[Article] Calgary Flames: Alone at the bottom - Page 6 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Monahammer · 06-02-2025, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terradude

I see this kind of chatter a lot from the "Team Tank" who use their view of stats to argue that the teams need to crater, grab a bunch of stars and then ride them to success. Their statistics say thats the only way to build a winning team.

Lies...Damn lies and statistics.

My view is that you never accept losing. if you do, it will permeate your team and you'll be forever cursed. You need to be damn lucky, know how to build a team and damn good while drafting. Were B Point, Datsyuk and Zetterberg high picks? Deploy the best scouts you have, send them everywhere and then listen to them when you're at the table. You need talent...high end talent but you also need grit to win in the playoffs. You also need to be lucky with injuries and when they come, you need a deep bench/farm from which to draw.

I think the flames could have caused a fair bit of damage this year if they only had one point more. Hopefully that fire will continue to burn next year and a few more good picks like we had last year and we won't have this conversation too many years in a row.

Man, this viewpoint can't stand when Edmonton makes the cup finals two years in a row. Against another historical "loser" franchise in Florida.

There's no permeation. Culture means very little or nothing. It's all about star power.

Rutuu · 06-02-2025, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well most longtime Flames fans are pretty conditioned to the fact that the playoffs is for other NHL teams and if the Flames do make it, it's usually just for a quick cup of coffee. There are plenty of variables in play such as small market, ownership, management, coaching, players, etc. The lack of success in the playoffs does feel like bit of a curse. The players and coaches change over the decades but it seems Flames teams (save for 2004) just never have the resolve to win even a first round matchup when they have home ice advantage.

I'm not at the point where I create a person in the sky for my reasoning behind the Flames troubles...but maybe one day.

The way I look at it. TLDR: The team has perennially had a lack of skill.

1. During the regular season, the team continually out works other teams and is sound defensively because they're well coached, and have vets at most positions.
2. When the post season comes along, everyone gives 100%, so then it becomes a skill battle, where most of the time we're short on talent, so we lose.
3. Rinse repeat for 20yrs

How do you obtain talent in this league:
1. Trade
2. UFA signings
3. The draft

With the advent of the salary cap, #1 and #2 add a layer of complexity with having to efficiently spend capital, not just spend capital. Building through the draft is something this team hasn't done for a decade, and even then they grew impatient. The other time they tried it, we ended up with the Young Guns. The time before that, well Fletcher was in charge, and Edwards wasn't on the ownership team.

The game has changed as well, and will continue to as the league expands. There have been expansion periods before, and they led to higher scoring. We're seeing a similar trend. Building from the net out might not be the best strategy in a higher scoring league. Top talent will be spread thinner and contribute younger. These trends are something our management / ownership need to adapt too. They are one of the longest serving ownerships in the league and have had bad experiences embracing the draft in the past.

The best thing that happened to this team is having a good year with a cut down payroll that forced younger players into the fold.

Groot · 06-02-2025, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I thank you for the unwarranted compliment on my class, you should probably learn to be more specific if you intend insult my good man.

It's lunacy because you've professed a goal less and pointless support for basically no outcome. These aren't our children. You are allowed to have expectations and desires. Most of us who aren't employed by the organization don't owe flames ownership our lives, which I suppose makes you different in some way, but ultimately this level of sycophantic cult like worship is perverse and sickening.

I want to support a club who intends to win the cup at least one time in my life. Unlike you.

What a way to say a bunch and still nothing at all. Where did I say anything about owing Flames ownership our lives? Cult like thinking? You have such a weird perspective. Maybe go back and reread what I posted since you have said nothing at all relevant to it.

I support a club that is trying to win a Cup. You don't like how they're doing it. Fine. I don't care and nor does anyone else cause we have no impact on the matter. And if the Flames don't win a Cup in your lifetime, then what? You'll waste away in misery and despair? What a sad way to live.

As an aside, the absurd notion you've now concocted that the Oilers purposefully lost for over a decade is one of the dumbest things to come out of this board.

Itse · 06-03-2025, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Man, this viewpoint can't stand when Edmonton makes the cup finals two years in a row. Against another historical "loser" franchise in Florida.

There's no permeation. Culture means very little or nothing. It's all about star power.

Edmonton needed a lot of years to get over that culture as did the Panthers.

However, pretty sure McDavid and Barkov are both reasons those cultures changed. Say what you want about McDavid, but he has clearly been on a mission in the last couple of seasons, not just putting up points but finally also focusing in his two-way game.

Barkov was more of a slow burner in development, but he was always a hard-working perfectionist who believes in offense through defense, and by many accounts his work ethic and attitude have been contagious in Florida, meaning he is a big reason they play the way they do.

Many teams in the league have similar stories about the effect a star player can have on their team.

I do think tanking can create an atmosphere of losing... but I think being perpetually frozen in mediocrity can just as easily corrupt a teams mentality. Calgary has had a lot of hard-working teams, but we've also watched many seasons of uninspired mediocrity... teams that fought hard enough to look good at times, but always faltered when the stakes got too high. A culture of mediocrity. Disappointing at big moments is basically a trademark of the Flames.

Bennett was always somewhat frustrating as a player here, but one thing I miss about him was that you could absolutely rely on him being noticeable in big games. Not always in the best way, but always definitely showed up

Hackey · 06-03-2025, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlereddevil

Yeah, exactly it introduces another variable and some bias to their analysis.

Take for example Buffalo and Detroit. Both recent teams who have had prolonged playoff droughts, and a number of high draft picks. Would you call their abundance of picks a success story? Buffalo is practically the farm team of the NHL and haven't been in the playoffs since 2008. I've lost track of the number of rebuilds they've gone through. Clearly their abundance of high picks hasn't been a success as it hasn't translated into playoff success (let alone any playoff appearances). This website makes a lot of assumptions that high draft picks = automatic playoff success and has created a false equivalence.

Where do you draw the line and decide to arbitrarily analyze each team? The past 5 years? The past 20 years? What about from 2015-2020?

Maybe this sounds like a cope but the jury is still out on the current Flames management group. We were suddenly forced into a rebuild situation after the previous one failed, give it some time.

Buffalo has drafted high but Detroit I think is a prime example of a team that never got the high picks and lack the high level talent needed to become a contender. I'd say they are more of an example that picking 5-20 every year makes it extremely difficult to find elite players. Outside Raymond they've never picked higher than 6 during this current rebuild. They've got some nice pieces but they lack stars and that will be there downfall. I feel Calgary could have a very similar trajectory I'd they refuse to tear it down for a few seasons.

I also find the argument against teams like Buffalo interesting because what is the alternative? Do you believe without drafting high they would have been better? Just because something doesn't work out doesn't mean the alternative would have been any better and more likely than not would have been worse.

Hackey · 06-03-2025, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terradude

I see this kind of chatter a lot from the "Team Tank" who use their view of stats to argue that the teams need to crater, grab a bunch of stars and then ride them to success. Their statistics say thats the only way to build a winning team.

Lies...Damn lies and statistics.

My view is that you never accept losing. if you do, it will permeate your team and you'll be forever cursed. You need to be damn lucky, know how to build a team and damn good while drafting. Were B Point, Datsyuk and Zetterberg high picks? Deploy the best scouts you have, send them everywhere and then listen to them when you're at the table. You need talent...high end talent but you also need grit to win in the playoffs. You also need to be lucky with injuries and when they come, you need a deep bench/farm from which to draw.

I think the flames could have caused a fair bit of damage this year if they only had one point more. Hopefully that fire will continue to burn next year and a few more good picks like we had last year and we won't have this conversation too many years in a row.

If all it took was good scouting why has Detroit not found another Datsyuk or Zetterberg again over 25 years later?

Jiri Hrdina · 06-03-2025, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Most of us who aren't employed by the organization don't owe flames ownership our lives, which I suppose makes you different in some way, but ultimately this level of sycophantic cult like worship is perverse and sickening.

Isn't this a wee bit over the top.
"perverse and sickening".

Jesus man.

PepsiFree · 06-03-2025, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hackey

lJust because something doesn't work out doesn't mean the alternative would have been any better and more likely than not would have been worse.

Which basically sums up this entire conversation on both sides and why having it every 2 weeks is bordering on insanity.

howard_the_duck · 06-03-2025, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rutuu

I'm not at the point where I create a person in the sky for my reasoning behind the Flames troubles...but maybe one day.

The way I look at it. TLDR: The team has perennially had a lack of skill.

1. During the regular season, the team continually out works other teams and is sound defensively because they're well coached, and have vets at most positions.
2. When the post season comes along, everyone gives 100%, so then it becomes a skill battle, where most of the time we're short on talent, so we lose.
3. Rinse repeat for 20yrs

How do you obtain talent in this league:
1. Trade
2. UFA signings
3. The draft

With the advent of the salary cap, #1 and #2 add a layer of complexity with having to efficiently spend capital, not just spend capital. Building through the draft is something this team hasn't done for a decade, and even then they grew impatient. The other time they tried it, we ended up with the Young Guns. The time before that, well Fletcher was in charge, and Edwards wasn't on the ownership team.

The game has changed as well, and will continue to as the league expands. There have been expansion periods before, and they led to higher scoring. We're seeing a similar trend. Building from the net out might not be the best strategy in a higher scoring league. Top talent will be spread thinner and contribute younger. These trends are something our management / ownership need to adapt too. They are one of the longest serving ownerships in the league and have had bad experiences embracing the draft in the past.

The best thing that happened to this team is having a good year with a cut down payroll that forced younger players into the fold.

Well put.

The lack of talent has historically meant low event hockey and teams that are hardworking and play with structure. AKA low entertainment value.

So not only has the team performed poorly, but they also aren't providing a very good product to keep fans engaged.

Monahammer · 06-03-2025, 12:30 PM

Quote: