't tell him what or why we're doing a certain exercise"

Oh hmmm we're doing 5 hole exercises, wonder what that means? Now were doing high glove exercises, wonder what that means!

Sigelet thinks that he is Mr. Miyagi. Getzlaf sweeps the leg.