New Look Flames - Thoughts on the roster ahead of camp

[Bingo]

Which is fair.

The six man unit likely takes a step back with Giordano. I agree he's going to falter at some point, but assuming he doesn't take a huge step back this year it's a loss.

But Zadorov isn't playing on the top unit with Giordano gone, it's clearly Hanifin. So that's not spin saying he's replacing Giordano ... it's logic.

The question is can Zadorov or Valimaki replace Hanifin, and especially last year's Hanifin?

That's going to be tough.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

To me those averages just tell me the difference between elite and average scoring depth is razor thin. Like 5 goals over a season. If we can prevent 5+goals more than the Avs or Vegas, the Flames will be ok.

The D scoring is most definitely a concern though.

I don't know about you but these averages really add up. The Avs scored 42 more goals than the Flames over a 56 game season(0.84 more goals per game). That adds up to 61.5 more goals over an 82 game season. As for Vegas it's 35 goals(extra 0.625 goals per game). That's quite the gap.

Unless you meant that if we manage to be as elite as these teams defensively, then yeah of course it would make the Flames a much better team. Based on last season the Flames would've needed to reduce their goals against by 28(col)-38(vgk) goals. The Flames would have went from a -5 goal differential to a +28(I averaged the two).

Yeah they would've been more than okay, but that's a huge if! That's 41-56 goals, and you want to add the 5+ more goals. I believe in Sutter as much as the next guy, but cutting goals against by 50-60 goals over one off season, that's some magic right there. Especially if you consider the defense got worse as a whole.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

on paper, sure - but you have to factor in where they all are on their career curves

so I would say that it is more accurate to put it like this:

20Tanev-20Hanifin-20Gio-20Andersson > 20Tanev-20Hanifin-20Andersson-20Zadorov

however, I am not so certain that it applies when we change them all to 21. Hanifin is going to get a bigger role. It should be easy for Andersson to have a better year. Tanev will probably be in tough to be as good as last year. Gio is 38, so every year is a risk of completely falling off the table at this point. Zadorov is 26 and I think he is going to love Sutter hockey. So those things being the case, the following may well be true:

21Tanev-21Hanifin-21Andersson-21Zadorov > 20Tanev-20Hanifin-20Gio-20Andersson

because let's be honest, the 2020 defense wasn't great (other than Tanev)

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I’m aware. We are talking roles.

I agree with you guys that Hanifin will get a bigger role. He will get more ice time and more opportunity. However, we don't know if playing more, and the added pressure will have him playing better. It is a gamble that he can turn into a #1 defenseman. Hanifin had a career year last year, and he seems to be on the right track, but the development of players is never linear. Hopefully he improves on his year last year, but he can just as easily take a step back with the added responsibility(see Andersson last year).

Some info to hopefully add to the discussion - average TOI/GP for our D last year:

• Giordano: 22:57 TOI/GP, 2:22PP, 3:03SH, QoC: 97%, QoT: 78%
• Tanev: 21:44 TOI/GP, 0:12PP, 3:07SH, QoC: 94%, QoT: 95%
• Andersson: 21:13 TOI/GP, 2:44PP, 0:49SH, QoC: 91%, QoT: 70%
• Hanifin: 20:01 TOI/GP, 0:46PP, 0:30SH, QoC: 92%, QoT: 88%
• Zadorov: 19:12 TOI/GP, 0:02PP, 1:46SH, QoC: 67%, QoT: 66%
• Gudbranson: 18:04 TOI/GP, 0:05PP, 2:42SH, QoC: 35%, QoT: 25%
• Stone: 16:05 TOI/GP, 0:21PP, 1:33SH, QoC: 3%, QoT: 3%
• Nesterov: 15:52 TOI/GP, 0:14PP, 1:16SH
• Valimaki: 15:26 TOI/GP, 0:14PP, 1:16SH, QoC: 21%, QoT: 9%

I based on the usage last year, I expect Gio's PP time to be mostly given to Hanifin, and maybe Valimaki. That's an extra 2 mins for Hanifin.

Hanifin was already leading the team in even strength TOI/GP, so Gio's 17.5 mins will essentially go to Zadorov.

As for SH time that's where things get interesting.
I see the PK pairings as: Tanev - Zadorov (3mins), Hanifin - Gudbranson (1min), Valimaki - Andersson(1min). Again most of the PK time will go to Zadorov as well.

In the end Hanifin should end up with a TOI around 22-23mins, getting 3 of Gio's minutes, mostly on the PP.


EDIT: I added QoC and QoT numbers to show that even though, Hanifin would be "taking over Gio's minutes", he is only going to get a small bump in the quality of competiton. Zadorov in the meantime taking over Hanifin's spot will have to adjust to much better players.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I don't know about you but these averages really add up. The Avs scored 42 more goals than the Flames over a 56 game season(0.84 more goals per game). That adds up to 61.5 more goals over an 82 game season. As for Vegas it's 35 goals(extra 0.625 goals per game). That's quite the gap.

Unless you meant that if we manage to be as elite as these teams defensively, then yeah of course it would make the Flames a much better team. Based on last season the Flames would've needed to reduce their goals against by 28(col)-38(vgk) goals. The Flames would have went from a -5 goal differential to a +28(I averaged the two).

Yeah they would've been more than okay, but that's a huge if! That's 41-56 goals, and you want to add the 5+ more goals. I believe in Sutter as much as the next guy, but cutting goals against by 50-60 goals over one off season, that's some magic right there. Especially if you consider the defense got worse as a whole.

I actually think it is possible for the Flames to cut their GA considerably this season, for the following reasons:


1) IIRC, the Flames basically already cut down their GA in the last 15 or 20 games of the season. Small sample size, so who knows if it sticks (also fair to think that it may not hold when playing against every other team in the NHL this season). However, there was no training camp for Sutter to really get his changes down - his changes were tweaks and orders about playing with more pace. I do think his system will help to keep the GA lower, but we will have to see.


2) Forwards - forwards like Lewis and Richardson weren't brought in to be face-punchers (not that I think you are implying this at all - just for the people who may be reading this that assume they are just 4th line plugs good at playing 'smashmouth hockey'). The additions have strong underlying metrics, especially defensively. Coleman is a strong 2 way forward. Pitlick to me should boost Backlund's line back up (though Backlund's line has been consistently good IMO) to the level of Backlund-Frolik (when Frolik was super strong defensively), but with a boost of grit over what Frolik brought. I really do think that the forwards overall will help reduce the GA this season.


3) Defence - This worries me offensively, but defensively? I think they will be fine. Hanifin should continue to shine defensively, Tanev is basically as 'good as it gets' defensively. Zadorov has good underlying metrics in shot suppression. WIll Andersson bounce-back a bit - I thought he was putrid for most of last season, but being coached by Sutter should help him recover somewhat I think. Valimaki is young and improving, and I wouldn't bet against him for taking a step forward this season. Gudbranson for all his warts, can be a reliable bottom-pairing defencemen (key word there - bottom-pairing). Fans in Pittsburgh, Nashville and Anaheim seemed to generally agree that he was a mistake-free bottom-pairing defencemen for them - so it gives me room for optimism. Plus Stone was better than Nesterov defensively, and if Gudbranson is not up to snuff, he can step in.


4) Ability to play at pace. Conditioning was seen as an underlying reason as to why the Flames weren't able to play with the speed and effort in all 3 periods over the last few years. Darryl has made a point to call this out, and to get every player training properly this off-season. Hard to get back on defence when you are pooped.



I am really not worried about this team not making it into the 'top 10 best defensive teams' ranking - in fact, I think they will be in the top 4 or 5, but I accept that I may be drinking the kool-aid. I just think that a bunch of rational reasons stacked-up leads me to believe that this team will be one of the stingiest in the NHL. The offence worries me (especially from the D, and the transition overall), but defence is one area that this team should now excel at.

[GioforPM]

^^ also, without researching, I'd bet Markstrom foolishly chasing a loose puck against the Canucks ended up causing an increase in GA for a while.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I actually think it is possible for the Flames to cut their GA considerably this season, for the following reasons:


1) IIRC, the Flames basically already cut down their GA in the last 15 or 20 games of the season. Small sample size, so who knows if it sticks (also fair to think that it may not hold when playing against every other team in the NHL this season). However, there was no training camp for Sutter to really get his changes down - his changes were tweaks and orders about playing with more pace. I do think his system will help to keep the GA lower, but we will have to see.


2) Forwards - forwards like Lewis and Richardson weren't brought in to be face-punchers (not that I think you are implying this at all - just for the people who may be reading this that assume they are just 4th line plugs good at playing 'smashmouth hockey'). The additions have strong underlying metrics, especially defensively. Coleman is a strong 2 way forward. Pitlick to me should boost Backlund's line back up (though Backlund's line has been consistently good IMO) to the level of Backlund-Frolik (when Frolik was super strong defensively), but with a boost of grit over what Frolik brought. I really do think that the forwards overall will help reduce the GA this season.


3) Defence - This worries me offensively, but defensively? I think they will be fine. Hanifin should continue to shine defensively, Tanev is basically as 'good as it gets' defensively. Zadorov has good underlying metrics in shot suppression. WIll Andersson bounce-back a bit - I thought he was putrid for most of last season, but being coached by Sutter should help him recover somewhat I think. Valimaki is young and improving, and I wouldn't bet against him for taking a step forward this season. Gudbranson for all his warts, can be a reliable bottom-pairing defencemen (key word there - bottom-pairing). Fans in Pittsburgh, Nashville and Anaheim seemed to generally agree that he was a mistake-free bottom-pairing defencemen for them - so it gives me room for optimism. Plus Stone was better than Nesterov defensively, and if Gudbranson is not up to snuff, he can step in.


4) Ability to play at pace. Conditioning was seen as an underlying reason as to why the Flames weren't able to play with the speed and effort in all 3 periods over the last few years. Darryl has made a point to call this out, and to get every player training properly this off-season. Hard to get back on defence when you are pooped.



I am really not worried about this team not making it into the 'top 10 best defensive teams' ranking - in fact, I think they will be in the top 4 or 5, but I accept that I may be drinking the kool-aid. I just think that a bunch of rational reasons stacked-up leads me to believe that this team will be one of the stingiest in the NHL. The offence worries me (especially from the D, and the transition overall), but defence is one area that this team should now excel at.

I agree with most of these points, but they are really glass half full/wishful thinking. If those things work out, that would be awesome, and then we will have a great team on our hands. I expect us to cut down the GA with a better SV% from Markstrom, and Sutter hockey. I also believe that we will be a top 10 team in the league in that department. I just don't expect them to beat the best team in the league by 5 goals against this season. It was VGK last year, that's why I was so surprised.

Here are the couple of things I disagree with/can pick on:

1. We all hope that Sutter would have a great effect on our players, and they did show improvement for a burst. Those players did well in the first year of Peters before tuning him out. If we look further down the road the Hartley team did the same(I believe only Gaudreau, Monahan, and Backlund were members so it's a moot point). The room might just start tuning Sutter out, like they did with previous coaches. Again, I doubt it, but it could happen.
   
   Also, I get that Sutter is an elite coach, but from the discussions around here, it sounds like he can fix any deficiency a player has.
2. I mostly agree with your points about the forwards.
   
   The only push-back I could have is that all of Lucic/Lewis/Richardson are a year older, and you never know when the wheels would fall off. Even if it does happen I am sure they can be replaced.
   
   In addition, the Monahan line would be a line the opposition will try to exploit defensively. I hope they will be up to the task, because team defense is only as strong as it's weakest link.
3. Again you make some good points, but you address the best case scenario with the Defense. Hanifin and Tanev had career years, so they will just keep performing at the same level, or even improve. Andersson who had a bad year will come back to average. Each of the three could easily happen, but that's wishful thinking that they all will. As for Zadorov, I look forward to having him, hopefully he can handle a little tougher deployment than in Chicago. In the case of Gudbranson, I don't remember when was the last time he was a reliable defenseman in the league. Valimaki, is the same as Hanifin/Andersson you hope he takes the next step, but prospect development is far from a linear thing.
4. I also agree with this one, again the only knock I have against it is that we added some players who are closer to 35 and as long as there isn't a big drop off in their game we will be good.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I agree with most of these points, but they are really glass half full/wishful thinking.

So you agree with wishful thinking? Or, at this point, are you just tossing word salad to make it seem like unlimited pessimism is rational?

Originally Posted by gvitaly

In addition, the Monahan line would be a line the opposition will try to exploit defensively. I hope they will be up to the task, because team defense is only as strong as it's weakest link.

Defence at any given moment is as strong as the players who are on the ice. What are you proposing, that the opponents will sit around and wait for Monahan to be on the ice and then score at will?

The Legend of Worthless Sean Monahan, at this point, is approaching the dimensions of the Legend of Stupid Brad Treliving.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I agree with most of these points, but they are really glass half full/wishful thinking. If those things work out, that would be awesome, and then we will have a great team on our hands. I expect us to cut down the GA with a better SV% from Markstrom, and Sutter hockey. I also believe that we will be a top 10 team in the league in that department. I just don't expect them to beat the best team in the league by 5 goals against this season. It was VGK last year, that's why I was so surprised.

Here are the couple of things I disagree with/can pick on:

1. We all hope that Sutter would have a great effect on our players, and they did show improvement for a burst. Those players did well in the first year of Peters before tuning him out. If we look further down the road the Hartley team did the same(I believe only Gaudreau, Monahan, and Backlund were members so it's a moot point). The room might just start tuning Sutter out, like they did with previous coaches. Again, I doubt it, but it could happen.
   
   Also, I get that Sutter is an elite coach, but from the discussions around here, it sounds like he can fix any deficiency a player has.
2. I mostly agree with your points about the forwards.
   
   The only push-back I could have is that all of Lucic/Lewis/Richardson are a year older, and you never know when the wheels would fall off. Even if it does happen I am sure they can be replaced.
   
   In addition, the Monahan line would be a line the opposition will try to exploit defensively. I hope they will be up to the task, because team defense is only as strong as it's weakest link.
3. Again you make some good points, but you address the best case scenario with the Defense. Hanifin and Tanev had career years, so they will just keep performing at the same level, or even improve. Andersson who had a bad year will come back to average. Each of the three could easily happen, but that's wishful thinking that they all will. As for Zadorov, I look forward to having him, hopefully he can handle a little tougher deployment than in Chicago. In the case of Gudbranson, I don't remember when was the last time he was a reliable defenseman in the league. Valimaki, is the same as Hanifin/Andersson you hope he takes the next step, but prospect development is far from a linear thing.
4. I also agree with this one, again the only knock I have against it is that we added some players who are closer to 35 and as long as there isn't a big drop off in their game we will be good.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I am optimistic not because everything will happen, but because I do think that there is a good chance of many of these things happening, and added up incrementally, will result in a fairly stingy team. I do think we will catch Vegas in GA (partly because Calgary will improve, but I expect Vegas to regress too). I am not sure that they will be AS GOOD as Vegas was (sorry, I missed that in the original argument) - that is a rather sparkling GA after all, and I guess we share a mutual optimism that the Flames will finish top 10.


I am optimistic because I do think that from points 1-4, there will be 'some' improvement (or at least, a reasonable expectation of improvement vs 'hoping for the best'). I think some small steps in ever category will result in an overall significant improvement, without requiring any one area to be a home run. I do share your concern (and disbelief) in Gudbranson as well, but just made mention that IF (keyword here - hope he doesn't become a Sutter-favourite!) he plays in the bottom pairing, he can be reliable (that's seems to be the word from those fans from those American teams - and he was playing elevated minutes in Vancouver and I thought he was mostly awful then).


I guess we will see. At least we mostly agree that the GA should improve - I guess we will find out by how much soon (and I left out goalies - I don't know much about Vladar or Werner - if Markstrom gets hurt, Vladar has 5 games under his belt, and Werner 2 at the NHL level - some risk there, but there is also 'some' depth I guess -- I don't know if this is a plus or a minus at this point, but they both do sound promising).



I just look forward to seeing a more focused and determined team out there, and one that is more stingy (we will see how stingy I guess).

[OutOfTheCube]

I think the team looks largely the same, so I expect largely the same result.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I am optimistic not because everything will happen, but because I do think that there is a good chance of many of these things happening, and added up incrementally, will result in a fairly stingy team.

This is the way some people naturally argue. If you have ten good points in favour of your case, they will shout, ‘Oh, so if you're not right about all ten, then you admit that you're totally wrong!’ Then they take their own case as proven without question or evidence.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Can't quote you Jay:


To be fair, I didn't REALLY think he was making that argument with me (or I wouldn't bother responding as there is no point in responding to posters who argue in circles to make their points). I was ok with his response, especially since he gave an opposing viewpoint, but still felt this team would finish in the top 10 GA - just not AS high as I think they will. That's ok - as long as he gave his reasons.


I would also take issue if he (or whomever) responded with:


"You are out of your mind if you expect all these things to work out you kool-aid injecting moronic cataract giving flamer of a homer!"


I think there was more than enough context in his posts.

[activeStick]

There are a couple of things that I feel are going to see the Flames have a good season. The first is a full season, with training camp under Darryl Sutter. He's still one of the best coaches in the world and this group will benefit from it. The second for me is just how bad the majority of the group was last year with a few exceptions and that these players who had down seasons are the Flames' best players. They'll be better than last year and I think this team will do much better than last.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The Legend of Worthless Sean Monahan, at this point, is approaching the dimensions of the Legend of Stupid Brad Treliving.

Picking an extreme polar position and planting a stake there (on behalf of the party making the case) is equally worthless

Nobody actually says either of those things

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Picking an extreme polar position and planting a stake there (on behalf of the party making the case) is equally worthless

Nobody actually says either of those things

Don't make me waste my time tracking down the poster who said Monahan should have been put on waivers.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So you agree with wishful thinking? Or, at this point, are you just tossing word salad to make it seem like unlimited pessimism is rational?



Defence at any given moment is as strong as the players who are on the ice. What are you proposing, that the opponents will sit around and wait for Monahan to be on the ice and then score at will?

The Legend of Worthless Sean Monahan, at this point, is approaching the dimensions of the Legend of Stupid Brad Treliving.

First of all, who peed in your cereal this morning? I am not after Calgary4Life, but I appreciate you sticking up for him. I was only saying that things need to be taken in moderation. I think its great he is optimistic and agree on many of his points. I was just creating a discussion because, well I think it is slightly too optimistic(especially the Sutter narrative).


As for Sean Monahan, I am not saying he is worthless. I'm hoping he can make the adjustments. He does seem to be working on his defensive game, but last season I felt that his line would often get trapped in our own end. I was just saying that it might be a match up opposition coaches would like to key on. I know I would try to get my top line away from the Lindholm and Backlund line. Again, I'm not sure you noticed, but I do think highly of Monahan, especially Monahan the person. I am not out to get him, or anyone else.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Don't make me waste my time tracking down the poster who said Monahan should have been put on waivers.

Maybe time to let that one comment go.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Maybe time to let that one comment go.

There have been plenty of others, including gvitaly's remark just now, to the effect that Monahan is so bad defensively that he'll ruin the whole team's defence. Which is how the topic came up.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

There have been plenty of others, including gvitaly's remark just now, to the effect that Monahan is so bad defensively that he'll ruin the whole team's defence. Which is how the topic came up.

Seriously?

"...the Monahan line would be a line the opposition will try to exploit defensively" does not equal "The Legend of Worthless Sean Monahan".

[zamler]

My general reaction.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Seriously?

"...the Monahan line would be a line the opposition will try to exploit defensively" does not equal "The Legend of Worthless Sean Monahan".

‘Team defence is only as strong as its weakest link’, with reference to Monahan. That is a flat statement that Monahan is so bad defensively that he will wreck the entire team's defence.