It’s not a woulda coulda shoulda when it takes two to tango and they say no.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Although, Brad Treliving would agree with FlashWalken and not you. He routinely calls the NHL the "do it" league in reference to players and management.
Yes he's trying and yes deals have fallen through, but ultimately his job is to improve the team with deals that go through and I'm hopeful he'll still find something to put us over the top in our shrinking window.
But if it fails and we go into a rebuild in two or three years with no significant playoff success then absolutely the "coulda, woulda, shoulda" line will be apt and will be accepted by Brad.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
It's weird. Last year I watched the pre-season game from China vs the Bruins and thought "this team can win the Cup this year with a tweak or two". This year, with basically the same team, I am questioning playoffs. Nothing logical, just "feel".
So then we should be winning the cup this year then if it follows the pattern properly and you are wrong with your feeling...lol
Yeah I think the more correct statement would be “getting screwed by the refs is not exclusive to Calgary”. I think most people can agree the refs are awful.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to N-E-B For This Useful Post:
Although, Brad Treliving would agree with FlashWalken and not you. He routinely calls the NHL the "do it" league in reference to players and management.
Yes he's trying and yes deals have fallen through, but ultimately his job is to improve the team with deals that go through and I'm hopeful he'll still find something to put us over the top in our shrinking window.
But if it fails and we go into a rebuild in two or three years with no significant playoff success then absolutely the "coulda, woulda, shoulda" line will be apt and will be accepted by Brad.
Fair points. Ultimately there are more deals out there than those two... which presumably he could pull the trigger on and chose not to.
I’m ok with the woulda coulda shoulda mantra, but those two examples don’t work for me in that context.
It's just tough because we're so close but I really fear our window will close in the next few years and the story will be "They were probably one star forward away from being a contender".
I think this is an important point, how many times have we seen good teams, top teams, go the extra mile to bring in that extra impact piece?
The Following User Says Thank You to DazzlinDino For This Useful Post:
Here’s one
In terms of the Flames building a organization that can have some sustained success…the worst thing in the world wouldn’t be to have a bad year.
Benefits:
The top end of this draft is pretty good
The Flames have their 1st and 2nd. High 2nds are something this team has lacked
The team has a number of players that could be dealt at the deadline for good returns
o Brodie
o Hamonic (and I think he could be one of those rare situations where you deal him at the deadline, and then re-sign him in the summer)
Lesser return guys
o Frolik
o Talbot
Guys that aren’t pending free agents that would be really good adds to a playoff team
o Ryan
o Sam
The team gets a very clear view on if this team can win or not and make some decision regarding the core, including Johnny
This organization has been asset weak for decades. This season going wrong could set them up much better for the future if handled correctly.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Jiri, I appreciate your post, but it is as if you haven't been following the Flames for a few decades. We all know what will happen - 86 points, no playoffs, no trades, and pick 13th...
Here’s one
In terms of the Flames building a organization that can have some sustained success…the worst thing in the world wouldn’t be to have a bad year.
Benefits:
The top end of this draft is pretty good
The Flames have their 1st and 2nd. High 2nds are something this team has lacked
The team has a number of players that could be dealt at the deadline for good returns
o Brodie
o Hamonic (and I think he could be one of those rare situations where you deal him at the deadline, and then re-sign him in the summer)
Lesser return guys
o Frolik
o Talbot
Guys that aren’t pending free agents that would be really good adds to a playoff team
o Ryan
o Sam
The team gets a very clear view on if this team can win or not and make some decision regarding the core, including Johnny
This organization has been asset weak for decades. This season going wrong could set them up much better for the future if handled correctly.
But how are you getting a clear view of whether the team can win or not? I assume under your scenario you’re not making the playoffs. And you’re losing another year of Giordano and your top players under good contracts.
Or maybe you’re saying by losing you’re facing the reality that you’re not good enough? And this forces you to make the hard decisions. I do see your point but I guess in the end, I’d rather win than lose. Should have just kept the picks we already had.
Yeah I think the more correct statement would be “getting screwed by the refs is not exclusive to Calgary”. I think most people can agree the refs are awful.
My unpopular opinion is the NHL refereeing is very good.
Very few mistakes are made and many that are only detectable in multi-angle super-slow motion.
First it is so difficult to make so many split-second decisions in a high-speed collusion sport it is impressive that they get the vast majority of them exactly right.
Second the above multi-angle, super slow point.
Third, I like the human element. Mistakes are the main cause of things happening in the game. Like goals and stuff. Mostly player mistakes but very occasionally referee/linesman mistakes. Perfect reffing isn't going to happen and I don't want to see it.
Fourth, good teams play and win games in a way (dominance, resilience etc.) that a reffing error rarely has a make or break impact on the game result.
Fifth, it all tends to even out in the end. What goes around comes around. Karma is playing the long game and so on.
Sixth, "the refs have it in for us" or "we always are on the receiving end of all the bad calls" are among the most easily disproved excuses/rationalizations out there. Side note, if I was a ref after the Wideman incident I would have hit the Flames hard and Wideman really hard in my decision making but the so-called 'Wideman effect' was truly negligible.
I could make a longer list but I feel I've made my point. I'm no Ron 'too biased in the other direction' MacLean apologist here. I am just super tired of this non-stop complaining about the refereeing. It's good, very good.
I have some issues with the 2019-20 Calgary Flames as they are average, very average, but I am giving them some more time to work that out.
The Following User Says Thank You to N26 For This Useful Post:
My unpopular opinion is the NHL refereeing is very good.
Agreed, in general. I think if the league would get rid of the game management mandate and just call penalties consistently, no matter the score or the time of year, NHL reffing would be about as good as it gets. The problem is almost entirely when refs let things go for reasons unrelated to the foul committed. It makes it impossible to understand what is and isn't against the rules.
My potentially unpopular opinion: abolish video review entirely. The best part of sports is jumping out of your seat fist pumping when your team scores a big goal. Watching a borderline offside and then your team scores 20 seconds later completely takes that away from the fans. You can't celebrate because you're not sure it's a goal, and then several minutes later the moment has passed, and even if they call it a goal. At absolute most, they should have a video ref that can rewind maybe 10 seconds and radio down in real time to stop the play, goal or not.
The Following User Says Thank You to Kovaz For This Useful Post:
We all know what will happen - 86 points, no playoffs, no trades, and pick 13th...
