Making the playoffs or keeping our top-10 first round pick 2025?

[Badgers Nose]

For a long time this team had no culture and didn't stand for anything, unvalueing homegrown players and taking flyers on other team's rejects - GMCC is offering a long term vision for the team: youth focus, build through the draft, keep players that want to be here, hard work, high expectations and a winning mentality.

Almost all the rebuild teams have messed parts of that up by short cutting or intentionally failing.

At this rate the Flames will be over flowing with NHL caliber talent in a few years. And that will put pressure on the roster to keep their spots. Guys that don't want to be here will be moved out and (probably) replaced by internally developed kids with picks or prospects being the currency coming back in those trades. It's a sustainable cycle and gives GMCC lots of flexibility.

Give me 10-15 years of that please! I'm sure we'll have lots of playoff stories after that.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by chummer

Kind of pissed though me off when they had Greg Wyshynski on and he said the Flames didn't deserve to be in the playoffs. WTF man, whoever makes the playoffs deserves to be there.

Not surprising considering how locked his lips are to McTantrum's ass. I remember when he said we wouldn't look at him the same after the Amazon series. He was right but not in the way he thought.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by dino7c

No kidding...Flames leading goal scorer was 3rd overall. Cup incoming.

I'm not talking about washed up players who were once good. I'm talking about elite talent that is needed to win cups in this league.

And the only way to do this unless you are Vegas and everyone is begging to come to your team, is to get a top pick.

People can put their head in the sand and be all against tanking. But you'll never win a cup by being in the murky middle like we have for the past 2 decades.

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Wolven

To be fair, I think the Flames had a really easy schedule since the start of December. We've had a pile of home games and no back-to-back games until mid-January.

I think the next couple of weeks will be a better test of the Flames season with only 2 "easy" games in the next 8.

It's certainly not a lock that they'll make the playoffs. The team's been really streaky this year (two separate back-to-back four straight wins followed by 4 straight losses) and they're currently on the good side of the streak, which makes us all happy.

Hopefully they'll be able to ride this streak a lot longer, which may mean sticking with Wolf for the majority of starts in net.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

There’s flawed logic on both sides of the argument, but paying top dollar to high profile free agents who were once drafted in the top 3-5 anyone can do, and is not the basis for the rebuild advocates insistence on adding these players. The real value is having these (elite) players when they’re cost controlled and are outperforming their salaries, giving the team the opportunity to add more depth and talent across the roster than when their contracts that span their free agency kick in.

This fact we have top picks on our roster is always trotted out and misses the whole point.

And yet most of these players were the highest paid players on their teams by far when they won the cup. Some to the tune of $10M.

[All In Good Time]

Originally Posted by dino7c

No kidding...Flames leading goal scorer was 3rd overall. Cup incoming.

Come on Dino
Get with the program!!!
We need to have a losing record for 6 or 7 years and by that time the likes of scrubs like Wolf and such will be long gone. Then with all the lotteries we will have won we can start winning and trying to fill our new building with interested fans!!!
Like seriously
What don’t you get?
It’s so simple

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

And yet most of these players were the highest paid players on their teams by far when they won the cup. Some to the tune of $10M.

I think Florida is the 1st team to win the cup in the post lockout era with a double digit aav player. Everyone else won and signed guys to big deals but never won after.

Wait Vegas the year before with Eichel.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I think Florida is the 1st team to win the cup in the post lockout era with a double digit aav player. Everyone else won and signed guys to big deals but never won after.

Wait Vegas the year before with Eichel.

Makar was making $9. Crosby was making $8.7.

Not double digits but salary cap has changed over the years so I’m not sure it’s TOO relevant. I assume the vast majority of cup winners over the next 10 years will have double digit salary players.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Makar was making $9. Crosby was making $8.7.

Not double digits but salary cap has changed over the years so I’m not sure it’s TOO relevant. I assume the vast majority of cup winners over the next 10 years will have double digit salary players.

It was just a stat thrown out a lot until it happened. Held near and dear to my heart as to why McDavid and the Oilers will never win

[Calgary4LIfe]

Too much talk in absolutes here - Tanking is the only way, Tanking doesn't work.


Buffalo is NOT the model for tanking. They continue to suck because they had terrible GM after terrible GM and terrible coach after terrible coach. They haven't returned to success because they can't draft, develop, manage and coach worth a darn. They are an exception, not the rule.


Pittsburgh is batting 100% on their tank jobs. Won cups with the Magnificent One, won cups with The Kid. They were good at building beyond the tank. Calgary is really good at this right now. I think if Calgary tanks, they would be a successful tank. What is successful in my definition? Actually turning into a contender - make the 3rd round a few times and the finals at least once with the core that has been drafted and augmented.



What a fantastic example Edmonton is. Can't draft worth squat. Poorly managed. Yet they contended. One lucky bounce of a ball, and they draft McDavid who has covered up a LOT of holes in that organization.


Calgary is in a really, really good place right now. Although the rebuild should have started sooner, they do have a lot of prospects pushing up. They don't have too many old vets to worry about. Sure, there are some tough contracts on the books, but they are manageable (just makes Conroy have to work that much harder to not screw up, as there is no wiggle-room for another poor deal). The biggest thing is that Calgary drafts and develops well.


Calgary doesn't HAVE to tank. I say just allow this team to bottom-out. Trading Rasmus isn't tanking... unless he is actually willing to sign here for a contract that is palatable for the Flames, and for as long as Calgary is in a playoff spot. Things can change, and a trade may happen. However, a tank job is fine by me. I am not really worried about that much, mostly because Calgary has a lot of good young players pushing up already. Sure, the culture will take a hit - and that worries me - but I think it can recover. I mean, Calgary has had seasons of poor culture and great culture.



I would just hold for now. See what happens. If Calgary falters between now and the deadline, then I say Conroy should sell. If not, then go for the playoffs. Don't turn into buyers, but hold. In the off-season, i would say sell and structure this team to fail, but fail with heart. Try to keep the culture, but lose some of the ability, and do your best for the top of the draft. Just allow the team to bottom-out.

[Jiri Hrdina]

They didn't tank for Crosby. They won the league wide lottery. Luck is not a strategy.
(not disagreeing with some of your broader points including the arguments being too binary, just noting that Crosby wasn't the result of tanking at all. It was the result of pure luck)

[Tbull8]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

They didn't tank for Crosby. They won the league wide lottery. Luck is not a strategy.
(not disagreeing with some of your broader points including the arguments being too binary, just noting that Crosby wasn't the result of tanking at all. It was the result of pure luck)

Wasnt it partially because of tanking though? If I remember correctly, every team started with the same amount of lottery balls, and then they took out balls for each team based on recent 1st overalls (Caps drafted 1st the previous year), as well as for recent playoff berths?

edit:

"The league conferred the best odds - three lottery balls in the draw - to the four teams that hadn't reached the last three postseasons or won any of the past four lotteries: Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Columbus, and the Rangers. (The Blue Jackets and Penguins drafted No. 1 in 2002 and 2003, respectively, but only after Florida earned and traded both picks.) Ten teams received two balls each for making one of those postseasons or winning one of those lotteries. The remainder of the league's clubs got a single ball apiece.

That distribution left Pittsburgh with a mere 6.25% (1-in-16) chance to earn the top selection, scarcely exceeding most other teams' odds of 2.08% (1-in-48) and undermining the belief of cynics and conspiracy theorists that the NHL rigged the lottery to save the Penguins from bankruptcy. Fortune smiled on Pittsburgh that July, while the Blue Jackets landed at sixth overall and the Sabres and Rangers fell out of the top 10."

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

They didn't tank for Crosby. They won the league wide lottery. Luck is not a strategy.
(not disagreeing with some of your broader points including the arguments being too binary, just noting that Crosby wasn't the result of tanking at all. It was the result of pure luck)

Yes, you are right. My memory is a bit cloudy there. I wouldn't say they tanked, but they were right in the middle of their rebuild, which one could argue involved some tanking. They did finish second last in 2002/03, last in 2003/04 - then the lockout - then 2nd last in 2005/06. I do remember that they did get lucky during the lottery that year, though I can't remember what the odds were. I retract them tanking though for Crosby - they were just in the midst of rebuilding/tanking overall, not specifically in the Crosby season, and there was no season in which to tank for Crosby as it was the lockout. It was another team that did well in their lotteries.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Because Pittsburgh was tanking they got 3 balls and because we made the playoffs we got 2 balls. Pretty sure that’s how it was done

[jayswin]

nm

[Rhett44]

People who are anti tank want to stay in the murky middle forever. And are fine with finishing 9th most years, and every few years sneaking into the playoffs and having no chance at a cup but having a fun week of playoffs.

Next year is the year that you absolutely want to tank. You need to give yourself a chance at McKenna, this is the next great prospect that comes around every few years. If you win the lottery next year, you give your team a legit chance at many cups in the future, if you build right around him.

I don't care about the odds being against you. Give me a chance at McKenna to change our franchise over finishing 9th every year!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

People who are anti tank want to stay in the murky middle forever. And are fine with finishing 9th most years, and every few years sneaking into the playoffs and having no chance at a cup but having a fun week of playoffs.

People who are pro tank want to stay out of the playoffs forever. And are fine with finishing 32nd overall and every few years getting a shiny new toy and having no chance at a cup but having a fun night at the draft party.

Maybe it’s both of these things. Or, you know, maybe, everyone wants a cup winning team and there are different ways to do that.

Crazy right.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

People who are anti tank want to stay in the murky middle forever. And are fine with finishing 9th most years, and every few years sneaking into the playoffs and having no chance at a cup but having a fun week of playoffs.

Next year is the year that you absolutely want to tank. You need to give yourself a chance at McKenna, this is the next great prospect that comes around every few years. If you win the lottery next year, you give your team a legit chance at many cups in the future, if you build right around him.

I don't care about the odds being against you. Give me a chance at McKenna to change our franchise over finishing 9th every year!

So outline what your "tanking plan" is - in detail please.
How does the team take the necessary steps that ensures they will finish at the bottom of the standings.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

And yet most of these players were the highest paid players on their teams by far when they won the cup. Some to the tune of $10M.

The examples I'm referring to include Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh, which all won with ELC/below market second contracts for their star players in their initial cups.

In many of the situations where the top picks became high paid, they took (often significant) discounts along the way to help the team build around them. So yes, some cases of these players being high paid when they eventually won a cup, but the strength of the team around them was related to their concessions along the way.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

The examples I'm referring to include Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh, which all won with ELC/below market second contracts for their star players in their initial cups.

In many of the situations where the top picks became high paid, they took (often significant) discounts along the way to help the team build around them. So yes, some cases of these players being high paid when they eventually won a cup, but the strength of the team around them was related to their concessions along the way.

Tkachuk was kind of that guy for us, his last year of the ELC we had the 50 win team before he got paid.

Allowed us the opportunity to add another elite forward and we tried, but we had The Real Deal eating up 5.5 cap space along with the buyout for Troy the Boy.

If you don't have that on the cap, I would probably still pull the trigger on Stone even if he was reluctant to sign.