“Make it to the playoffs an anything could happen"

[TheIronMaiden]

The main take away from what I have read and looked at, is that teams rarely squeeze into the playoffs and turn that playoff birth into playoff success. Just making the playoffs is not a sustainable strategy.

What is up for debate is how should a team react to that information.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon Surfer

I appreciate the stats people have added to this thread.

The initial analysis using only seed did not pass the sniff test for me, as those Kings and Blues teams were obviously good at the time. I made some good money from pre-playoff bets those years as to me they looked like cup favorites.

It is really about the team going into the playoffs. The cases of low seeds winning it all, were all good teams which had something happen to suppress their regular season points. I do not see any cases of consistent tweeners wining anything.

Which seems to match the average sentiment on this board too. For playoffs people get excited about teams they think can win, and are not excited about teams they don't think can win, regardless of seed. They get frustrated seeing assets spent/expired for teams that they do not think can win (assuming those assets are not a Kiprusoff).

How much of that is just hindsight? When Colorado blasted us out of the playoffs in 2019 in 5 games - when you look back at it, it makes sense - they became a powerhouse and added Cale Makar right as the playoffs started. But at the time no one was picking them to win.

[TheIronMaiden]

Speaking of Colorado, they're a poster boy for drafting high picks and winning a championship. That 2013 to 2017 draft run set them up.

2013 Nathan MacKinnon 1st OA
2015 Mikko Rantanen 10 OA
2017 Cale Makar 4OA

3 point per game players in 5 drafts.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Looks like if you finish in the top 10 in the league, are healthy and get good goaltending you have a shot. Flames are 6 points out of the top 10, healthy, getting very good goaltending and are fun to watch. Trending up .

This may be the hottest of hot takes. Yes, the Flames are 6 points out of 10th, but have 10 teams to climb over and 8 of those teams have games in hand.

This was the absolute worst possible outcome for a team struggling to make a decision on dumping their soon to be UFAs. This is a team that has opportunity to make some real significant change in direction and recover from some of the damage done organizationally by the previous manager. Superficially they have played themselves back into the race, but this really feels like smoke and mirrors. Coleman and Sharaganovich leading the team in should be a red flag here and determine sustainability of this all.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

The main take away from what I have read and looked at, is that teams rarely squeeze into the playoffs and turn that playoff birth into playoff success. Just making the playoffs is not a sustainable strategy.

What is up for debate is how should a team react to that information.

I know this sounds stupid, but this year does seem different.

The top teams are the Jets, Bruins, Canucks, Rangers, Avalanche, Panthers, and Stars. I don't see any of those teams as unstoppable or even true contenders above the rest of the playoff teams.

The Jets, Canucks, and Stars have been relatively inconsistent the last few years. The Bruins are missing Bergeron. They have Marchand, Pasternak, and a bunch of not so impressive depth pieces. The Rangers, Avalanche, and Stars all look pretty inconsistent this year.

If the Flames finish out these last 38 games with 25ish wins, I'd put them right up there with any of those teams.

[Pekkerhead]

Conroy is doing exactly what he’s supposed to do. Traded two UFA’s for picks and a really good younger player, he’s playing lots of young guys, while staying competitive and entertaining. In all likelihood he’ll still trade Lindholm and Tanev for more picks and younger players. We may not win the cup this year but nobody can say we’re not building a more entertaining and younger team.

[Icantwhisper]

Originally Posted by blankall

I know this sounds stupid, but this year does seem different.

The top teams are the Jets, Bruins, Canucks, Rangers, Avalanche, Panthers, and Stars. I don't see any of those teams as unstoppable or even true contenders above the rest of the playoff teams.

The Jets, Canucks, and Stars have been relatively inconsistent the last few years. The Bruins are missing Bergeron. They have Marchand, Pasternak, and a bunch of not so impressive depth pieces. The Rangers, Avalanche, and Stars all look pretty inconsistent this year.

If the Flames finish out these last 38 games with 25ish wins, I'd put them right up there with any of those teams.

Of course it would, .658 winning percentage for last 38 games! The only teams with a better winning percentage than that right now are Winnipeg .674 and Vancouver .659.
So yes, if we become the best team in the league for the next 38 games we would be a contender. Big ask, though

[looooob]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Speaking of Colorado, they're a poster boy for drafting high picks and winning a championship. That 2013 to 2017 draft run set them up.

2013 Nathan MacKinnon 1st OA
2015 Mikko Rantanen 10 OA
2017 Cale Makar 4OA

3 point per game players in 5 drafts.

I'm agreeing with you, just being morbid...but to think the Flames more or less fell into the same thing (ok the average quality of the players is not quite as high and the time window slightly stretched) in Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Fox even outside of the top 5
Aves are certainly a good model. need to stay the course and have a plan. still then takes some luck (sort of ) sprinkled in that a true generational (as opposed to the overused term) D man falls to 4 (well not really falls maybe he was rising to 4) anyways fortune smiles on the prepared

[Teroy]

I've really enjoyed the games lately. Fun to watch and good to see the young guys playing so well. That said; I don't want to just make the playoff and go out in the first round. I'd rather get a good draft choice.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Teroy

I've really enjoyed the games lately. Fun to watch and good to see the young guys playing so well. That said; I don't want to just make the playoff and go out in the first round. I'd rather get a good draft choice.

You don't really have much choice in the matter, and if Conroy sold every one they still likely wouldn't end up in a high drafting position.

So might as well keep enjoying it.

[Enoch Root]

The Avs are definitely a good model, because they are patient, and they retain their draft picks, and they don't spend capital every deadline on depth guys.

But the Avs are also the poster child for how much it all depends on luck. When we got a 4OA, we got Bennett. When they got one, they got Makar. Also, the one year they get the 1OA, it turns out to be MacKinnon. If you're lucky, you might time it well and get a MacKinnon, or a Makar. But to get 2 top 4 picks over 5 years, and end up with MacKinnon and Makar? Ridiculously good fortune. You can tank for a decade and never get a player as good as either of them - in fact, you probably won't (see: BUF, DET and most other rebuilds)

[Pekkerhead]

We keep talking about drafting elite players but every time we have one, he leaves the first chance he gets.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

We keep talking about drafting elite players but every time we have one, he leaves the first chance he gets.

That doesn't change the process.

Just means you need to nail drafting and development and be ruthless about asset management on third contracts.

If they won't extend a year early ... you move them.

Rinse and repeat.

Stay young.

Hope to hit lightning in a bottle with a bunch of players on first and second contracts.

This is the way ...

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

We keep talking about drafting elite players but every time we have one, he leaves the first chance he gets.

The Flames have to create a culture and environment where they will be more likely to stick around, and then make sure we have the cap flexibility to pay them appropriately.

The new arena should help some
Conroy and Huska seem to be cultivating a very solid player friendly culture as well
Conroy also seems to be willing to sidestep nasty contracts and move the player if they won't sign a palatable deal

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That doesn't change the process.

Just means you need to nail drafting and development and be ruthless about asset management on third contracts.

If they won't extend a year early ... you move them.

Rinse and repeat.

Stay young.

Hope to hit lightning in a bottle with a bunch of players on first and second contracts.

This is the way ...

Yup - understand the situation with respect to being a small Canadian market, and make it organizational policy: you sign, or we move you.

And moving them usually turns out to be the better plan anyway.

[Ashes]

Will be interesting to see what the lineup looks like for the Flames once they presumably trade the UFA's, especially if they're still in the hunt for a playoff spot.

Unless there's another C prospect coming back.. would they consider trying Sharangovich at Center? I've heard it mentioned he's played there before, though he seems to be thriving as a Winger.

It kind of seems like we have a log jam if we were to take a player(s) back in the trade. I'm still in the camp that would be perfectly fine trading Dube or Ruzicka, though I'm not sure what either would return in a trade, especially Dube for various reasons.

Might a lineup like this be realistic after the deadline with no other changes? And is this enough to squeek in?

Huberdeau - Sharangovich - Coronato
Zary - Kadri - Pospisil
Mangiapane - Backlund - Coleman
Pelletier - Dube - Greer

Weegar - Anderson
Kylington - DeSimone
Oesterle - Gilbert

[dino7c]

Almost certain some players will be coming back in deals

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yup - understand the situation with respect to being a small Canadian market, and make it organizational policy: you sign, or we move you.

And moving them usually turns out to be the better plan anyway.

And could even go further ...

Nobody signs a contract beyond say age 34

If you're 30 ... 4 year deal
If you're 29 ... 5 year deal

Won't do it?

Trade.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Speaking of Colorado, they're a poster boy for drafting high picks and winning a championship. That 2013 to 2017 draft run set them up.

2013 Nathan MacKinnon 1st OA
2015 Mikko Rantanen 10 OA
2017 Cale Makar 4OA

3 point per game players in 5 drafts.

TBH it kind of down plays the actual way Colorado built that team though and when their rebuild actually started.

2009 Matt Duchene 3rd OV
2011 Gabriel Landeskog 2nd OV
2013 Nathan MacKinnon 1st OA
2015 Mikko Rantanen 10 OA
2017 Cale Makar 4OA

They really perfected the "Suck every other year" method of building a team, and had sprinked in some playoff appearances in the years in between, before really becoming a contender near the end of the 2019 season with the addition of Makar (As we know all too well) and then won their cup in 2022.

So took 13 years from drafting Duchene to winning the cup.

[Icantwhisper]

Originally Posted by Ashes

Will be interesting to see what the lineup looks like for the Flames once they presumably trade the UFA's, especially if they're still in the hunt for a playoff spot.

Unless there's another C prospect coming back.. would they consider trying Sharangovich at Center? I've heard it mentioned he's played there before, though he seems to be thriving as a Winger.

It kind of seems like we have a log jam if we were to take a player(s) back in the trade. I'm still in the camp that would be perfectly fine trading Dube or Ruzicka, though I'm not sure what either would return in a trade, especially Dube for various reasons.

Might a lineup like this be realistic after the deadline with no other changes? And is this enough to squeek in?

Huberdeau - Sharangovich - Coronato
Zary - Kadri - Pospisil
Mangiapane - Backlund - Coleman
Pelletier - Dube - Greer

Weegar - Anderson
Kylington - DeSimone
Oesterle - Gilbert

Not convinced they all go, could see Hanafin stay, with Lindholm gone and Tanev could go either way.
Don't think change will be as much as we thought.