[PGT] Sharks defeat Flames 6-3, Dec 16th

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That's not what the view is. No one is afraid of picking first. The view is that people are not panicking over not having the best odds because even the best odds aren't great, and there's still a pretty good chance of getting the best player if you pick 4th or 6th or whatever.

Weird things happen. The Avs finished last but lost the lottery and ended up picking 4th in 2017. And they picked the best player in the draft.

2018. Buffalo finishes last and wins the lottery so they get the hoped for result and grab Dahlin - pretty good. But Carolina moves up 9 spots on the second lottery and picks Svechnikov also not bad. Montreal moves up as well and gets Kotkaniemi. But the best player is Quinn Hughes and he is taken 7th. Ottawa (arguably the loser of the lottery, takes Brady Tkachuk. AZ in typical sad sack fashion picks two spots worse than their finish and gets Barrett Hayton. But had the picks stayed the same but the teams went in their original order, Svechnikov is a Sen, Kotkaniemi is a Coyote, Tkachuk is a Hab, Hayton is a Red Wing, Zadina is a Canuck and Hughes is Hawk (and maybe that team misses out on Bedard later on).

Its not about panic, its about strategy.
The whole argument is whether the team is doing enough to actively target those best odds picks. You seem to think its fine if they maybe keep the vets around and end up with a 7th pick, vs make some moves earlier that make a pick 1-3 much more probable. Presumably because you don't seem to think it matters much which segment of the top 10 they pick in (you can correct me if I'm wrong). I would wholeheartedly disagree with that and say, even though there is variability and "weird things happen" -- you still have a much better chance at getting a franchise altering player in the top 3, and further, you actually should be strategizing to end up there, especially in a year that is likely a write off anyways.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Its not about panic, its about strategy.
The whole argument is whether the team is doing enough to actively target those best odds picks. You seem to think its fine if they maybe keep the vets around and end up with a 7th pick, vs make some moves earlier that make a pick 1-3 much more probable. Presumably because you don't seem to think it matters much which segment of the top 10 they pick in (you can correct me if I'm wrong). I would wholeheartedly disagree with that and say, even though there is variability and "weird things happen" -- you still have a much better chance at getting a franchise altering player in the top 3, and further, you actually should be strategizing to end up there, especially in a year that is likely a write off anyways.

Are the Flames in danger of missing our on a top 5 pick though? That's why people are annoyed. The Flames have not made a trade, and have started winning more games, and yet we are STILL second last in the NHL. Do we just give players away for 1 spot better odds?

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Are the Flames in danger of missing our on a top 5 pick though? That's why people are annoyed. The Flames have not made a trade, and have started winning more games, and yet we are STILL second last in the NHL. Do we just give players away for 1 spot better odds?

So if the Flames keep playing at the pace they've played since November 1st (.550) it would mean they likely finish the season with 82 points and finish right at .500.

That would likely mean picking somewhere between 6-10 and it would mean they don't have a top 5 pick.

Not to say they should rush moving Andersson, Kadri, and Coleman but they should be aggressively shopping them and trying to build the best possible market for them.

[metroneck]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Was Celebrini expected to be this good? I don’t remember a lot of hype.

Lots of mentions, yes, but didn’t really get the hype. Mostly because Beddard was so hyped, he was able to hide a bit in the shadow, and his path being USHL and college underager.

I think that was good thing.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Are the Flames in danger of missing our on a top 5 pick though? That's why people are annoyed. The Flames have not made a trade, and have started winning more games, and yet we are STILL second last in the NHL. Do we just give players away for 1 spot better odds?

We don't know yet. Yes they are 31st today, in a log jam with about 8 other teams within a couple points. So the position isn't set.
And the team has generally been playing better recently.
I think the concern is the team plays better, rises up the standings enough to play out of that top draft range, and still wont make the playoffs anyways.

But if you trade a Kadri, Andersson, you are pretty much solidifying yourself in the basement.
Its not about giving away the players though, however I think timing will be pretty important as to where they end up. Also, there could be more benefit to a higher draft pick than the trade return, so they'll have to factor that in.
If the team is a few points out of a wild card spot in January and playing decently well, we still don't know with certainty which path they'll prefer to chase.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So if the Flames keep playing at the pace they've played since November 1st (.550) it would mean they likely finish the season with 82 points and finish right at .500.

That would likely mean picking somewhere between 6-10 and it would mean they don't have a top 5 pick.

Not to say they should rush moving Andersson, Kadri, and Coleman but they should be aggressively shopping them and trying to build the best possible market for them.

Exactly, no rush trading trading Coleman or Kadri. When the price is met trade them. As for Andersson, I can see why people want urgency.

I guess my frustration is there is no news indicating the Flames are not selling. Nothing indicates the Flames are trying to keep players to compete for 9th spot.

FWIW other models have the Flames finishing with 80.5 points, which if everything remains equal would be good for 3rd last. In other words its just to early to tell.

https://powerrankingsguru.com/nhl/point-projections.php

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Igottago

We don't know yet. Yes they are 31st today, in a log jam with about 8 other teams within a couple points. So the position isn't set.
And the team has generally been playing better recently.
I think the concern is the team plays better, rises up the standings enough to play out of that top draft range, and still wont make the playoffs anyways.

But if you trade a Kadri, Andersson, you are pretty much solidifying yourself in the basement.
Its not about giving away the players though, however I think timing will be pretty important as to where they end up. Also, there could be more benefit to a higher draft pick than the trade return, so they'll have to factor that in.
If the team is a few points out of a wild card spot in January and playing decently well, we still don't know with certainty which path they'll prefer to chase.

According to Tankothon the Flames have the most difficult remaining schedule. The Flames recent hot streak is propped up by the glut of home games. After the Olympic break they are back on the road mostly and will come crashing down.



https://www.tankathon.com/nhl/remain...edule_strength

[TheIronMaiden]

Just to get a tripple post score, is anyone watching the Flames thinking, geez this team is too good, they might just rise up in the standings. I watch them and wince for poor Wolf.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So if the Flames keep playing at the pace they've played since November 1st (.550) it would mean they likely finish the season with 82 points and finish right at .500.

That would likely mean picking somewhere between 6-10 and it would mean they don't have a top 5 pick.

Not to say they should rush moving Andersson, Kadri, and Coleman but they should be aggressively shopping them and trying to build the best possible market for them.

I think they slip back below that .550 range especially when Andersson is gone.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Just to get a tripple post score, is anyone watching the Flames thinking, geez this team is too good, they might just rise up in the standings.

I can think of atleast one person. But I think it's just because they can't function without chaos.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Its not about panic, its about strategy.
The whole argument is whether the team is doing enough to actively target those best odds picks. You seem to think its fine if they maybe keep the vets around and end up with a 7th pick, vs make some moves earlier that make a pick 1-3 much more probable. Presumably because you don't seem to think it matters much which segment of the top 10 they pick in (you can correct me if I'm wrong). I would wholeheartedly disagree with that and say, even though there is variability and "weird things happen" -- you still have a much better chance at getting a franchise altering player in the top 3, and further, you actually should be strategizing to end up there, especially in a year that is likely a write off anyways.

Define "much better". The last few drafts it's 50-50.

As for panicking, have you seen the PGTs after a win?

[Cobra]

[QUOE=GioforPM;9595862]Define "much better". The last few drafts it's 50-50.

It was asked earlier by several posters.
Lionel what is the point you are trying to make?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Cobra

[QUOE=GioforPM;9595862]Define "much better". The last few drafts it's 50-50.

It was asked earlier by several posters.
Lionel what is the point you are trying to make?

If you want a serious discussion, try to act like an adult.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

According to Tankothon the Flames have the most difficult remaining schedule. The Flames recent hot streak is propped up by the glut of home games. After the Olympic break they are back on the road mostly and will come crashing down.



https://www.tankathon.com/nhl/remain...edule_strength

Exactly. Out of the six sub-500 teams in the NHL, only the Blues have anywhere near the strength of remaining schedule as the Flames. They are very likely to finish bottom three, together with the Blues and Canucks. And if the Flames trade Andersson, the only non-rookie NHL-calibre defensemen on the roster will be Weegar and Bahl, so I expect that their performance will drop like a stone after said trade.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Define "much better". The last few drafts it's 50-50.

As for panicking, have you seen the PGTs after a win?

So if you were the Flames GM and had a top 3 pick, would you trade down?
If not, why?

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Igottago

So if you were the Flames GM and had a top 3 pick, would you trade down?
If not, why?

Actually, this year, maybe. There's little separation in the top 3, and the organizational need is for a 1C, so I would trade 1 overall for 4 overall and an unprotected 2027 1st in a heartbeat. You can't lose, either you get a consensus top 3 if one of them drops, or you get the best C available. Plus a lottery ticket in the draw that really matters.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Just to get a tripple post score, is anyone watching the Flames thinking, geez this team is too good, they might just rise up in the standings. I watch them and wince for poor Wolf.

For 96 of the last 116 games the Flames have played at a 90+ point pace

For the first 20 games this season they played at a last place pace

Is it so hard to believe they will play at the pace they did for those 96 games? The team is essentially unchanged for last season

Maybe those first 20 games were the outlier not last season.

Personally I don’t think this is a good team . But I didn’t think they were good last year either and they kept winning .

80% of this board thought this team would just miss the playoffs or make before the season, and nothing has changed roster wise nor serious injury wise

That’s why I think it’s important to really lean into the bad start . I also worry Coleman and / or Kadri will fall off due to their age sooner then later and prefer not to risk it to try and get a slightly better offer .

If there’s no real offer for them - well then the market has spoken. But holding out for an extra 3rd rounder in those deals seems like a bad risk / reward situation with the potential negative situations that could occur .

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Actually, this year, maybe. There's little separation in the top 3, and the organizational need is for a 1C, so I would trade 1 overall for 4 overall and an unprotected 2027 1st in a heartbeat. You can't lose, either you get a consensus top 3 if one of them drops, or you get the best C available. Plus a lottery ticket in the draw that really matters.

I believe there is a clear top 3 this year and then a significant fall off at 4? I would definitely keep any top 3 pick in that case.

Of course things could change and this is all just scouting and speculation. But I have seen a few times scouts saying the top 3 all have really high potential. And then the next few are good as well but there is a gap.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

For 96 of the last 116 games the Flames have played at a 90+ point pace

For the first 20 games this season they played at a last place pace

Is it so hard to believe they will play at the pace they did for those 96 games? The team is essentially unchanged for last season

Maybe those first 20 games were the outlier not last season.

Personally I don’t think this is a good team . But I didn’t think they were good last year either and they kept winning .

80% of this board though this team would just miss the playoffs or make before the season, and nothing has changed roster wise nor serious injury wise

That’s why I think it’s important to really lean into the bad start . I also worry Coleman and / or Kadri will fall off due to their age sooner then later and prefer not to risk it to try and get a slightly better offer .

If there’s no real offered for them - well then the market has spoken. But holding out for an extra 3rd rounder in those deals seems like a bad risk / reward situation with the potential negative situations that could occur .

If the delta was an extra 3rd, Andersson would be long gone.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

I believe there is a clear top 3 this year and then a significant fall off at 4? I would definitely keep any top 3 pick in that case.

Of course things could change and this is all just scouting and speculation. But I have seen a few times scouts saying the top 3 all have really high potential.

And I've read that McKenna has been a disinterested floater/cherry picker in college and that his exceptional skills haven't even translated at an NCAA level, let alone an NHL level. I wonder if he will still be a consensus 1OA by the end of the season.