[News] Johnson: Flames fans patiently wait for Gaudreau

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Neither Baertschi nor Brule fit in that category - actually, neither does Hudler

Also, not one person suggested Brule was a top 6 candidate

Cammaleri (185 lbs) also doesn't fit in that category due to his weight.

So that leaves 0 tiny players currently on the flames top 6, but 2 small ones (<=189lbs), and the rest are average.

[puds]

What are you even talking about Ricardo? Even if our top line is undersized this year we are rebuilding.. We don't really know what the composition of the team is going to look like down the road. We have some idea given our current prospect pool but really Baertschi isn't that small at 5'11. He's a bit below average but the same size as a number of players who aren't physical dominated (zetterberg, datsyuk, crosby etc)..

Hudler and Gaudreau are both small but it's highly unlikely that Hudler would play on our top line at the rebuild.

With a decent prospect pool you are also able to address organizational needs via trade.

[Coach]

Yeah, Cammalleri may be short, but weak he is not. The dude is a tank. You have to be to be a successful small player in the NHL. Gaudreau could be special, but his core and leg strength are going to need to be off the charts. There's no reason he can't be Martin St. Louis 2.0. The skill set is definitely there.

[Vulcan]

Adding another small player has to be a consideration in the Flames plans. Last year they were the lightest team in the NHL.

Weight Height Age Wrank Hrank Arank Anaheim 203.3 73.1 27.6
17 18 22

Boston 200.0 72.9 28.5
26 21 11

Buffalo 203.1 73.3 27.7
19 13 19

Calgary 195.5 72.8 28.3
30 23 14

Carolina 200.5 73.1 27.3
24 18 26

Chicago 203.0 72.3 27.7
20 29 19

Colorado 205.9 73.1 27.8
8 18 16

Columbus 204.5 73.3 26.9
12 13 30

Dallas 197.2 72.4 28.8
29 28 5

Detroit 201.2 72.6 29.6
22 26 3

Edmonton 203.8 73.5 27.6
16 8 22

Florida 201.2 73.5 29.7
22 8 1

Los Angeles 209.7 73.3 27.3
2 13 26

Minnesota 199.7 72.7 27.5
27 24 25

Montreal 197.3 72.1 27.8
28 30 16

http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2013/01/20...t-and-age.html

[Igster]

I've never seen anyone like to take the other side of the argument and piss people off as much as ricardodw likes to. It's almost like you hop into a thread with a stick and sit there...poke, poke, poke...just for s**** and giggles.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I'll take a stab in the dark and say they still end up an NHL team

But yes, I agree size is important but you can't just ignore that there's not many top 6 players that size. I'm sure if a team had 180 pound Kane on their team and 5'7'' St. Louis that wouldn't prevent them from offering a contract to 170 pound Giroux if he magically became a free agent and wanted to sign there for cheap.

But having even Kane and St. Louis on the same team is a hypothetical. When you have Kane, St.Louis or Kariya the team is built around them to provide them with an opportunity to shine.

Giroux broke through when Briere was injured and eventually took over the dominant (small skilled role) role.

There was one season where Briere and Giroux were good together but the next year when Giroux put up 93 points Briere became less important with 49 points.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Adding another small player has to be a consideration in the Flames plans. Last year they were the lightest team in the NHL.



http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2013/01/20...t-and-age.html

I believe, but could be mistaken, that's a bit skewed by Horak and Byron being on the team January 18th (Byron sent down later that night). When they are 170 and 150 pounds and the next smallest is north of 180 pounds that's going to distort the results. Not a big team by far, but I don't think they were the smallest.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Igster

I've never seen anyone like to take the other side of the argument and piss people off as much as ricardodw likes to. It's almost like you hop into a thread with a stick and sit there...poke, poke, poke...just for s**** and giggles.

Moon objects to this statement.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by New Era

You're saying that we should wait and see what Montreal does with their small players but you're completely dismissing Calgary and what they could possibly do with theirs, even though the one guy is at least a year away and at least one position will open up and one of those small guys may bulk up past the point you identified in your criteria? Consistent much?

No I am saying that if Gaudreau has a chance to break into the NHL on LA or with the Flames he will take the Kings 10 times out of 10.

The Flames HAVE to get much bigger if they want to be successful as a team and add someone like Gaudreau.

Patrick Kane would be no where as good on the Flames as he is in Chicago. Cammalleri would be successful in Chicago as a Kane replacement.

I do not think that Montreal will be as successful with Briere added to their current line-up. I expect that Gionta will play a much smaller role. He is in the last year of his big Contract and similarly to Cammalleri and will not get as much of a return as the Flames and Canadien's fans expect.

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Adding another small player has to be a consideration in the Flames plans. Last year they were the lightest team in the NHL.



http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2013/01/20...t-and-age.html

It only has to be a longer term consideration. Consider where the young players will likely end up weight wise, increase the size of the bottom six (largely accomplished already), and suddenly we are average, even with Johnny Hockey on the team.

Our opening day lineup last year was something like this. Cervenka (201) and Hudler (184) were both not included.

Cammalleri(185), Tanguay(194), Iginla(210)
Stempniak(196), Glencross(197), Backlund(198)
Stajan(190), Comeau (195), Baertchi (181)
Horak(170), Jackman (225), Jones (216)

Average (forwards): 196.4
Top 6: 196.7
Bottom 6: 196.2

This year, my projected starting lineup is something like this (grouped by top 6 and bottom 6, but there could be some transfer obviously)

Cammalleri (184) - Backlund (198) - Hudler (184)
Baertchi (190) - Monahan (190) - Jones (210)
Glencross (197) - Knight (200) - Stempniak (196)
Galiardi (210) - Stajan(190) - Jackman (225)

Average(forwards): 197.8
Top 6: 192.6
Bottom 6: 203

As you can see, our bottom six is considerably larger this year, while our top 6 is a bit lighter due to the promotion of young guys.

If everything stays the same except that Camalleri is subtracted and 168lb Gaudreau (his target for spring) is added, the team average would still be 196.4lb, exactly the same as last year.

That's with 3 of the top 6 still having room to put on another 10lbs average (about 17 for Monahan (207), 5 for Baertchi (195), 8 for Gaudreau (176)). If these players can reach this kind of weight, the top 6, while not huge, is also no longer tiny.

More concerning than our top 6 forward size, is the size of our defense.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

No I am saying that if Gaudreau has a chance to break into the NHL on LA or with the Flames he will take the Kings 10 times out of 10.

How can you say that with such certainty? And how would that even be possible? The Kings have three players (Kozun, Weal, and O'Neill) on their potential roster under 5'10 and 190 pounds. That's no place for Gaudreau based on your theory.

The Flames HAVE to get much bigger if they want to be successful as a team and add someone like Gaudreau.

While bigger would be great, the Flames need to get more skilled if they want to be successful. The more talented players they have the better chance they have to win. Size would be great, but they need guys that can score.

Patrick Kane would be no where as good on the Flames as he is in Chicago. Cammalleri would be successful in Chicago as a Kane replacement.

I wasn't certain before, but now you have me convinced. You're trolling us and trolling us hard.

I do not think that Montreal will be as successful with Briere added to their current line-up. I expect that Gionta will play a much smaller role. He is in the last year of his big Contract and similarly to Cammalleri and will not get as much of a return as the Flames and Canadien's fans expect.

Performance of each player will dictate their worth, not your belief in some mythical exception teams have for player size.

[SHOGUN]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

No I am saying that if Gaudreau has a chance to break into the NHL on LA or with the Flames he will take the Kings 10 times out of 10.

The Flames HAVE to get much bigger if they want to be successful as a team and add someone like Gaudreau.

Patrick Kane would be no where as good on the Flames as he is in Chicago. Cammalleri would be successful in Chicago as a Kane replacement.

I do not think that Montreal will be as successful with Briere added to their current line-up. I expect that Gionta will play a much smaller role. He is in the last year of his big Contract and similarly to Cammalleri and will not get as much of a return as the Flames and Canadien's fans expect.

Lol.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

It only has to be a longer term consideration. Consider where the young players will likely end up weight wise, increase the size of the bottom six (largely accomplished already), and suddenly we are average, even with Johnny Hockey on the team.

Our opening day lineup last year was something like this. Cervenka (201) and Hudler (184) were both not included.

Cammalleri(185), Tanguay(194), Iginla(210)
Stempniak(196), Glencross(197), Backlund(198)
Stajan(190), Comeau (195), Baertchi (181)
Horak(170), Jackman (225), Jones (216)

Average (forwards): 196.4
Top 6: 196.7
Bottom 6: 196.2

This year, my projected starting lineup is something like this (grouped by top 6 and bottom 6, but there could be some transfer obviously)

Cammalleri (184) - Backlund (198) - Hudler (184)
Baertchi (190) - Monahan (190) - Jones (210)
Glencross (197) - Knight (200) - Stempniak (196)
Galiardi (210) - Stajan(190) - Jackman (225)

Average(forwards): 197.8
Top 6: 192.6
Bottom 6: 203

As you can see, our bottom six is considerably larger this year, while our top 6 is a bit lighter due to the promotion of young guys.

If everything stays the same except that Camalleri is subtracted and 168lb Gaudreau (his target for spring) is added, the team average would still be 196.4lb, exactly the same as last year.

That's with 3 of the top 6 still having room to put on another 10lbs average (about 17 for Monahan (207), 5 for Baertchi (195), 8 for Gaudreau (176)). If these players can reach this kind of weight, the top 6, while not huge, is also no longer tiny.

More concerning than our top 6 forward size, is the size of our defense.

This was a lottery team. It was the weakest/worst Flames team in basically in the history of the Flames. It is not a benchmark for success or a blueprint to follow going forward.

It is too small with not enough players playing significant minutes that have the degree of toughness required to win,

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by SHOGUN

Lol.

Cammalleri would not do much better on a line with Toews and Hossa. Or Toews and Bickell?


Kane would be racking up the same points playing with Stajan/Backlund and Hudler?

That is not trolling that is self evident.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Cammalleri would not do much better on a line with Toews and Hossa. Or Toews and Bickell?


Kane would be racking up the same points playing with Stajan/Backlund and Hudler?

That is not trolling that is self evident.

you said Cammalleri could replace Kane on the Hawks. the 31 year old 0.75ppg post-apex player could replace the 24 year old 0.95ppg #1 overall draft pick. that's the sound of an otherwise reasonable argument flying right off the rails.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Cammalleri would not do much better on a line with Toews and Hossa. Or Toews and Bickell?


Kane would be racking up the same points playing with Stajan/Backlund and Hudler?

That is not trolling that is self evident.

It's trolling. Patrick Kane was drafted 1st overall for a reason. Cammy wishes he had his skill.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Igster

I've never seen anyone like to take the other side of the argument and piss people off as much as ricardodw likes to. It's almost like you hop into a thread with a stick and sit there...poke, poke, poke...just for s**** and giggles.

I don't even think it's that. As another poster said that description sounds more like moon.

ricardodw just spews nonsense for the most part from what I've read of him. I've chosen to no longer read him, it's too frustrating to argue with him, he never sees the point.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Cammalleri would not do much better on a line with Toews and Hossa. Or Toews and Bickell?


Kane would be racking up the same points playing with Stajan/Backlund and Hudler?

That is not trolling that is self evident.

No. the way you stated it is that Chicago is so big/good that Cammi could supplant Kane. Which is a clown shoes remark. Kane is a top 10 player in this league skill wise and maybe top 5. Cammilleri is not even close to that conversation, no offense to him.

Cammi would also have less of an impact on chicagos top line than kane would on our top line. and its not rocket appliances to know that.

[Alberta_Beef]

Twas a mistake to re-visit this thread. Was hoping for reasonable talk about Johnny Hockey's future, instead everyone is just responding to an over the top drama queen

[FlamesAddiction]

Just to throw his name out there, but Steve Sullivan is small light weight that has had a reasonably productive career. He is listed at 5'8" and 165lbs.

And all due respect to him, but I think Gaudreau has a higher skill level. Sullivan has a lot of determination and if Gaudreau can match that, I don't see why he couldn't have a similar career.