[CP Story] Decision Time in Calgary

[Camronius]

Originally Posted by Super-Rye

Very good article. I couldn't vote though as I feel the reason the Flames haven't rebuilt is a combination of all those factors and more.

This. Exactly this.

[FusionX]

It's all about money in my mind. I chose playoff revenue but I think D could be a close second (E as well to an extent). I used to believe the notion that perhaps management really truly believed the team was "good enough" but not anymore, not after so many years and the exact same result. There is no way that they can't see what the rest of us do, regardless of whatever it is that they're saying publicly.

In the end, it's a business. Even the loyalty to Jarome (I think there is some) is more tied into the translated loss/gain (unlikely) of revenue that it would cause. As such, it will always be money driven. Of course, winning the cup would be the absolute best way to generate income but as 2004 showed, a deep run could potentially do the same.

So, they're basically stuck at the moment with a mediocre team that still brings in revenue as we still do alright, ticket sales are still high, season ticket holders are still plentiful... but it doesn't generate the money that a playoff run would generate. But coupled with the fact that we are "so" close to making the playoffs as well as the fact that rebuilding would definitely have a short-term drop in revenue, they basically just tinker with what we've got, hoping that one season (before interest completely dies off) they somehow manage to scrape in and make some noise, thereby repeating said cycle.

A rebuild just has too many unknowns in terms of profits and losses that it isn't smart business practice IMO and unfortunately, unless management can swallow some losses for a potential future gain, it just isn't going to happen.

[Phil Russell]

A combination of owners thinking that the team is better than it really is (hey, on paper, many of us over the last few years have thought the same thing), and the fact that ownership really hasn't taken a major hit to their bottom line despite icing a crap team--the building has remained full and the team isn't losing money (correct me if I am wrong).

So why make major change? Ownership thinks the team is "close" and there has been no economic pressures to alter course.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GGG

For you top six calc we have gotten almost 2 years younger. You put Backlund in the top 6 which to my recolection never really happened for any considerable length of time and then in todays top 6 you leave Backlund out and put the 5 year older Stajan who was in the bottom 6 before.

So Our team top 6 and top 4 D has gotten 2 years younger despite core members of that group aging by 2 years.

Are you ever grasping for straws.

Why should I put Backlund in the top 6? The guy has played for less than half the season and is 8th in ATOI?

But sure, let's look at this in a different way, here's our top 10 in icetime. That should be an objective way of looking at things.

2013:
Wideman 30
Bouwmeester 29
Giordano 29
Tanguay 33
Iginla 35
Glencross 30
Brodie 22
Stempniak 30
Cammalleri 30
Stajan 29
Kiprusoff 36

Average: 30.3

2011:
Bouwmeester 27
Giordano 27
Regehr 30
Iginla 33
Tanguay 31
Sarich 32
Jokinen 32
Bourque 29
Morrison 35
Glencross 28
Kiprusoff 34

Average: 30.5

Yes, let's feel good about that 0.2 years of improvement.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

Except Selanne still has his speed left.

He's no longer the Finnish Flash anymore is what I meant...no longer can he just skate past players and snipe (well, he still can on occasion, but not like the Selanne I grew up watching). He had to adapted to a new role on the team, one where he's no longer as dominant 5v5.

I see the same in Iginla: He can't force his way to the front of the net like he used to. He has given up that. He still does it every once in a while, but like Selanne, just isn't as consistent as past Iginla. Now he focuses on smart passing, shooting, and not relying on being able to reach the last 5 feet in front of the goalie.

[vilzeh]

Ye, of course, but It's still pretty sick to watch a 42 year old guy skate faster than major part of guys in 20's, his skating is so smooth.

[Tinordi]

Excellent article. The absolute key point I would reiterate is the window. The Flames just are not going to turn into a contender overnight. They need to be shelling off assets for assets that they think will contribute in 3-5 years.

This is why I'm so concerned about trading for a guy like Chris Stewart or Bernier. They will likely be gone in 5 years and therefore ######ing the rebuilding process.

Everything needs to be conducted with a 5 year rebuild window to return to a true contender. Otherwise the will continue to wallpaper over the cracks.

This means trading assets for nothing but picks, young prospects, and salary dumps.

[the_only_turek_fan]

The irony here is that ownership seems to believe they will lose fan support and/or their season ticket base of they move Iginla and company.

However, if King and the owners have been reading boards like this, and listening to Fan960 the fans are screaming at the top of their lungs for change.

Bingo is correct to say that this is a Canadian market and thus understands that this team will have a couple of tough years in their rebuild. I am going even further than that, the fans are demanding it.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Itse

Are you ever grasping for straws.

Why should I put Backlund in the top 6? The guy has played for less than half the season and is 8th in ATOI?

But sure, let's look at this in a different way, here's our top 10 in icetime. That should be an objective way of looking at things.

2013:
Wideman 30
Bouwmeester 29
Giordano 29
Tanguay 33
Iginla 35
Glencross 30
Brodie 22
Stempniak 30
Cammalleri 30
Stajan 29
Kiprusoff 36

Average: 30.3

2011:
Bouwmeester 27
Giordano 27
Regehr 30
Iginla 33
Tanguay 31
Sarich 32
Jokinen 32
Bourque 29
Morrison 35
Glencross 28
Kiprusoff 34

Average: 30.5

Yes, let's feel good about that 0.2 years of improvement.

Average age has remained close to the same, however I think age frequency might be a better indicator for the age distribution.

In 2011 there were 6 players over 30, compare to only 3 this year. This year there is actually a 22 year old where in 2011 the youngest were 27. There is a glaring hole in the mid 20s for both years but moving from a majority over 30 to a majority at 29/30 (which is closer to prime than old) is a move in the right direction.

Is it enough? Not at all. But I think it is a lot better move towards a younger team than just a 0.2 seems to indicate.

[Burner]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

Ye, of course, but It's still pretty sick to watch a 42 year old guy skate faster than major part of guys in 20's, his skating is so smooth.

Yeah and I liked his comment after Getzalf and Perry signed 8 years contract --- if they can play 8 more years then so can I cause I am in better shape then them...

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

The irony here is that ownership seems to believe they will lose fan support and/or their season ticket base of they move Iginla and company.

However, if King and the owners have been reading boards like this, and listening to Fan960 the fans are screaming at the top of their lungs for change.

Bingo is correct to say that this is a Canadian market and thus understands that this team will have a couple of tough years in their rebuild. I am going even further than that, the fans are demanding it.

I think ownership knows they will lose fan support if they continue to ice a bad team. They already are, and change is coming. Though I'll bet its change to get better next season or at most the season after, which wont stop the critics.

The canadian market angle is way overblown. Thats mostly our own egos.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by kirant

I see the same in Iginla: He can't force his way to the front of the net like he used to. He has given up that. He still does it every once in a while, but like Selanne, just isn't as consistent as past Iginla. Now he focuses on smart passing, shooting, and not relying on being able to reach the last 5 feet in front of the goalie.

Yep. Iginla just hasn't been a dominant offensive threat for years. He's a great player still but not a guy who singlehandedly wins you many if any games. He used to win a much greater percentage of board battles and could drive the net and he really doesn't bring that aspect much anymore. The power is definitely gone from his powerforward game. I think I first noticed it when he talked a lot about trying to get quicker. I think he dropped a bit of upper body strength and it took away from his ability to power through defenders.

We have a bunch of guys up front with some talent but no one who can't be shut down. No one that just overpowers or outskills checking on a regular basis. We've got good offensive depth but no premiere talent.

If you look at this team the thing we really lack these days is strength/power up front and on the back end. We don't have a physical defenseman who can keep up (Sarich isn't the answer). We don't have a big strong centre, nor do we have a big strong powerforward. I think we could do without it if we had a gamebreaker up front like a Kane but we don't.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Average age has remained close to the same, however I think age frequency might be a better indicator for the age distribution.

In 2011 there were 6 players over 30, compare to only 3 this year. This year there is actually a 22 year old where in 2011 the youngest were 27. There is a glaring hole in the mid 20s for both years but moving from a majority over 30 to a majority at 29/30 (which is closer to prime than old) is a move in the right direction.

Is it enough? Not at all. But I think it is a lot better move towards a younger team than just a 0.2 seems to indicate.

Your cherrypicking is starting to border on the side of humour.

Here's another cherrypicked number for you:
Number of players under the age of 29:
2011: 3
2013: 1

Here's a few other stats for you:
Median age for that group:
2011: 31 years
2013: 30 years.

Average age removing outliers (smallest and largest):
2011: 30,6 years
2013: 30,5 years

Number of 30+ players:
2011: 7
2013: 7

Average age of our top 5 in ATOI:
2011: 30,0 (30,7 including Kipper)
2013: 31,4 (32,2 including Kipper)


Also, the important thing to remember is that our team is the second oldest team in the NHL. That alone should pretty much shut up any talk about how this team has become younger in any significant way.

Also, any talk about how our fourth line and scraps are pulling that number up is BS, as the truth is actually quite the opposite. On average our first line is older than our fourth line and our second line is older than our third line. Our oldest players are not Sarich and Begin (both 34), they are Iggy and Kipper.

Btw, many have also claimed that Jackman and McGrattan are old. Not really on this team, they are both 31. Their effect on the average age is minimal. Of course we could discuss the fact that for all that it matters we might as well be playing Jones (26), Horak (21) and Aliu (23), but it's just not the way this team rolls.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by Itse

Of course we could discuss the fact that for all that it matters we might as well be playing Jones (26), Horak (21) and Aliu (23), but it's just not the way this team rolls.

Team rolls? Jones, and Aliu have not played better then the current players on the 4th line. Horak has not played better then the 3 centers ahead of him. Play the best player available for that roll IMO not the youngest.

I do however agree with the rest of what your saying

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Itse

Your cherrypicking is starting to border on the side of humour.

Here's another cherrypicked number for you:
Number of players under the age of 29:
2011: 3
2013: 1

Here's a few other stats for you:
Median age for that group:
2011: 31 years
2013: 30 years.

Average age removing outliers (smallest and largest):
2011: 30,6 years
2013: 30,5 years

Number of 30+ players:
2011: 7
2013: 7

Average age of our top 5 in ATOI:
2011: 30,0 (30,7 including Kipper)
2013: 31,4 (32,2 including Kipper)


Also, the important thing to remember is that our team is the second oldest team in the NHL. That alone should pretty much shut up any talk about how this team has become younger in any significant way.

Also, any talk about how our fourth line and scraps are pulling that number up is BS, as the truth is actually quite the opposite. On average our first line is older than our fourth line and our second line is older than our third line. Our oldest players are not Sarich and Begin (both 34), they are Iggy and Kipper.

Btw, many have also claimed that Jackman and McGrattan are old. Not really on this team, they are both 31. Their effect on the average age is minimal. Of course we could discuss the fact that for all that it matters we might as well be playing Jones (26), Horak (21) and Aliu (23), but it's just not the way this team rolls.

I did not cherry pick anything. I used the exact same data set you did but looked at it from a different angle. I am not changing the set by looking at the whole team, or the top 5 instead of the top 10 or anything. The only person cherry picking is you, I made very sure not to change anything about the data.

I am also not arguing that the team is old and needs to get younger. My point was that simply using average age didn't show the whole story. The fact that the bulk of the players have gotten younger. Not a lot younger because when we keep the same players they do get older. But in the set of players you used I was just demonstrating that although the average isn't a lot lower, the actual ages of the bulk of players did slide down.

I also didn't say one word about the fourth line bringing that number up. I know it isn't and I'm not claiming this team isn't old. I also think that McGratton has filled the role way better than Aliu or Horak or even Jones could, so he gets to play regardless of his age.I just disagree with the idea that management continues to ignore youth, and that simply looking at the average age change doesn't show the whole picture that some progess is being done. Just not enough.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I am also not arguing that the team is old and needs to get younger. My point was that simply using average age didn't show the whole story. The fact that the bulk of the players have gotten younger. Not a lot younger because when we keep the same players they do get older. But in the set of players you used I was just demonstrating that although the average isn't a lot lower, the actual ages of the bulk of players did slide down.

Well the team is bound to get younger when Feaster replaced some players 33+ coming off multi-year contracts with 28+ year old UFAs beginning their multi-year contracts.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Itse

Also, the important thing to remember is that our team is the second oldest team in the NHL. That alone should pretty much shut up any talk about how this team has become younger in any significant way.

One of the scariest thoughts is the average age of the top 5 skaters.

The average age in 2011 was 29.6, 2012 was 29.6, and 2013 is 31.2, almost a full 2 year change in average top player age.

Now, we have to consider that Chris Butler, who many consider not a top 2 D, pulled down the average heavily (standard deviation of the top 10 skaters jumps from 2.61 years to 3.78 years). If we consider him not, then the average is actually 31.

The bottom lines may be getting younger, but nothing has changed on the top line for a while.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Somebody should start a thread called "Did the Flames really get younger?"

[Itse]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I did not cherry pick anything. I used the exact same data set you did but looked at it from a different angle. I am not changing the set by looking at the whole team, or the top 5 instead of the top 10 or anything. The only person cherry picking is you, I made very sure not to change anything about the data.

Eh.

Let's start with this: you can't say that "the distribution is different" and claim that it means that the team is younger. The latter point does not follow from the first. It's like saying that because I painted my car red it's now a firetruck. "The distribution is different" only means that the distribution is different.

Whether or not it's true that 29-30 are close to the most productive years is also a non-factor, when we are trying to establish whether or not we are any younger.

Yes, I do admit that we have gotten rid of some of the oldest players, but the bottom line remains the same; we are not generally speaking notably younger as a whole, because we have also reached a point where essentially our whole roster is at or past it's prime.

Which should be the most telling point about how this is really the last point at which you should start unloading these guys. And really it should have started earlier.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Itse

Are you ever grasping for straws.

Why should I put Backlund in the top 6? The guy has played for less than half the season and is 8th in ATOI?

But sure, let's look at this in a different way, here's our top 10 in icetime. That should be an objective way of looking at things.

My issue wasnt that you had or didnt have backlund. In or out if you top six. My point was you artificially aged the 2013 group by swapping backlund and stajan whose roles on the flames havent really changed. Your data you presented did not back up your claim.

Your second dataset based on ice time is a much fairer comparison and actually surprises me. I thought from the look and feel of the team we were getting younger.