Senators extend C Tim Stützle (8x$8.35M)

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Flames beat each of those teams when they came here.

Straight up, do you think Calgary is better than those teams?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Flames beat each of those teams when they came here.

So based on that exceptionally small sample size, Calgary is... what?

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Straight up, do you think Calgary is better than those teams?

I think the flames are better than Toronto. And dare I say it but I think the Flames are better than Florida this year with the moves both teams made.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Respectfully disagree. Lightning, Maple Leafs, Panthers would all win the Pacific if they were in our division. Remember Calgary's little Florida trip last year? They got owned. Then you have Bruins who will still be competitive, Ottawa which is rising, Montreal is going to be better, Buffalo is going to be better and Detroit who already is better. This is a very tough, competitive division and there will be no easy nights this year.

Ottawa is so bad their record against Calgary over last 2 years (when they were supposedly crappy) is 7-4. They are not as bad as people make them out to be, good young team that just got better with another year development of young men getting stronger.

Also we are talking about this year based off the changes in the off-season so I just don't think Sagarin's division wizardry is that relevant.

The Habs are awful. They definitely are not going to be better, if they are it is on the margins largely based on how awful Arizona and Chicago are likely to be. But Montreal may have the worst goaltending in the league, one of the worst defences in the league and a sub-par group of forwards.

I would agree that Ottawa is a good team and I would personally suggest that they have a very good chance at beating out the Bruins. But as a general statement the bottom three teams in that division are pretty bad with Montreal being far and away the worst.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Straight up, do you think Calgary is better than those teams?

Two out of three, yes. TB is tough.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

So based on that exceptionally small sample size, Calgary is... what?

Hey, I'm not the one citing a single road trip as the indicator.

[djsFlames]

Obviously things have to work out on the ice with new combinations but here are my "tiers" in terms of the last year's playoff qualifiers going into this season.

1a Colorado, Tampa, Carolina
1b Calgary, NYR, St Louis
2a Florida, Toronto, Edmonton, Boston
2b Minnesota, Washington, Pittsburgh, Nashville, Dallas

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Obviously things have to work out on the ice with new combinations but here are my "tiers" in terms of the last year's playoff qualifiers going into this season.

1a Colorado, Tampa, Carolina
1b Calgary, NYR, St Louis
2a Florida, Toronto, Edmonton, Boston
2b Minnesota, Washington, Pittsburgh, Nashville, Dallas

You forgot the Kings

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

You forgot the Kings

Too soon, bro. She literally just died.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Respectfully disagree. Lightning, Maple Leafs, Panthers would all win the Pacific if they were in our division. Remember Calgary's little Florida trip last year? They got owned. Then you have Bruins who will still be competitive, Ottawa which is rising, Montreal is going to be better, Buffalo is going to be better and Detroit who already is better. This is a very tough, competitive division and there will be no easy nights this year.

Ottawa is so bad their record against Calgary over last 2 years (when they were supposedly crappy) is 7-4. They are not as bad as people make them out to be, good young team that just got better with another year development of young men getting stronger.

Also we are talking about this year based off the changes in the off-season so I just don't think Sagarin's division wizardry is that relevant.

Flames were 20-7-5 against the east last season

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Flames were 20-7-5 against the east last season

Too bad we did not play the great Eastern Conference for every game, we had a higher winning percentage against them than we did against the Western Conference.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by fleury

...It's not a Flames thread but the problem with the recent moves is the length of contract given to 30 year olds. These guys are young and have shown enough promise to invest in. Giving high value contracts to older guys is a bad proposition in the second halves of the deal...

*SIGH* In isolation, no, it is not a "bad proposition." It depends entirely on the trajectory and competitive cycle of the team. Long-term deals for guys like Huberdeau and Kadri were necessary for the Flames, because they are a team that looks poised to win now, and over the next few years. But they won't win anything minus these two forwards, and these players are not signing anything but long-term deals. It's not a good proposition for NHL teams outside of their competitive window, but that's not the Flames.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[dino7c]

Yeah it's all well and good to say long term deals that take guys into their 30s are bad but realistically if you want to win at some point you have to.

Should the Avs get rid of Nate this season? Oilers ditch McDavid when his deals up.

It's pretty easy to say just sign young guys when your team has sucked for 10 years like the Sens


It's too bad the Flames didn't get Gaudreau for 8 but I'm sure glad they didn't give Monahan 8...these things go both ways

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Hey, I'm not the one citing a single road trip as the indicator.

You are now.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

You are now.

No, he's refuting a bad argument. Which inherently involves making an argument, but he's not introducing the notion that X means Y.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

You are now.

No, you must’ve missed the post I responded to. That poster essentially said “hey the false lost to TB and Fla on their road trip) and also mentioned TO, who they also lost to once. That’s the small sample size. I merely noted that Calgary beat all those teams the other time they played. IOW, there’s nothing to be taken from that Florida road trip.

[dino7c]

Judging by their record if the Flames played in the east they would have done even better so this idea that the Flames weren't that great they just played in a poor division is false.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Judging by their record if the Flames played in the east they would have done even better so this idea that the Flames weren't that great they just played in a poor division is false.

Well they definitely played in a poor division. And in a league where the goal is to win four Bo7 series perhaps the comparatively small sample size of cross-conference games - where one team is on a long road trip and in an unusual time zone - isn't actually that relevant.

Another argument would be that there is less game planning for non-conf opponents, but the Flames haven't been as successful against their most frequent opponents, including the CAD division year.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Well they definitely played in a poor division. And in a league where the goal is to win four Bo7 series perhaps the comparatively small sample size of cross-conference games - where one team is on a long road trip and in an unusual time zone - isn't actually that relevant.

Each team plays 32 cross-conference games per season. That's not exactly an insignificant sample.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Each team plays 32 cross-conference games per season. That's not exactly an insignificant sample.

It's 16 two-game samples. The other 1280 games that those teams played are probably more informative of their overall calibre

9-5-2 against EC playoff teams (still pretty impressive, but it's only 0.625)
11-2-3 against EC non-playoff teams

Weird year in the East where the lines were drawn clearly and early between the 8 good and 8 not-so-good teams. Flames were .703 against the EC

Total Points:

CEN 750 (107.2 avg for playoff teams)
ATL 731 (113.5)
MET 718 (107.3)
PAC 713 (104.7)

EC PO Teams 110.4
WC PO Teams 106.3

EC non-PO Teams 70.8
WC non-PO Teams 76.6

1463 WC total pts vs 1449 EC

WC had a 3-0-1 better record against the EC than vice-versa...pretty darn close over 1312 games.


The only easy argument is that there was more parity in the west. Playoff history suggests the East was better as they had won 5/6 last cups before this year, and their most dominant teams were still going strong, while several of the West's best teams had fallen off the map in recent years (CHI, LAK, SJ, ANA, VGK) - whereas NYI was probably the only team to do so from the East.