As the core stands now, do you believe it has cup potential?

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well already we have two top lines with producing centremen (Monahan/Backlund). Bennett and Jankowski developing would really give us an embarrassment of riches at that position.

It most certainly would, which would have the Flames in the best position you could ask for essentially.

Monahan and Backlund are great, and if they stay as the 1-2, Flames could stick with that. Backlund I don't expect to have anymore growth in his offensive game than he has shown this season. Monahan still has potential, but I'm not expecting much more based on his style of play. I think ~70 points is as best he'll get unless the top line can get a winger the can be the pure sniper with edge. Someone who can bring edge to the line, and also get the puck behind the net. So basically a scoring version of Ferland.

But assuming Monahan can continues as is and doesn +60 point seasons, and Backlund maintains this his production form this season, still would be nice to have another centre that can put up just as much points, if not more. That's the position that generally makes the line work. If they can have three centres that can put up those numbers, that's three lines that can score. Tremendous scoring depth that can take this team far.

[bigrangy]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Ya I don't see the Risto comparison, his defensive play is more than suspect. I'd take Hamilton over him every day of the week. My biased opinion

I'd take Hamilton over any defenseman younger than him every day of the week.

Maybe Dahlin will change that but for now I believe in Dougie.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Stylistically those comparisons don't really hold IMO. We don't have a Tarasenko. They don't have a Johnny.

Interesting comparison. Not sure it fits better than Hawk comparison though. I think the Hawk comparison is used more because some of the comparisons seem better stylistically. Gaudreau and Kane have a lot more similarities than Gaudreau/Tarasenko for example.

I wasn't talking stylistically, more so how the different players fit into the different tiers of the NHL hierarchy.

Kane has been ahead of Gaudreau on every statistical level since their draft day. He was well over ppg in two separate seasons by the time he was Johnny's age. I'd say the comparison to the Hawks breaks down further after that.

I feel like Statsny and Backes are more on the level of Monahan and Backlund. Toews was considered a top 3-5 center in the show until recently.

Flames don't have anything like Hossa.

Keith wins Norris trophies. I feel like the Flames guys are good but not at that level. More like the St.Louis trio. Highly regarded but not the best of the best.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I see STL as a team that had tremendous depth, one game changer (Tarasenko) who the coach sheltered and a solid defense.

That's how I see Calgary as well. Gaudeau is the game changer. A good amount of capable forwards. A solid top 3 defence. And a goalie tandem.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Pronger is arguably the best defenseman I've watched play in my 20+ years of following the game. I love Gio, Hamilton and Brodie but none of them come close to the overall impact Pronger brought. Pronger was a powerplay QB, could rush the puck, pass the puck, skate it out, play nasty, destroy people, hurt people, shut down forwards, toss down small forwards like they were children. There isn't a defenseman in the game right now that has the overall impact Pronger had in his prime IMO. Pronger was a combination of a dominating shutdown d-man with tremendous size/strength but who also had the puck skills and shot of an offensive d-man. Chara was not too far below Pronger in his prime in terms of overall impact. Both those guys are in a completely different tier than guys like Gonchar, Zubov, Leetch, Ozolinsh and Blake. Pronger dragged several teams to the cup finals playing half the game, dominating in all zones.

Will we see another Pronger? I don't think Dougie is mean enough and physical enough to be a Pronger. I think Ristolainen has a chance to develop into that calibre of dman but we'll see.

I'm not even sure how this discussion deviated. My comparison to 07' Ducks wasn't meant for specific focus towards the style of Hamilton to the style of Pronger, more of a general holistic perspective of two rosters that each carried 3 great defensemen during their playoff runs. I mean, when someone makes a roster to roster comparison, its not meant to literally compare every player to their stats and eating habits. It's suppose to be a rough blueprint.

Basically, the 07' Ducks carried 3 really good defensemen of THEIR time, and the Flames, while playing in a different era, also carry 3 really good defensemen of their time. Just so we're clear, I'm not suggesting the FLAMES ARE EXACTLY LIKE THE 07' DUCKS, right down to the practice schedule and jock straps.

[Sylvanfan]

It appears to be really hard to win a Stanley Cup unless you potentially have that one player who can be the best player in the series, and than back that with a lot of depth.

Chicago as an example won their three cups with a different player winning the Conn Smythe each time. Never once needing the goaltender to do so. Pittsburgh had Malkin and Crosby both win the Conn Smythe although one could argue Crosby wasn't really the key piece last year.

On the current Flames team, the only guy that I think is capable of being that true best player in the series is Gaudreau. Outside of him, it's a collection of good players but not a dominating take over a series type. So I think that's going to make it tough for them to get to that next level.

In the past few years teams like St.Louis, San Jose, Anaheim, and Washington have all generally been pretty good. But out of those three only San Jose made a cup final. Anaheim had two guys up front who could emerge as top forwards in a series but don't have a real number one defencmen. Tarasenko in the two years prior to this has finally emerged as a game breaking forward, but they seem to lack that defenceman who's an alpha dog. San Jose finally stepped forward last year with Brent Burns emerging as a game changer on the back end. Washington to this point despite a plethora of talent has struggled to break through, again a team that seems to lack that true top defenceman.

The Rangers also have been reasonably competitive, but to me they lack the elite skill up front to be much of a contender right now. I think depth is needed to win 4 rounds, but elite guys need to take over a series somewhere along the lines and will you to victory.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

strongly strongly disagree. What the bruins and that ducks team showed was just how dominant those generational elite dmen can be.

Pronger, Neidermayer, Chara were absolute stud dmen in their cup run years. Hell, just look at the fact that pronger went to the cup finals like 3 times with 3 different teams (oilers, ducks, flyers).

Flames have good top 3 d, but nowhere near what made those cup teams ultimately cup winners.

I don't know if you're giving the rosters of those teams enough credits. Hockey isn't like basketball and teams can win a cup without a properly assembled roster with full effort. Look at Orr. During a time in hockey where the league was expanding every few years and rosters were made up of cigarette smokers on the bench, Bobby Orr only managed 2 cups. Likewise, Gretzky couldn't win a cup for LA.

I wouldn't put Chara in that list either. Thomas, if anyone, carried that roster to a cup. He put up arguably the best goaltending performance ever witnessed. Bergeron was playing with a punctured lung and that whole Bruins team beat on the Canucks.

[codynw]

I'm sure it's been said by others, but this depends on Bennett's development. Him turning into the legit #1 center that I still think he's capable of becoming would go a long way.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I wasn't talking stylistically, more so how the different players fit into the different tiers of the NHL hierarchy.

Kane has been ahead of Gaudreau on every statistical level since their draft day. He was well over ppg in two separate seasons by the time he was Johnny's age. I'd say the comparison to the Hawks breaks down further after that.

I feel like Statsny and Backes are more on the level of Monahan and Backlund. Toews was considered a top 3-5 center in the show until recently.

Flames don't have anything like Hossa.

Keith wins Norris trophies. I feel like the Flames guys are good but not at that level. More like the St.Louis trio. Highly regarded but not the best of the best.



That's how I see Calgary as well. Gaudeau is the game changer. A good amount of capable forwards. A solid top 3 defence. And a goalie tandem.

The differences are not as great as you are suggesting.

Put a Panarin with Gaudreau and he is a point per game player

If the Flames win a cup or had won a cup in the last couple years, Giordano is in the Norris discussion along with Keith.

The Flames' big 3 on D is as good as the Hawks' big 3, or at least pretty close.

The biggest difference between the teams is the notoriety that comes with playoff success. And yes, that is earned. But once established (which is a TEAM achievement), those players tend to get more credit relative to their peers than is probably warranted.

If the Flames were to make a deep playoff run, all of a sudden the comparisons above become very pertinent.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by codynw

I'm sure it's been said by others, but this depends on Bennett's development. Him turning into the legit #1 center that I still think he's capable of becoming would go a long way.

I'm trying to think of the last time a player emerged during the playoffs, and since then became a stud? Joe Pavelski? Byfglien?

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The differences are not as great as you are suggesting.

Put a Panarin with Gaudreau and he is a point per game player

If the Flames win a cup or had won a cup in the last couple years, Giordano is in the Norris discussion along with Keith.

The Flames' big 3 on D is as good as the Hawks' big 3, or at least pretty close.

The biggest difference between the teams is the notoriety that comes with playoff success. And yes, that is earned. But once established (which is a TEAM achievement), those players tend to get more credit relative to their peers than is probably warranted.

If the Flames were to make a deep playoff run, all of a sudden the comparisons above become very pertinent.

The differences are great.

The Hawks just finished with 109 points and all these guys played 40+ games:
Hartman, Schmaltz, Kero, Hinostroza, Kempny, Rasmussen, Forsling, Tootoo, Desjardins,Van Reinsdyk, Panik.

That's a pretty big list of rookies, and replacement level players.

The Chicago core is the TEAM. Any and all achievements are due to the players in their core being really, really good.

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I wasn't talking stylistically, more so how the different players fit into the different tiers of the NHL hierarchy.

Kane has been ahead of Gaudreau on every statistical level since their draft day. He was well over ppg in two separate seasons by the time he was Johnny's age. I'd say the comparison to the Hawks breaks down further after that.

This made me curious about how they compare so I took a look at their age comparable seasons.

Kane's 3 Seasons Beginning with his 21 year old season:
GP: 82 G: 30 A: 58 P: 88 PPG: 1.07
GP: 73 G: 27 A: 46 P: 73 PPG: 1.00
GP: 82 G: 23 A: 43 P: 66 PPG: 0.75
TOTAL:
GP: 237 G: 80 A: 147 P: 227 PPG: 0.96

Gaudreau's 3 Seasons Beginning with his 21 year old season:
GP: 80 G: 24 A: 40 P: 64 PPG: 0.80
GP: 79 G: 30 A: 48 P: 78 PPG: 0.99
GP: 72 G: 18 A: 43 P: 61 PPG: 0.85
TOTAL:
GP: 231 G: 72 A: 131 P: 204 PPG: 0.88

Tarasenko:
GP: 38 G: 8 A: 11 P: 19 PPG: 0.50
GP: 64 G: 21 A: 22 P: 43 PPG: 0.67
GP: 77 G: 37 A: 36 P: 73 PPG: 0.95
TOTAL:
GP: 179 G: 66 A: 69 P: 135 PPG: 0.75

Well there definitely does seem to be a step down from Patrick Kane to Gaudreau as far as production goes. Tbh I was a little surprised by this as I thought it would be closer.

From the point of view of a Flames fan, there are a couple of encouraging things. Kane became more productive after his 23 year old season and Tarasenko has been able to maintain his near point per game pace. Also, I think the combination of the contract hold-out, the team struggling out of the gate (especially the powerplay) and Gaudreau's injury may have deflated his numbers somewhat this season.

I feel like Statsny and Backes are more on the level of Monahan and Backlund. Toews was considered a top 3-5 center in the show until recently.

Now I'll look at Monahan and Toews starting in their 19 year old season:
Toews:
GP: 64 G: 24 A: 30 P: 46 PPG: 0.72
GP: 82 G: 34 A: 35 P: 69 PPG: 0.85
GP: 76 G: 25 A: 43 P: 68 PPG: 0.89
TOTAL:
GP: 222 G: 83 A: 108 P: 191 PPG: 0.86

Monahan:
GP: 81 G: 31 A: 31 P: 62 PPG: 0.77
GP: 81 G: 27 A: 36 P: 63 PPG: 0.78
GP: 82 G: 27 A: 31 P: 58 PPG: 0.71
TOTAL:
GP: 244 G: 85 A: 98 P: 183 PPG: 0.75

I didn't bother with Stastny as he entered the league at 21 and kind of set the world on fire for a couple seasons before dropping off. Personally, I prefer Monahan by a lot and think that his career will be better than Stastny's. Admittedly subjective.

Again, the comparison leans towards the Blackhawks star. In addition to being more productive, I think it is fairly safe to say that Toews possesses intangibles that are superior to Monahan. For the optimistic Flames fan, Monahan was hindered pretty significantly with a back injury for the first part of the season where he scored only 8 points in 23 games and then went on to score 50 points in the remaining 59 games for a PPG of .85 which is much more in line than Toews. As you can see though, it takes some effort to get there so put on your rose colored glasses

Flames don't have anything like Hossa.

True , but they do have Tkachuk!

Keith wins Norris trophies. I feel like the Flames guys are good but not at that level. More like the St.Louis trio. Highly regarded but not the best of the best.

Fair enough.

That's how I see Calgary as well. Gaudeau is the game changer. A good amount of capable forwards. A solid top 3 defence. And a goalie tandem.

I know you weren't claiming that St. Louis is a perfect comparison, but I think the Flames fall somewhere in between the two groups with the actual styles of players leaning closer to the Blackhawks model. Hard to say if that is a viable Stanley Cup winning pattern if the main pieces of Gaudreau, Monahan, and Giordano are all a step down from their Blackhawks counterparts.

I'm still optimistic though because once Gaudreau, Monahan, Hamilton, and Tkachuk are all in their prime I think the Flames will be a significantly stronger team than they are now and to me that would be contender level.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The Chicago core is the TEAM. Any and all achievements are due to the players in their core being really, really good.

Plus good coaching. Those rookies and replacement parts could easily cost a lot of games without good coaching.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Will we see another Pronger? I don't think Dougie is mean enough and physical enough to be a Pronger. I think Ristolainen has a chance to develop into that calibre of dman but we'll see.

Hedman is the closest player in the NHL today to Pronger. He's not as mean as Pronger, but then nobody is.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Savvy27

Again, the comparison leans towards the Blackhawks star. In addition to being more productive, I think it is fairly safe to say that Toews possesses intangibles that are superior to Monahan.

The only thing Monahan and Toews have in common is they both play centre. That's it. The comparison fans around here draw between the two is mystifying.

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The only thing Monahan and Toews have in common is they both play centre. That's it. The comparison fans around here draw between the two is mystifying.

That's a little too strong. Starting in 2014-15/15-16/16-17:
TOI
Toews: 19:33/19:14/20:09 -- PP: 3:22/2:26/2:41 -- SH: 1:22/1:24/1:18
Monahan: 19:37/19:10/17:34 -- PP: 2:50/3:14/3:01 -- SH: 0:50/0:48/0:29

Powerplay and Shorthanded Points
Toews: 17/9/17 -- 3/7/0
Monahan: 19/20/17 -- 2/0/1

Shots Per Game and Shooting Percentage
Toews: 2.4/2.2/2.8 -- 14.6/15.6/10.5
Monahan: 2.4/2.4/2.4 -- 16.2/13.7/13.6

Face-off % and Game Winning Goals and OT Goals
Toews: 57/59/55 -- 7/8/5 -- 1/5/1
Monahan: 49/51/52 -- 8/5/4 -- 3/1/2

Blocked Shots
Toews: 0.2/0.5/0.4
Monahan: 0.5/0.5/0.3

Giveaways
T: 34/28/37
M: 52/38/44

Takeaways
T: 45/57/37
M: 81/55/50

Hits/G and Penalty Minutes
T: 0.7/1.0/0.6 -- 36/62/35
M: 0.5/0.5/0.4 -- 12/18/20

Zone Starts (Offensive Zone %)
T: 57/55/54
M: 47/54/61

SAT Close -- Points Per 60 minutes played
T: 55/48/52 -- 2.50/2.26/2.44
M: 48/47/51 -- 2.34/2.43/2.41

Don't get me wrong, Toews is a better player. But you are overstating the difference in my opinion. This season is a bit of a strange one since Gulutzan is deploying Monahan differently with far more offensive starts and using Backlund more in the role that Toews plays. That being said, given Monahan's ice-time has gone down and he is only 22, he is putting up decently comparable numbers in many categories. Enough so that I don't think you should be mystified by the comparison.

Also of interest: Toews is much more physical than Monahan now, as evidenced by his higher hits per game and PIMs. However, if you go back the three previous seasons you can see that Toews hits per game were between 0.4-0.5 and his PIMs were between 27-34.

[CliffFletcher]

Play with the puck is only half the game.

Toews is the one of the best forwards in the NHL - if not the best - without the puck. He's was already a Selke winner at 24. Monahan isn't even one of the three best defensive forwards on his team.

Toews can skate with anybody and forechecks like a madman. Monahan is a below-average skater who routinely gets beat to the puck.

Toews plays with an intensity that borders on the manic. Monahan's demeanour is better described as... placid.

Monahan is a very good player in his own right. But he's nothing like Jonathan Toews. Not in accomplishments, impact, or playstyle.

[Par]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Play with the puck is only half the game.

Toews is the one of the best forwards in the NHL - if not the best - without the puck. He's was already a Selke winner at 24. Monahan isn't even one of the three best defensive forwards on his team.

Toews can skate with anybody and forechecks like a madman. Monahan is a below-average skater who routinely gets beat to the puck.

Toews plays with an intensity that borders on the manic. Monahan's demeanour is better described as... placid.

Monahan is a very good player in his own right. But he's nothing like Jonathan Toews. Not in accomplishments, impact, or playstyle.

We can compare all the numbers we want but this post is pretty bang. These playoffs will really show what Monahan is all about and we will have a clear idea. Get him a lot of massages and get him all fired up and see what he can do.

[heep223]

Yes they are a contender now. Not perfect but enough pieces to be considered a serious threat out of the west. GFG!

[Split98]

Yes, absolutely.

What a lot of teams have won without is Tkachuk. We have that piece so we can approach this with an entirely different recipe.

[Mr.Coffee]

I really do get concerned with Monahan's intensity. It's like if you could combine Bennett's intensity and grit with Monahan's offensive awareness, net presence and shot (quick release) you'd have one hell of a player, but neither delivers all of it.