Building The 2018/19 Flames Roster

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Honestly I think it's garbage thinking to try and put any regime in the same package as all others and think it's a 30 year thing.

They've all exhibited similar thought processes. It's a pattern that I'm seeing and it's also resulted in 20+ years of similarly disappointing 1st round exits and mediocre regular seasons. If people don't like my opinion, that's fine, it's my opinion and I'm very steadfast in my belief of it. A different voice that goes against the typical grain might actually be beneficial than the same things that are posted year after year.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

They've all exhibited similar thought processes. It's a pattern that I'm seeing and it's also resulted in 20+ years of similarly disappointing 1st round exits and mediocre regular seasons. If people don't like my opinion, that's fine, it's my opinion and I'm very steadfast in my belief of it. A different voice that goes against the typical grain might actually be beneficial than the same things that are posted year after year.

You're entitled to your tired, poorly constructed opinion all you want.

It's just your drawing validation for it from something that doesn't exist in this thread that's the issue.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

They've all exhibited similar thought processes. It's a pattern that I'm seeing and it's also resulted in 20+ years of similarly disappointing 1st round exits and mediocre regular seasons. If people don't like my opinion, that's fine, it's my opinion and I'm very steadfast in my belief of it. A different voice that goes against the typical grain might actually be beneficial than the same things that are posted year after year.

So you are suggesting there's a puppet master that only hires the same thinking GMs that has been pulling the strings since 1990?

As I said earlier ... Treliving has gone to a high skill with a clear issue (size) in recent drafts. I don't see the take the big Western kid plan at all that we saw under Sutter.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

And what you're not getting is just because the present group may dislike Vanek as a player (which we don't know) it in no way correlates to anything thinking separate, previous management groups had. Philosophical or otherwise.

You're connecting dots that aren't there to validate your own frustrations / narrative.

Like I said, I'm seeing patterns just like in years past. I truly believe that Sutter and Burke would have zero interest in a player like Vanek also. Maybe it would help to look at players like this once in a while. 15 points in 19 games while making a paltry $2 million certainly would've helped us down the stretch.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Like I said, I'm seeing patterns just like in years past. I truly believe that Sutter and Burke would have zero interest in a player like Vanek also. Maybe it would help to look at players like this once in a while. 15 points in 19 games while making a paltry $2 million certainly would've helped us down the stretch.

Sutter, Burke, and the 6 GMs that have moved on from him in the last however many years.

I get you're seeing what you want to see to feel validated about your contrived, negative outlook on the team. That's evident.

What you're not seeing is that (A) we don't even really know the current management's feeling's about Vanek (the biggest problem with the drum you're beating here) and (B) a LOT of teams that have had him on their roster HAVE moved on from him despite the points he puts up. The latter point rings the most true here.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Like I said, I'm seeing patterns just like in years past. I truly believe that Sutter and Burke would have zero interest in a player like Vanek also. Maybe it would help to look at players like this once in a while. 15 points in 19 games while making a paltry $2 million certainly would've helped us down the stretch.

Well if your analysis is that deep than sure.

The guy has been a one dimensional tire fire his entire career. There's a reason bargains like this bounce around and around the league ... they don't work.

Save for a blip in Columbus he's now on the provide offense and nothing else for teams going nowhere phase of his career.

10 straight seasons averaging a CF% of roughly 46% which would put him right beside Matt Bartkowski on the Flames for "getting things done!"

If this is flawed thinking to avoid Vanek then give me more of it!

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Treliving thinks what he thinks.

You can agree with his thinking or disagree for sure ... but I'm more than certain that Risebrough, Coates, Sutter and Button have little to do with his decision process.

The guy has drafted the likes of Mangiapane and Phillips in recent drafts. The guy isn't all in on grit.

See, when I see Mangiapane and Phillips, I DO see grit. However, it's the type of grit that wins in the modern NHL, and it's spelled D-E-T-E-R-M-I-N-A-T-I-O-N. That's why GMs aren't lining up to get guys like Vanek. Sure, he fills a role as a shooter and point producer, but Vanek has ZERO determination in a game. Players like Mangiapane and Phillips have it in spades, which is what makes them hard to compete against and able to produce despite their small size. Paul Byron has that element too (I still miss Spull).

Modern "grit" is about being hard to play against and difficult to get away from the puck. Simply having more desire than the other guy is all it really comes down to.

That's why Brouwer sucks. He doesn't have any of that determination that a player of his skill level needs to be successful. I'd sooner have a hungry Mangiapane in the lineup over Brouwer.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Bingo

So you are suggesting there's a puppet master that only hires the same thinking GMs that has been pulling the strings since 1990?

As I said earlier ... Treliving has gone to a high skill with a clear issue (size) in recent drafts. I don't see the take the big Western kid plan at all that we saw under Sutter.

The drafting has been fine and I'm a big fan of Tod Button and have confidence in his abilities. It's Treliving's signings and acquisitions that have been problematic to me. His acquisitions of high character/leadership players have not worked out. Burke made a lot of acquisitions for truculence purposes that made no sense and Sutter's entire era was littered with moves for players who were good Western boys or players who generally were high character people.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Like I said, I'm seeing patterns just like in years past. I truly believe that Sutter and Burke would have zero interest in a player like Vanek also. Maybe it would help to look at players like this once in a while. 15 points in 19 games while making a paltry $2 million certainly would've helped us down the stretch.

This is about Vanek? He's just not that desirable on a league wide basis, hence the contract. Like many teams, I'm sure the flames saw Vanek as a streaky talent prone to long spells of not caring. Personally, I'm quite alright with that being a long standing philosophical pillar of the team to not want that. And him going on a streak doesn't really disprove that..

But over the years, the flames have tried to make several soft, talent first, questionably motivated players work. You have your Huselius', your Cervenkas, your Hudlers. Hell, Oleg saprykin became a key cog on a playoff run as a butter soft guy. And yes, they tried and failed with guys like Savard and St. Louis.

But those were organizational failures that are on coaching and management of the time. I don't think anyone was holding them up as examples of how to deal with raw or immature talent.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

The drafting has been fine and I'm a big fan of Tod Button and have confidence in his abilities. It's Treliving's signings and acquisitions that have been problematic to me. His acquisitions of high character/leadership players have not worked out. Burke made a lot of acquisitions for truculence purposes that made no sense and Sutter's entire era was littered with moves for players who were good Western boys or players who generally were high character people.

I disagree with this a little. When he came on we had to deal with very large and physical teams in our division: L.A., Anaheim, and even San Jose. It was clear that we needed to have that element on the team in the early part of the rebuild just to make sure our young guys weren't getting run over. It worked too. The team played with more confidence than their talents allowed, resulting in some early success.

Even as we have moved into a phase of real playoff contention, there is little doubt that we were pushed around physically in that 2nd-most recent Anaheim playoff series. Having a few more players who have physicality, but are also good players, would have made that a much more even series. It wasn't much better in that 4 game sweep either. We played with more jam, but overall Anaheim had that in spades and we struggled to match it.

You do need a little bit of size and physicality in the modern NHL, but you definitely have to be able to skate and chip in some offense. That's why getting a guy like Bollig didn't make much sense.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

The drafting has been fine and I'm a big fan of Tod Button and have confidence in his abilities. It's Treliving's signings and acquisitions that have been problematic to me. His acquisitions of high character/leadership players have not worked out. Burke made a lot of acquisitions for truculence purposes that made no sense and Sutter's entire era was littered with moves for players who were good Western boys or players who generally were high character people.

Again, overly dramatic and negative trying to bend the narrative around your preconceived frustrations.

Frolik? Bringing in Hamilton?

Yes Brouwer was a swing and a miss, but Treliving has shown a penchant towards speed and skill.

You're reaching here. Big time.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Sutter, Burke, and the 6 GMs that have moved on from him in the last however many years.

I get you're seeing what you want to see to feel validated about your contrived, negative outlook on the team. That's evident.

What you're not seeing is that (A) we don't even really know the current management's feeling's about Vanek (the biggest problem with the drum you're beating here) and (B) a LOT of teams that have had him on their roster HAVE moved on from him despite the points he puts up. The latter point rings the most true here.

I've already spoken about my feelings on past GMs and the terribly mediocre run this Franchise has been on. But I'm not even talking about just Vanek. The main point that I'm making is that this organization needs to look at skill first and foremost. I've heard about character, truculence, grit and etc way too much over the Sutter, Burke and Treliving's eras.

There hasn't been enough talk about skill and speed. That's the main point I'm trying to make. The focus needs to be on these traits first and foremost.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I've already spoken about my feelings on past GMs and the terribly mediocre run this Franchise has been on. But I'm not even talking about just Vanek. The main point that I'm making is that this organization needs to look at skill first and foremost. I've heard about character, truculence, grit and etc way too much over the Sutter, Burke and Treliving's eras.

There hasn't been enough talk about skill and speed. That's the main point I'm trying to make. The focus needs to be on these traits first and foremost.

lol, you're just moving the goal-posts.

The problem here is that you WERE just talking about Vanek, and used that as a jumping off point to whine about this antiquated, tired mantra that this team is run by cave-men who choose size and grit over skill.

Now you're moving the goal-posts away from the weak and misplaced pining over Vanek to just ranting in general about a stigma that doesn't exist.

This current management regeim employs a lot of skilled, softer and smaller players. Both presently in the line-up, and drafted into the system.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I've already spoken about my feelings on past GMs and the terribly mediocre run this Franchise has been on. But I'm not even talking about just Vanek. The main point that I'm making is that this organization needs to look at skill first and foremost. I've heard about character, truculence, grit and etc way too much over the Sutter, Burke and Treliving's eras.

There hasn't been enough talk about skill and speed. That's the main point I'm trying to make. The focus needs to be on these traits first and foremost.

There are literally three different articles in the last three weeks between Treliving and Maloney discussing the need to add speed

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I've already spoken about my feelings on past GMs and the terribly mediocre run this Franchise has been on. But I'm not even talking about just Vanek. The main point that I'm making is that this organization needs to look at skill first and foremost. I've heard about character, truculence, grit and etc way too much over the Sutter, Burke and Treliving's eras.

There hasn't been enough talk about skill and speed. That's the main point I'm trying to make. The focus needs to be on these traits first and foremost.

Vanek is as slow moving as Molasses in January. He is not a guy you add if you want to increase team speed.

[The Cobra]

I'm not sure if anyone should really be talking about trading for Vanek and making a playoff run in the same sentence.

Calgary fell off the rails when Smith went down.

Now, if you want to complain about Treliving not trading for a better goalie to use down the stretch, you might getting some traction on this board.

But Vanek?

[Sylvanfan]

I don't think the Flames signed players like Raymond, and Jagr to add grit and truculence. In fact of the guys the Flames spent money on back on July 1st 2014, the gritty and truculent and "slow" Deryk Engelland is the one who's still in the NHL.

The Free agent adds that the Flames have gone after in Treliving's tenure have generally not worked out. Although Brouwer largely skews that one..and if he wakes up this coming year and has two really good years...could still turn it around. But that's free agency for you. Very few of the guys you sign deliver good value for what they're paid. It's when a non playoff team signs a Vanek, let's him play a lot, and than raffles him off at the deadline where a team makes a profit in free agency.

If I have one criticism for the Flames Management during Treliving's tenure it's that they spent too many picks to go after Stone, Elliott, Smith, and Hamonic given where they were in the rebuild at the time. Even the Hamilton move could be assessed as jumping the gun, although given the opportunity presented, you can see why they made the move.

[Mattman]

Are we still loosely on the topic of RWs and right handed shooters?

I just thought this was interesting and wanted to share.

Troy Brouwer - 6G 16A 22pts
Garnet Hathaway - 4G 9A 13pts
Curtis Lazar - 2G 10A 12pts
Kris Versteeg - 3G 4A 8pts
Chris Stewart - 1G 2A 3pts
Nick Shore - 1G 2A 3pts
Spencer Foo - 2G 0A 2pts

That's a grand total of 18 goals score by right hand shooters on our offense, lead by yours truly Troy "Buyout" Brouwer.

For comparison sake, Mark Jankowski scored 17 goals...as a rookie...playing on the 3rd line...in just 72 games.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Because through the last couple decades, the GMs who have been employed have put heavy emphasis on these traits. This isn't something that I conjured up from thin air, this is taken from the Horse's mouths.

If people here don't want Vanek, that's fine. It's like he's anywhere near the top of my list. I'm just saying, this management group needs to think differently from years past because all we've seen is a whole of mediocrity. So sorry everybody for trying to think outside the box a little.

What exactly is unique or novel about your thinking?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Mattman

Are we still loosely on the topic of RWs and right handed shooters?

I just thought this was interesting and wanted to share.

Troy Brouwer - 6G 16A 22pts
Garnet Hathaway - 4G 9A 13pts
Curtis Lazar - 2G 10A 12pts
Kris Versteeg - 3G 4A 8pts
Chris Stewart - 1G 2A 3pts
Nick Shore - 1G 2A 3pts
Spencer Foo - 2G 0A 2pts

That's a grand total of 18 goals score by right hand shooters on our offense, lead by yours truly Troy "Buyout" Brouwer.

For comparison sake, Mark Jankowski scored 17 goals...as a rookie...playing on the 3rd line...in just 72 games.

TBF you should list the games played by those guys. Foo played 4 games (albeit in nothing to lose time). Stewart had 7 games. Shore had 9. Versteeg had 24.