[News] Calgary Flames Garbage Bag Day Media Availability 10AM

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by nik-

They'd probably play terrible, uninspired hockey and miss the playoffs.

They are doing that with Gio

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This will be extremely unpopular but...

I think the best road forward is to keep as much of this group as possible.

I was one of if not the pre-eminent “blow it up” crowd earlier. In fact 2 years ago I was clamouring to blow it up. I think this team has what it takes. I really wanted to blow them up but from what I saw from Sutter onward? Yeah. We can win the Cup with this group. Yep- roast away. But I believe. Coaching change was too little too late. Fans in the building? This team can do it. Biggest major hurdle is to expect Giordano to go via Expansion Draft and that’s a massive hole to fill.

But this team? Yep, I think they have it. I know that sounds insane. You know there’s something to be said about having something to prove. Markstrom is a Stanley Cup caliber goalie. Defence admittedly needs to be addressed and more depth especially when Gio gets taken, but you got some good young forwards Johnny stepping up and I think Tkachuk returns to form with a crowd in the building. Lindholm is amazing and, yeah. I think they have it. I know this is unpopular- but one of the reasons the 2004 team did what they did was because the city believed they could and the team could feel it as well. If this city backs this group? It can work- the players are good enough.

I strongly disagree.

Go watch some of these playoff series and tell me the Flames have the talent, pacing, or compete level to come anywhere close to a cup win. They might win a 1st round series, but that's about it. They're not close at the moment.

[tkflames]

Those wanting to keep the bulk of the core together and/or clamoring to an easier playoff entry next year are likely just realizing (or not realizing) that there are no scenarios where this team is good in the next 3-5 years.

The level of retool necessary to competed with Tampa or Colorado or Carolina or Las Vegas is not possible with this roster. With top end coaching you can try to scratch and claw to get through a round or two (like NYI), but there is no chance of winning a cup. This is not Washington after winning the presidents trophy or close for many years. This is not even the 8th place Kings team that loaded up on fir power with Quick, Doughty, Kopitar as the center pieces. This is not even the 04 Flames with Kipper, Regehr, Iginla. This team has neither the top end to outscore, nor the grit to grind out a team in the playoffs.

It's either 5 years of misery starting now...or 5 years of misery starting whenever we decide to take on 5 years of misery. Either way...I don't see a scenario where a team trades us a good enough set of players to make a tangible difference and there is nothing in the pipeline that could make the necessary impact in the near term time horizon. This team peaked in the regular season of 2019 and burned (misdeveloped, traded etc.) too many assets along the way to build on that.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This will be extremely unpopular but...

I think the best road forward is to keep as much of this group as possible.

I was one of if not the pre-eminent “blow it up” crowd earlier. In fact 2 years ago I was clamouring to blow it up. I think this team has what it takes. I really wanted to blow them up but from what I saw from Sutter onward? Yeah. We can win the Cup with this group. Yep- roast away. But I believe. Coaching change was too little too late. Fans in the building? This team can do it. Biggest major hurdle is to expect Giordano to go via Expansion Draft and that’s a massive hole to fill.

But this team? Yep, I think they have it. I know that sounds insane. You know there’s something to be said about having something to prove. Markstrom is a Stanley Cup caliber goalie. Defence admittedly needs to be addressed and more depth especially when Gio gets taken, but you got some good young forwards Johnny stepping up and I think Tkachuk returns to form with a crowd in the building. Lindholm is amazing and, yeah. I think they have it. I know this is unpopular- but one of the reasons the 2004 team did what they did was because the city believed they could and the team could feel it as well. If this city backs this group? It can work- the players are good enough.

Every once in a while on this site I get to bust out my favorite all-time gif. This post is that occasion.

I like your optimism (unless your post was meant in jest)! Thanks for the chuckle good sir.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This will be extremely unpopular but...

I think the best road forward is to keep as much of this group as possible.

...

Are you talking about the roster as a whole, or the young core? The latter I could see the argument for. Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuck continue to build off of how they finished off the season, Monahan bounces back and is a strong #2 centre, and Mangiapane continues to be a strong forward. That's 5/6 players that are playing as top 6 forwards then and you can work with that as a playoff team. A lot of this really relies on Monahan playing good though, and that's up in the air honestly.

If that goes well, and depending on the expansion draft some cap space is cleared, then the possibility of adding a 2nd line winger via Free Agency - preferably with a right handed shot - can fill out the roster nicely.

The remaining bottom two lines you fill out with your budding prospects and cheaper players, plus Lucic/Backlund depending on who sticks around. If anything the bottom 6 should look a lot different than it has for most of the season. Treliving was very critical of the depth on the roster and was expecting more from them. So if I'm certain of one thing if he does stick around, the bottom forward lines will probably be different come opening night for the next season. Don't know if it'll make it better or worse, but if it's with younger players with potential, I think that it could work out for the better since it's players that could have spurts for production while developing. And then a player or two that are solid utility players that play a steady game.

The defense I don't have much of an issue with except for lack of goal production from the more offensive capable players we've expected to produce. But those players are still young and growing, so hopefully they bring more of it next season.

Factor in Sutter having a full training camp, complete control of the room and expectations out of the players, and a proper season to work with, I could see the possibility of giving the main core one last shot since at the point there's absolutely no more excuses.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Jimdon

I don't understand why we're arguing here That's the same point I'm trying to get across, when the best case scenario is a team making the playoffs and getting pounded, there's no excuse in my mind for being afraid to make changes because you might not make your team better. Your team is not good now, there's no value in hanging on to that.

I’m not arguing that there doesn’t need to be changes. I’m saying that Treliving isn’t wrong when he says a move has to make sense before you make it. For example, he thought Brodie for Kadri made sense but Kadri used his NMC. You don’t just give away players.

[Nelson]

I don’t think Tre’s being honest, and I don’t think his interview really tells us much about what this off-season will look like. For example, Tre said this is the first offseason when the Flames really have to look at changing the core (paraphrase). But they tried to trade Monahan to the CBJ last offseason.

[BagoPucks]

Tkachuk is the only interview I watched. He seemed upset, conflicted and looking for answers. You want guys that are upset when they lose and also confident that they have what it takes. I could do without the shots at how much he was playing. I read it as a guy who wants to be the guy who will lead this team. I hope he realizes he needs to change few things before he gets the keys to be a captain in this league.

[Poe969]

It's funny with some of the interviews how they're really upset and they think they have what it takes to win...at the end of the season. During the season you don't really see the same replies or emotion. These answers are all just pillow talk, it's really hard to believe any of them when the answers are mostly the same.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Tkachuk showing up for the interview again. Fool me once

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

I think the team was better at the end is a false narrative

They still couldn’t beat Ottawa and Montreal when it counted
Two terrible teams

So what if they won a few meaningless games

Shut down Johnny and you shut down the flames and it’s been as easy as taking candy from a baby

Sutter is telling the truth when he said lack of talent

It isn't a false narrative at all ... it's pretty easy to prove factually.

The Flames went from a two way tire fire to a top five team defensively under Darryl Sutter, and that's quite a feat in the middle of a shortened season.

Top five/six in CA60, xGA60, SCA60, HDCA60

That is a way better hockey team that can compete on any night. Add in that Markstrom rebounded and you see in the last 15 or so games what they are.

A team that doesn't give up much, but doesn't seem to have the offensive depth (or transitional defense) to create the high danger chances they need (although that improved in the last dozen games as well, ... playing Vancouver certainly helped).

That has to change if they want to move up the standings.

But to say their improvement is a false narrative, is in fact the real false narrative.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Yup. Don’t understand all the “Gio is such an amazing captain and leader” verbage. The biggest flaw on this team is a lack of resilience and leadership so how does the finger not get pointed at the captain? The lack of resilience year after year and the lack of results….why does Gio not get any heat? Because he’s a nice guy, has been with the team for so long, won a Norris, does amazing in the community? I just think a lot of people like to bring up leadership issues with the team but the captain conveniently gets left out. What if it was Gio that told Tkachuk to tone it down? Never know. I think at 38 years old, it’s time to part ways with Gio and thank him for being such a great player for the organization. Also - we shouldn’t name a captain until we see where this team is headed and who steps up. Also - I think Backlund is a big problem with the country club culture too. He’s got to go. I believe he’s the second longest tenured Flames player on the roster after Gio and wears the ‘A’. I believe that’s the place to start. If these guys were such great leaders then no one would question the leadership in the room. It makes no sense. Treliving et all are blowing smoke.

What actual proof points do you have against any of this?
Including that Backlund is a "big problem with the country club culture"

Do you have any information that you can use to prove that?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

At the time uninjured Rittich was no better than recovering Markstrom. After the TDL, neither was Domingue. Tanev didn’t miss a beat. So instead of Monahan who - Ruzicka?

It would have been conceding the POs.

Because Ruz would have been worse than Monahan who was out there doing nothing but taking up space? Anything would have been better, he should have been shut down.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Me? No.

Tanev made his own case. Clearly he was medically cleared to play, wanted to play...so he played.

Happens on every team, every year, at every professional level and believe it or not, in almost every contact sport.

This is nothing new.

I mean one of the most famous stories in Stanley cup history is Bobby Baun coming back into a game to score the cup winning goal..after his leg was broken.

So then what the heck is Treliving referring to when he says

"I've never seen a guy play through anything like that."


Either it was manageable and relatively commonplace or it was a crazy exertion of will that should have had intervention to protect Tanev from himself.

What is Trevling's opinion on players playing through concussions and have mush for brains after their careers were done? That was common practice in his lifetime.

----
Leivo playing through a broken thumb makes far more sense as whatever job he gets next year will not be making $875,000 USD.

[CliffFletcher]

I wouldn’t give much credence to anything anyone says in these press conferences. It’s all vacuous corporate platitudes, sports cliches, and scripted responses fed to players by their agents.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

So then what the heck is Treliving referring to when he says

"I've never seen a guy play through anything like that."


Either it was manageable and relatively commonplace or it was a crazy exertion of will that should have had intervention to protect Tanev from himself.

What is Trevling's opinion on players playing through concussions and have mush for brains after their careers were done? That was common practice in his lifetime.

----
Leivo playing through a broken thumb makes far more sense as whatever job he gets next year will not be making $875,000 USD.

I would imagine NHL injuries roll out like this.

-Player gets hurt
-He's taken back to get looked at.
-In Tanev's case he didn't return for the game.
-After tests they assess whether further play would make the injury worse, or if there would be no change.
-If the latter is true it's up to the player based on pain threshold.

I get that we want to complain and act like we know what's going on for every single issue but lets get a grip here.

The players have a player's association and agents to protect them from mean teams that make them play when they're hurt.

Now is there a code? Sure there is. But if the players is diagnosed not to get worse from playing that's up to him to either break or conform to. The code exists because of players stubbornly playing when they were hurt, it will have to be nixed or changed by players saying forget it.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What actual proof points do you have against any of this?
Including that Backlund is a "big problem with the country club culture"

Do you have any information that you can use to prove that?

The long term core Flames have far more golf time in at the country clubs than is the norm for the NHL player.

Do you think these guys are playing at public courses?


**** Trying to make a point while being funny.

Backlund at least seems to like hockey enough to play whenever Sweden asks him.

Gio has the longest off season of any elite player basically ever. Add his 7 games in 2010 that he played for Team Canada at the WC means he has 30 games after the regular season ends with 10 coming with the bubble mess last year.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I would imagine NHL injuries roll out like this.

-Player gets hurt
-He's taken back to get looked at.
-In Tanev's case he didn't return for the game.
-After tests they assess whether further play would make the injury worse, or if there would be no change.
-If the latter is true it's up to the player based on pain threshold.

I get that we want to complain and act like we know what's going on for every single issue but lets get a grip here.

The players have a player's association and agents to protect them from mean teams that make them play when they're hurt.

Now is there a code? Sure there is. But if the players is diagnosed not to get worse from playing that's up to him to either break or conform to. The code exists because of players stubbornly playing when they were hurt, it will have to be nixed or changed by players saying forget it.

So you think that Treliving was lying?

"I've never seen a guy play through anything like that."

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I would imagine NHL injuries roll out like this.

-Player gets hurt
-He's taken back to get looked at.
-In Tanev's case he didn't return for the game.
-After tests they assess whether further play would make the injury worse, or if there would be no change.
-If the latter is true it's up to the player based on pain threshold.

I get that we want to complain and act like we know what's going on for every single issue but lets get a grip here.

The players have a player's association and agents to protect them from mean teams that make them play when they're hurt.

Now is there a code? Sure there is. But if the players is diagnosed not to get worse from playing that's up to him to either break or conform to. The code exists because of players stubbornly playing when they were hurt, it will have to be nixed or changed by players saying forget it.

I also get the perception from many that if a player is playing hurt, he immediately is a detriment to the team.

That is just simply and demonstrably untrue.

If I am Tanev for instance and i get a couple cracked ribs....that stuff hurts and it hurts a lot. That does not mean that i cannot play though as long as I am willing to endure the pain of it all. Not even a little bit. If it hampers me so much i cant execute the way I go about business and actually start to be a liability, then fine....sit me.

The last thing I want however is someone else deciding how much pain I should be allowed to play with if i can still play as needed. If the doctor says I am risking further damage by playing, then by all means...call it a day, but otherwise stay the hell out of my head.

A lot of people on here seem to think they know what others are thinking and feeling. You don't.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

So you think that Treliving was lying?

"I've never seen a guy play through anything like that."

You just pick the oddest arcs in these discussions.

The team assessed the injury. They deemed he wouldn't make it worse. It was up the player. He chose top lay.

hence

"I've never seen a guy play through anything like that."

There just isn't a mystery here.