Building The 2018/19 Flames Roster

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Bingo

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

Also was talked about by the coach as a key theme in his discussion with the Fan 960 last week.

The need to inject more team speed and play faster.

[Royle9]

Speed is great, its no coincidence that its becoming a faster game. But I also think you do need skill and scoring at the same time, or better yet have all 3 in 1 player.

Phil Kessel doesn't bring speed but I think he brings an aspect of the game to which the Flames could desperately need and fits a position on our team that's extremely weak in depth.

[Jiggy]

Dube and Foo will get every chance to make the team. Hopefully they show up ready for camp. Last year it felt like the youngsters and vets were not ready from day 1 of camp.

[TheScorpion]

I suppose "points with determination" must count more than regular old points, but I know I'd be lying if I wouldn't rather pay Thomas Vanek and his LOTS of points to play on the powerplay instead of ####ing Brouwer or Versteeg. He scores points. I don't care if it looks like he isn't trying. The Flames have too few guys who coast along on intangibles. They need guys who put the puck in the net. Maybe Vanek doesn't work in the playoffs. Neither does David Perron, but he sure helped Vegas to get there.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Speed is great, its no coincidence that its becoming a faster game. But I also think you do need skill and scoring at the same time, or better yet have all 3 in 1 player.

Phil Kessel doesn't bring speed but I think he brings an aspect of the game to which the Flames could desperately need and fits a position on our team that's extremely weak in depth.

He is actually quite fast, which is surprising given his [ahem] physique.

[Toonage]

How can anyone suggest Phil doesn't have wheels when SN/CBC makes sure we get a good long shot of him on the bench after every shift recovering.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Phil Kessel doesn't bring speed .

Kessel would be the fastest skater on roster other than maybe Kylington.

[Scroopy Noopers]

https://www.nhl.com/penguins/video/k...428/c-47939703

Kessel has wheels for sure.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Bingo

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!

Is it really flawed thinking though? The only flawed thinking IMO would be to not explore all options that can help turn the 5th worst offense into hopefully a playoff contender.

Vanek for a while was also one of the elite wingers of the game. He's having a hard time keeping up with the speed of the game now which is why he wouldn't be near the top of my list. But much like Versteeg, he could be a good PP specialist because he still is productive and has good touch and finishing around the net which is something we sorely lacked this season.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

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.

You're completely wrong. I've been talking about this for a long time now. Just check my posts. I've ranting about this even before the season ended.

I didn't even bring up Vanek. It was just an example that was used and people were jumping all over the idea and I was merely trying to defend the notion that we shouldn't just discard ideas like in the past because this organization needs to change its philosophy.

This team IMO needs to add more skilled players into the line up. We have enough grit already but don't have enough playmakers or finishers and we need all the help we can get with our bottom finish in the GF category. It's part of the reason why our shooting% was so low this season. The work ethic was there, but the finish was not.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Major Major

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.

This organization needs a philosophical change and Vanek may not be the answer to that, but it's also the type of avenue this organization needs to start walking down. If people are happy with the current set up, that's fine, but I'll tell you what, I can almost guarantee another 1st round exit or mediocre finish because that's exactly what we've seen for decades here.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

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.

I just look at the way Las Vegas absolutely took it to L.A, San Jose and the Jets who were bigger and stronger than the Knights. To me, the path is speed, skill and forward depth. If the modern game, the team that can slot their forwards the best has the best chance of winning.

Ideally, I would love it if we could find to slot a 1st line, two 2nd lines and a 3rd line. Wave after wave of attack could give us the edge over a lot of other Western Conference opponents.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

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

Yes, that's why he's not a player I would put near the top of my list. But he's still a right handed shot with 24 goals and 56 points this season. He would've finished 3rd on our team in scoring and he's showed some productivity with the Wings last season and the Canucks and Blue Jackets this season.

He would be cheap and could be placed in a similar situation as Versteeg this season. Bottom 6, moderate even strength minutes, but use him more as a PP specialist around the front of the net. It's not like Versteeg was a burner, but he still was very helpful to the team especially last season.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Is it really flawed thinking though? The only flawed thinking IMO would be to not explore all options that can help turn the 5th worst offense into hopefully a playoff contender.

Vanek for a while was also one of the elite wingers of the game. He's having a hard time keeping up with the speed of the game now which is why he wouldn't be near the top of my list. But much like Versteeg, he could be a good PP specialist because he still is productive and has good touch and finishing around the net which is something we sorely lacked this season.

It doesn't take a whole lot of exploration to see Vanek isn't the answer though.

Why are you assuming to not add/sign him was a mistake when a good analysis of the player would suggest he isn't a good option?

Versteeg will never set the world on fire for his defensive prowess but nobody would accuse the guy of not being engaged.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by 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?

This team relied on 2 players this season to win them the majority of their games. Johnny Gaudreau and Mike Smith. The Flames' best winning stretches this season coincided with Johnny's point streaks, in other words, he was carrying this team on his back. With Smith, when he wasn't standing on his head, it was tough to win.

That's not a recipe for long term success. The Flames need more high end scoring and they need it ASAP.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

This organization needs a philosophical change and Vanek may not be the answer to that, but it's also the type of avenue this organization needs to start walking down. If people are happy with the current set up, that's fine, but I'll tell you what, I can almost guarantee another 1st round exit or mediocre finish because that's exactly what we've seen for decades here.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Bingo

It doesn't take a whole lot of exploration to see Vanek isn't the answer though.

Why are you assuming to not add/sign him was a mistake when a good analysis of the player would suggest he isn't a good option?

Versteeg will never set the world on fire for his defensive prowess but nobody would accuse the guy of not being engaged.

Why is Vanek such a terrible option, yet Versteeg is perfectly fine? I didn't like Versteeg's overall game, I thought he should've played less at even strength. But there's no question that when Versteeg went down, the PP went to the crapper.

To me, Versteeg and Vanek aren't that different. 2 players who aren't great overall players, both have lost a step and both are going to have to be sheltered a bit. But they both are inexpensive and can bring you offensive creativity and some finish which was our biggest problem this season.

I don't personally care if we go after him or not, but we need to start going after higher skilled players throughout our line up if we want to improve in the standings.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Why is Vanek such a terrible option, yet Versteeg is perfectly fine? I didn't like Versteeg's overall game, I thought he should've played less at even strength. But there's no question that when Versteeg went down, the PP went to the crapper.

To me, Versteeg and Vanek aren't that different. 2 players who aren't great overall players, both have lost a step and both are going to have to be sheltered a bit. But they both are inexpensive and can bring you offensive creativity and some finish which was our biggest problem this season.

I don't personally care if we go after him or not, but we need to start going after higher skilled players throughout our line up if we want to improve in the standings.

Aren't you answering your own questions?

The team brought in two players pretty much as you described in Versteeg and Jagr, they didn't bring in the other guy you keep bringing up. But they have flawed thinking for not bringing in the one while experimenting with the other two?

All offensive players.
None great in their own zone.

Vanek alone in a career reputation for not giving a rip.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

You're completely wrong. I've been talking about this for a long time now. Just check my posts. I've ranting about this even before the season ended..

No, I'm not. The problem you encountered here is that you used the premise that management here is against the idea of bringing in Vanek (again, something we don't even know) as validation for your out-dated and poorly constructed idea that the current management has some hang-up choosing grit and character over skill that's been in place decades over several different management groups.

This was thoroughly deconstructed, and you just kept moving the goal-posts.

Before you try to do it again, you're correct, you're entitled to think that all you want (no mater how much of an incorrect and over-dramatic reach it is).

But people rightfully pointed out (A) how full of holes that suggestion is and (B) the team not going after Vanek's services at present in no way validates or lends any credence to it.

[CliffFletcher]

Vanek is a half step up from Chris Stewart. If he winds up on the Flames, it will be because plans A, B, and C all failed.