Brad Treliving needs to go

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by direwolf

I agree with most of this, but I still think the team is a bit short on high-end talent, particularly on offence. Regardless of how the Eichel thing shakes out, at the very least the Flames will certainly be tougher to play against and won't get pushed around. Whether or not that translates to a playoff appearance or any kind of post-season success is anyone's guess. Sure, Sutter did it with the Kings several years ago, but can he do it again with this roster in today's game?

Dont forget the 2004 Calgary Flames.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Dont forget the 2004 Calgary Flames.

2004 roster is criminally underrated because media oversold that super-underdogs narrative. Best goalie in the game. Best winger in the game. Premier first pair on D. Very tough to play against throughout line-up. Excellent speed throughout line-up. That was legitimately good team. Maybe not SCF good, but better than what we have now.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Pointman

2004 roster is criminally underrated because media oversold that super-underdogs narrative. Best goalie in the game. Best winger in the game. Premier first pair on D. Very tough to play against throughout line-up. Excellent speed throughout line-up. That was legitimately good team. Maybe not SCF good, but better than what we have now.

It was also a very different league due to the legacy rulebook...

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by direwolf

I agree with most of this, but I still think the team is a bit short on high-end talent, particularly on offence. Regardless of how the Eichel thing shakes out, at the very least the Flames will certainly be tougher to play against and won't get pushed around. Whether or not that translates to a playoff appearance or any kind of post-season success is anyone's guess. Sure, Sutter did it with the Kings several years ago, but can he do it again with this roster in today's game?

This is a team that is probably going to spend a lot of time in the penalty box based on the makeup of the team. Special teams are going to have top notch, or this team is going to be easy pickings. If they make the post-season, and that is a massive "if", they will be tough to play against. The problem is they may not be good enough to make the post-season. They have what looks to be a good first line, a massive question mark on the second line, and then a bunch of guys you hope don't have the other team beat up on the scoreboard on the bottom six.

After looking at this mess, Treliving should be relieved of his duties.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

It was also a very different league due to the legacy rulebook...

It was when you actually didn't have to have a lot of skill if you were tough enough or an ahole to play against. You could hook & hold much more. A guy like Gudbransson would have been great in that era, too bad for him the game changed just when he entered the league.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

This is a team that is probably going to spend a lot of time in the penalty box based on the makeup of the team. Special teams are going to have top notch, or this team is going to be easy pickings. If they make the post-season, and that is a massive "if", they will be tough to play against. The problem is they may not be good enough to make the post-season. They have what looks to be a good first line, a massive question mark on the second line, and then a bunch of guys you hope don't have the other team beat up on the scoreboard on the bottom six.

After looking at this mess, Treliving should be relieved of his duties.

I'll play ball. You're throwing out a lot of bologna with no substance.

Line 1: Tkachuk-Lindholm-Johnny I agree, appears to be a very solid 1 line.
Line 2: Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman This is where you lose me. You could argue Monahan is a question mark but statistically you're talking about a guy who is essentially guaranteed to put up 20g and 50 pt. Mangiapane has a lot of fans around here who would say he's much more than a ? and Coleman also has a good record of consistency. So the injury to Monahan should be the only real ?
Line 3: Lucic-Backlund-Dube I know you're not a lucic fan, but then you could replace him with Pitlick and easily invalidate your argument. This has the makings statistically of a good third line.
Line 4: Lewis-Richardson-Pitlick Again, statistically this is a group of guys that's never really been beaten up on the scoreboard through their career. Could happen but I don't think you're going in desperately hoping to not get clowned (as opposed to running a line of Simon-Ryan-Nordstrom as a comparison)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I'll play ball. You're throwing out a lot of bologna with no substance.

Line 1: Tkachuk-Lindholm-Johnny I agree, appears to be a very solid 1 line.
Line 2: Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman This is where you lose me. You could argue Monahan is a question mark but statistically you're talking about a guy who is essentially guaranteed to put up 20g and 50 pt. Mangiapane has a lot of fans around here who would say he's much more than a ? and Coleman also has a good record of consistency. So the injury to Monahan should be the only real ?
Line 3: Lucic-Backlund-Dube I know you're not a lucic fan, but then you could replace him with Pitlick and easily invalidate your argument. This has the makings statistically of a good third line.
Line 4: Lewis-Richardson-Pitlick Again, statistically this is a group of guys that's never really been beaten up on the scoreboard through their career. Could happen but I don't think you're going in desperately hoping to not get clowned (as opposed to running a line of Simon-Ryan-Nordstrom as a comparison)

Yeah, that actually looks quite solid to me. Even with questions about his health, Monahan is still at worst a very good second-line producer, and having bona-fide top-six player like Backlund centring the third line is an amazing option.

If the Flames are going to struggle this year, it will be on the blue line, and in particular with generating offense from the backend. But I don't see any issues with the forward depth that several posters are predicting, and I believe that Sutter is going to coach an airtight defensive system. It seems like a good strategy fro this group that has solid forward depth, but which is short on high-end talent, and with questions on the blue line.

[TheIronMaiden]

The Flames are going to live and die by their defense and goaltending.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yeah, that actually looks quite solid to me. Even with questions about his health, Monahan is still at worst a very good second-line producer, and having bona-fide top-six player like Backlund centring the third line is an amazing option.

If the Flames are going to struggle this year, it will be on the blue line, and in particular with generating offense from the backend. But I don't see any issues with the forward depth that several posters are predicting, and I believe that Sutter is going to coach an airtight defensive system. It seems like a good strategy fro this group that has solid forward depth, but which is short on high-end talent, and with questions on the blue line.

I think if we assume the worst for Monahan we look at last year. 16 goal pace, and a disaster 5 on 5. Remember those analytics hockey cards that had him as one of the league’s worst defenders 5 v 5?

So I’d argue a bit of a return to from for Monahan is critical for this teams success and take some scoring pressure off the top line.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

The Flames are going to live and die by their defense and goaltending.

Sure, but I don't think it will be much different for the Flames than it is for most other NHL teams. There are maybe five teams in the entire League capable of out-scoring their problems if they need to, and almost every team is coached in such a way that anticipates they won't have to. The Flames have a middle-of-the-pack group of forwards, so of course they will need to be good defensively and in goal.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I think if we assume the worst for Monahan we look at last year. 16 goal pace, and a disaster 5 on 5. Remember those analytics hockey cards that had him as one of the league’s worst defenders 5 v 5?

So I’d argue a bit of a return to from for Monahan is critical for this teams success and take some scoring pressure off the top line.

Fair enough. But even then, a line of Mangiapane · Backlund · Coleman is more than capable of relieving the pressure if so needed.

[Monahammer]

So our assumption going into this season is that the injury Monahan very clearly sustained that cratered his production in the last half of last calendar year will not have healed at all and he'll just play that way forever?

That doesnt seem reasonable.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

So our assumption going into this season is that the injury Monahan very clearly sustained that cratered his production in the last half of last calendar year will not have healed at all and he'll just play that way forever?

That doesnt seem reasonable.

I agree, but it is the "worst case scenario." There are at least a handful of posters who seem incapable of accepting that anything better is even possible.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I'll play ball. You're throwing out a lot of bologna with no substance.

And you're just throwing #### at the wall and hoping it sticks. Here's the way I see the lineup.

Line 1: Tkachuk-Lindholm-Johnny I agree, appears to be a very solid 1 line.

Should be a solid line. Looked great in the last few games of the season, but consider the opposition. Proof will be in the pudding, puddin'.

Line 2: Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman This is where you lose me. You could argue Monahan is a question mark but statistically you're talking about a guy who is essentially guaranteed to put up 20g and 50 pt. Mangiapane has a lot of fans around here who would say he's much more than a ? and Coleman also has a good record of consistency. So the injury to Monahan should be the only real ?

I don't count Monahan as a question mark. What I am concerned about is chemistry on the line. Here are three players who have never played together and all have non-complimentary skill sets IMO. This is throwing three guys together and hoping they turn into an effective line. I see them as nothing but a big question mark. I look at them and I just don't know who is going to make the zone entry? Who is going to be controlling the puck? Who is setting up Monahan, or which of the other two becomes the finisher? Lots of question marks as to if these guys can work together and how they are going to play off each other.

Line 3: Lucic-Backlund-Dube I know you're not a lucic fan, but then you could replace him with Pitlick and easily invalidate your argument. This has the makings statistically of a good third line.

Doing what exactly? They aren't going to score. They aren't going to be a great checking line. Backlund has not been the same since Colorado and the other two have their challenges. Lucic can't skate to play a checking role. Dube has been in the Sutter dog house because he can't play defense. This is another line that is just a hope and prayer that it works out. I just don't see what this line is going to be good at, regardless if it is Lucic or Pitlick or Dube. Any of the iterations is just as questionable.

Line 4: Lewis-Richardson-Pitlick Again, statistically this is a group of guys that's never really been beaten up on the scoreboard through their career. Could happen but I don't think you're going in desperately hoping to not get clowned (as opposed to running a line of Simon-Ryan-Nordstrom as a comparison)

Lewis is 34. Richardson is 36. Pitlick is the youngster on the line and will be 30 come November 1st. What you're hoping for is they can still skate with the teams they are playing against and not get outscored. Yes, they should be better than Simon-Ryan-Nordstrom (BTW, Simon only got into 11 games last a season, so where did this example come from? Did they every play together?) but they have Father Time to deal with. I get they are Sutter players, but can these players still play in the NHL? That's the question mark. I'm going to assume these guys will be killing a lot of penalties, so let's hope they still have some legs.

This is a team of question marks. It is really hard to get enthusiastic about this lineup. I don't see them being the sum of their parts. I hope to be proven wrong on that. but looking at this lineup I just don't see any thought or plan in putting it together, other than to ask Sutter who he likes on the open market.

[Bingo]

Every team has "iffs" that need to be sorted out, some more than others.

But I don't see the team's forward group on it's own to be a big issue ... the top line looked like it was good to go under Sutter, and they have enough quality to fill out three lines, and a boosted more defensively responsible fourth line.

Starting goaltender ... should also be a pretty small if. With a Sutter system he'll face less rubber overall, and less 10 bellers that tend to hurt goaltenders.

The big issue is the lack of offence and transition on the blueline and what that will do to the forwards and scoring overall. Giordano could have taken a step back this year for sure, but assuming he wouldn't have that's a big hole to fill.

Success and failure this season comes down to Valimaki and Andersson taking a step forward (Andersson rebounding), and Tanev and Hanifin holding serve.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Coleman is a two-time cup winner, a great defensive forward who chips in offense, and was one of the most sought-after free agents this year. The consensus seemed to be that he would get north of $6M/yr, but we got him for free (TB paid a first) and below $5M. He plays with grit, and is a leader. This may be the FA steal of the year, to go with the other two steals from last year (Marky and Tanev). Does he automatically get us a cup? Of course not, but he definitely moves the needle. The deficiencies in our backend might move that needle back, but our group of forwards are better this year than last.

I am honestly curious where is the $6M number coming from? He was coming from a 31 point season(46 point pace over 82 games). He also has never had more than 36 points, and he is already 29 years of age. I realize he brings a lot more than points but $6M? I also think that while he was facing the top opposing forwards, the oppositions top D pairings were containing Tampa's top 2 lines.

Personally I think that this is a gamble at 2 years too long. He can be a great addition to the team, but he can also be a Frolik level contributor. And no one really knows what player we will be getting in his mid 30's. Right now I have him penciled in around Backlund in terms of what he brings, but as a winger. Is that a good value? I believe CP is split on Backlund, because of the uncertainty of how he will age going forward, and the same will apply to Coleman.

[EVERLAST]

Reading through this makes me want to scream.
We haven't even stepped on the ice and we suck, have no chance , blah , blah blah.
Sutter is in full Turd polishing mode.
If anyone can polish a turd and make It a champion it's Darryl " I polish turds " Sutter . Sorry D. 😞

I know to not expect anything flashy and since I've been watching this team since day 1 I'm okay with that.

Let's temper our expectations here FFS and see what the semi new Coach and Asst can do with this group.

We aren't a weak team looking at some of these players and what they are capable of doing.

If we stay healthy we win this division, make the playoffs and some noise.

I just so want the naysayers to be respectfully silenced and change their narrative .

Darryl Sutter has 2 ......2 Stanley Cups that no one seems to GAF about and I respectfully disagree on that.

Go Flames.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I am honestly curious where is the $6M number coming from? He was coming from a 31 point season(46 point pace over 82 games). He also has never had more than 36 points, and he is already 29 years of age. I realize he brings a lot more than points but $6M? I also think that while he was facing the top opposing forwards, the oppositions top D pairings were containing Tampa's top 2 lines.

Personally I think that this is a gamble at 2 years too long. He can be a great addition to the team, but he can also be a Frolik level contributor. And no one really knows what player we will be getting in his mid 30's. Right now I have him penciled in around Backlund in terms of what he brings, but as a winger. Is that a good value? I believe CP is split on Backlund, because of the uncertainty of how he will age going forward, and the same will apply to Coleman.

I'll be happy with Coleman if he isn't bum for half that contract. Pretty much like any UFA signing

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I don't count Monahan as a question mark. What I am concerned about is chemistry on the line. Here are three players who have never played together and all have non-complimentary skill sets IMO. This is throwing three guys together and hoping they turn into an effective line. I see them as nothing but a big question mark. I look at them and I just don't know who is going to make the zone entry? Who is going to be controlling the puck? Who is setting up Monahan, or which of the other two becomes the finisher? Lots of question marks as to if these guys can work together and how they are going to play off each other.

Really? These are professional hockey players. All of them have no doubt started playing with new players at some point or another... chemistry is something that develops over time. Every line at one time or another was throwing three guys together and hoping they turn out to be effective. It's not a video game where certain players mash together better than others with mathematical certainty.
For the record I see it as pretty obvious: Mangiapane will be the primary distributor and puck carrier, Monahan will fill the triggerman role, and Coleman will play retrieval and defensive presence. But I also think Monahan has displayed solid puck distributor skills (such as beginning of last season; his whole junior career; 18-19) so could end up with Mangiapane playing triggerman.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Doing what exactly? They aren't going to score. They aren't going to be a great checking line. Backlund has not been the same since Colorado and the other two have their challenges. Lucic can't skate to play a checking role. Dube has been in the Sutter dog house because he can't play defense. This is another line that is just a hope and prayer that it works out. I just don't see what this line is going to be good at, regardless if it is Lucic or Pitlick or Dube. Any of the iterations is just as questionable.

? Those were our 5th, 7th, and 8th most productive forwards last year, and we're asking them to be our 7th, 8th and 9th most productive this season. Lucic and Backlund have solid defensive advanced stats together, and Dube adds good speed and counter attack potential. Dube-Lucic combo showed real chemistry at times last season (notably with Bennett between them, and Backs is an upgrade.) It seems that you're basing your take on ethereal feelings.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Lewis is 34. Richardson is 36. Pitlick is the youngster on the line and will be 30 come November 1st. What you're hoping for is they can still skate with the teams they are playing against and not get outscored. Yes, they should be better than Simon-Ryan-Nordstrom (BTW, Simon only got into 11 games last a season, so where did this example come from? Did they every play together?) but they have Father Time to deal with. I get they are Sutter players, but can these players still play in the NHL? That's the question mark. I'm going to assume these guys will be killing a lot of penalties, so let's hope they still have some legs.

34 and 36? Call the crypt keeper!! I don't have to hope for that too hard, statistically all of them were not getting outscored in the NHL last season... so I should expect them to maintain that performance. If not, there are a bounty of young players like Ruzicka, Gawdin, Pospisil and not young players like Ritchie there to provide more energy.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

This is a team of question marks. It is really hard to get enthusiastic about this lineup. I don't see them being the sum of their parts. I hope to be proven wrong on that. but looking at this lineup I just don't see any thought or plan in putting it together, other than to ask Sutter who he likes on the open market.

I agree that it's not easy to be super enthusiastic about the current team make up, but you're dead wrong on the other parts. I detailed the thought that went to putting it together, it was clearly to address toughness, grit, and playoff two way play. There was obviously thought because there was ample speculation by us here about all of these moves over summer.

Bolded, well that's just your opinion until it plays out.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Every team has "iffs" that need to be sorted out, some more than others...

No, Bingo.

Every team has "IFS". The fact that the Flames enter the season with "IFFS is sure to spell their doom.