Vent your frustration (as a Flames fan) here

[FlamingHomer]

The goalposts and the crossbars. Sigh.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Not in every round I don't think they have.
Example:
They drafted Topi Ronni at 59 last draft. I don't mind the pick. I don't know the player well. But the Flames see him as a potential middle 6 forward.
Lane Hutson went at #62.
If Lane Hutson is an NHL player he will be impactful. He's got elite hockey sense. He does things that most players can't do.
But he's undersized. And his skating may not be good enough to over come that.

But if he hits, he will be viewed as the steal of the NHL draft and has the potential to be a game changer for the Habs.

I'm not one to get tunnel vision on a certain player because I don't follow them all or know them well.
But that's the type of thing I'm talking about.

Home run swings. Every. Pick.

My strong hypothesis is that over the long-term you will be better off.

Possibly, but if you don't draft on sure bets to be NHLers who are not that dynamic, then you are forced to constantly sign and recycle replacement level vets on your bottom 2 lines. You can't go boom/bust on every single pick. You need a mix.

Besides, we've had enough big success in later rounds who were boom/bust types. Mangiapane alone comes to mind. 6th rounder who was very much one of the players you're talking about.

You also need to draft guys like Dube. Who aren't that dynamic at anything except speed, but have the entire package necessary to stay in the NHL and contribute.

I guess I'm saying I sort of agree with your hypothesis, but also that you might be missing a part of the picture with a singular focus like that.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

then you are forced to constantly sign and recycle replacement level vets on your bottom 2 lines

This is absolutely what you should do. Bottom 6 players are frequently available in FA. Ideally not replacement level, of course. However, the goal with these lines should be to identify undervalued players rather than overpaying for Stanley Cup role players.

I'm also a believer that ELCs are good for your 3rd line.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

This is absolutely what you should do. Bottom 6 players are frequently available in FA. Ideally not replacement level, of course. However, the goal with these lines should be to identify undervalued players rather than overpaying for Stanley Cup role players.

I'm also a believer that ELCs are good for your 3rd line.

They're much cheaper if you develop them from within, and usually surprise to be more than you expect. I don't mind 2 maybe 3 veterans on those lines, but you really do need to have cheap options for your bottom 6, and veterans in free agency get paid a lot more than a guy on an ELC or RFA deal.

That way you can pay your stars more and actually field a team capable of competing for a cup.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Mickey76

. My kids will watch the odd game with me but for the most part the Flames haven’t done much since 04 to make new lifelong fans. We’ve been a 12-20 team for 20 years. Yah!!

This is rings so true. Even when my time commitment to following the team has waxed and waned with life, I always come back to them in some form largely because of what 04 did to reignite the passion I had in elementary school in the 90s.

EDIT: semi related I know it's a hockey years thing but when folks talk like it's amazing Lewis is doing what he does at his age, I die a little inside because he's a year younger than me.

[Strange Brew]

IMO you don’t lock yourself into a style or philosophy for each and every pick. For one, it’s not really possible to put every pick into one of two categories of 1) safe and 2) boom/bust.

Usually boom/bust type picks are euphemisms for smaller, skilled players. And it would be a mistake to stock an organization with only such players. But every draft pick has elements of skill, size, speed, character etc. I’d advocate an approach that considers all of these qualities for every pick.

[#-3]

Flames fans who opine for a 1stOA pick annoy the hell out of me, almost as bad as all of the Oilers fans who peacock around saying "Ever heard of McDavid" while their team perpetually sits in 4th-5th place in the division standings. All we need to do is look North to understand that lamenting your team has never been bad enough to get good is a terrible premise.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

IMO you don’t lock yourself into a style or philosophy for each and every pick. For one, it’s not really possible to put every pick into one of two categories of 1) safe and 2) boom/bust.

Usually boom/bust type picks are euphemisms for smaller, skilled players. And it would be a mistake to stock an organization with only such players. But every draft pick has elements of skill, size, speed, character etc. I’d advocate an approach that considers all of these qualities for every pick.

The best way to maximize each of these attributes is to never trade a first round pick. Unfortunately the GM doesn’t see it that way.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

They're much cheaper if you develop them from within, and usually surprise to be more than you expect. I don't mind 2 maybe 3 veterans on those lines, but you really do need to have cheap options for your bottom 6, and veterans in free agency get paid a lot more than a guy on an ELC or RFA deal.

That way you can pay your stars more and actually field a team capable of competing for a cup.

If you draft for potential, then some of the time those guys will still reach the NHL but at a lower ceiling. So they are still candidates for depth positions.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by #-3

Flames fans who opine for a 1stOA pick annoy the hell out of me, almost as bad as all of the Oilers fans who peacock around saying "Ever heard of McDavid" while their team perpetually sits in 4th-5th place in the division standings. All we need to do is look North to understand that lamenting your team has never been bad enough to get good is a terrible premise.

While I agree with this, it’s also hard to deny the appeal of having a franchise-type player.

That’s probably my biggest frustration right now. Losing Gaudreau and Tkachuk basically eliminated any “wow” moments from the game. We’re doing ok, and we’re doing it as a team, but even the wins aren’t that exciting because we don’t really have any exciting players.

I’d love a player like Bedard, who wouldn’t? I want to watch a player who is on another level offensively again.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

IMO you don’t lock yourself into a style or philosophy for each and every pick. For one, it’s not really possible to put every pick into one of two categories of 1) safe and 2) boom/bust.

Usually boom/bust type picks are euphemisms for smaller, skilled players. And it would be a mistake to stock an organization with only such players. But every draft pick has elements of skill, size, speed, character etc. I’d advocate an approach that considers all of these qualities for every pick.

Some of the math that is done is the probability of making the NHL and the upside of the player if they do. Which is reasonable.
What I'm advocating for though is within that math, putting more weight towards the potential. That doesn't mean smaller/skilled. But it does typically mean it's looking at players who have some sort of elite skill but some flaws.
So it could be the small/skilled guy, it could be the guy with great hands but is slow, it could be the fast guy with poor hockey instincts. Etc.
Could be a guy that checks most the boxes, but with a more compete level.
As you go deeper into the draft the number of flaws are higher but you still look for that elite element to their game.

I would say that I have a bias towards two elements though: Hockey sense & skating.

I would generally prioritize in that order.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Yes! This! 1000 times this!

How about stopping the wave all together. It's not the 1988 Olympics.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

How about stopping the wave all together. It's not the 1988 Olympics.

You have my vote.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Many frustrations. Too many to list.

Mainly, I can't for the life of me figure out why no one pulls Marky aside and just straight up tells him "play better". Don't need to over complicate things. Just be straightforward with what he needs to do. 'Marky, you need to play better and stop more pucks from going into the net.' Voila. Problem solved.

You'll never know if it works until you try it. Maybe up to this point he's been under the impression that his play has been good enough and the coaching staff is happy with him. It's not like they've ever given him reason to think his play needs improvement, they keep starting him no matter how poor he is!!

[SportsJunky]

Sorry but I have to vent. I know it doesn't belong here but holy hell does the NHL website suck. Why does it take forever to load pages?

[CroFlames]

I wish the dome wasn't a library.

Stamps and Cavalry have way better atmospheres, but the Flames don't care about atmosphere. They care about each extra buck they extract from a seat.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I wish the dome wasn't a library.

As long as we don't end up too far the other way with fans banging on the glass and doing the wave in the arena.

I'm kidding although wavers and glass bangers are bad people. That can't be debated.

[CroFlames]

Glass banging isn't cheering/supporting. It's just being a doosh.

This is cheering/supporting:

Spoiler!

[Cecil Terwilliger]

People keep telling me the dome is a library but I've never once found anyone who knows where I can actually borrow a book from. And where are the periodicals?

[drewtastic]

Originally Posted by Bingo

This is actually a good idea ...

Venting thread may prove to be a solid release valve.

Hard to argue with some/most of the posts either. Personally I just don't get all that up or down as a rule. Helps with following this team.

Having been a Flames fan for almost their entire Calgary tenure, I'd say this bolded part resonates most with where I've landed as a Flames fan.

I've become resigned to the idea that, if you are going to follow pro-sports teams (especially in leagues with as many teams as there are in the NHL), you have to celebrate what would otherwise be considered "lesser" achievements (egs: individual player accomplishments, regular season division titles, year-end awards) because the bigger ones ((like recurring playoff success and championships) are so few and far between.

Given the overall competitiveness of the NHL, the statistical reality of having a 1/32 shot at a championship every year and the Flames' franchise's specific history of underperforming at the most important times, I've altered my expectations and approach to fandom as a result. Sucks, but, reality bites.

(And, given the (c)Oilers' ridiculous draft luck, organizational incompetence and arrogance the past two decades, most of my recent "fandom" has been rooted firmly in Chia-den-freude. Oilers losses are my ultimate favourite.)