[PGT] Chicago 5 - Calgary 3

[Red]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I don't think this team needs a full rebuild. They have a young core and for me they just need to make some hard decisions on a couple of players to do a re-tool on the fly. If it was me Backlund and Gio would be gone this summer. Gio is not getting any younger and we could still get a great haul for him. The other player would be Johnny hockey if they really don't think they are going to be able to re-sign him. I have my doubts that Johnny wants to stay out west. Between Johnny and Gio i would like to think 1 of those players could bring a gritty top 6 center. After that you hope the rest of players traded, bring in young d and young wingers.

They need a few tweaks. Whoever they bring they better have size and grit. Smaller players can be good too, but we have too many of them.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I don't think this team needs a full rebuild. They have a young core and for me they just need to make some hard decisions on a couple of players to do a re-tool on the fly. If it was me Backlund and Gio would be gone this summer. Gio is not getting any younger and we could still get a great haul for him. The other player would be Johnny hockey if they really don't think they are going to be able to re-sign him. I have my doubts that Johnny wants to stay out west. Between Johnny and Gio i would like to think 1 of those players could bring a gritty top 6 center. After that you hope the rest of players traded, bring in young d and young wingers.

The flames don't have a young core.

Monahan is 25. Lindholm is 25. Gaudreau is 26. Compared to yours and my old asses that's young, but have you looked around the league lately? O'Reilly had already established himself as a premiere 3 zone player by 25. Brayden Schenn was a 70 point 3 zone wrecking ball by age 26. Is Monahan as good as either of those guys? Does he look to be on that trajectory now? Tarasenko was a 4 time 30 goal scorer by the time he was 26.

Tkachuk is the only member of the core group who is young. I suppose Hanifin, but I don't consider him a core member considering he looks expendable now.

But the Flames Bridged Tkachuk, so he's probably gone in 3 years anyway.

Also, that core group has never shown much of anything so I don't understand the idea that they are good either.

Sometimes I feel like I've been watching a different team than you guys. The Flames have done absolutely nothing of note in 15 years. Last season was really fun, but, like, 1 playoff win and then the doors were blown off.

Without looking it up, can anyone name the team that finished 2nd overall 2 years ago? It's meaningless.

'A gritty centre' isn't going to fix things. There are fundamental issues with the roster that can only be addressed by the draft at this point.

Last year was the year to go all in and the Flames ended up with Fantenberg. When you have a shot you need to take it, because 7 months later the Flames look like they will miss the playoffs in maybe the weakest division in the league.

There is nothing worth saving about this group.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The flames don't have a young core.

Monahan is 25. Lindholm is 25. Gaudreau is 26. Compared to yours and my old asses that's young, but have you looked around the league lately? O'Reilly had already established himself as a premiere 3 zone player by 25. Brayden Schenn was a 70 point 3 zone wrecking ball by age 26. Is Monahan as good as either of those guys? Does he look to be on that trajectory now? Tarasenko was a 4 time 30 goal scorer by the time he was 26.

Tkachuk is the only member of the core group who is young. I suppose Hanifin, but I don't consider him a core member considering he looks expendable now.

But the Flames Bridged Tkachuk, so he's probably gone in 3 years anyway.

Also, that core group has never shown much of anything so I don't understand the idea that they are good either.

Sometimes I feel like I've been watching a different team than you guys. The Flames have done absolutely nothing of note in 15 years. Last season was really fun, but, like, 1 playoff win and then the doors were blown off.

Without looking it up, can anyone name the team that finished 2nd overall 2 years ago? It's meaningless.

'A gritty centre' isn't going to fix things. There are fundamental issues with the roster that can only be addressed by the draft at this point.

Last year was the year to go all in and the Flames ended up with Fantenberg. When you have a shot you need to take it, because 7 months later the Flames look like they will miss the playoffs in maybe the weakest division in the league.

There is nothing worth saving about this group.

Where would he be going? And why?

[thefoss1957]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Refs had a tough game again. Not sure how they missed the Hawk that tripped two guys in 3 seconds.

I don't think that the refs were going to call ANYTHING in the last 5 minutes. Sure there were trips, but, neither was as egregious as Lucic crosschecking Murphy with about 3 minutes left. Even TheScorpion claimed to be surprised by the non-call in the GT.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

I don't think that the refs were going to call ANYTHING in the last 5 minutes. Sure there were trips, but, neither was as egregious as Lucic crosschecking Murphy with about 3 minutes left. Even TheScorpion claimed to be surprised by the non-call in the GT.

Sure, not saying the refs cost the Flames the game. They lost it all by themselves.

But the refs did struggle.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Where would he be going? And why?

Anywhere that isn't in the cellar of the league because they've bottomed out without an appropriate rebuild.

What is the draw to stay in Calgary, exactly?

[Harry Lime]

Wow, the negativity. So, who is worth building around, in a re-tool?

My list :
Monahan (has really worked on his 200ft game, is more physical. Best yet to come)
Tkachuk (consistency issues, but all of the talent is there)
Lindholm (prototypical can do everything player)
Dube (highest upside of the forward ELC group that's not Tkachuk)
Ryan (untouchable til the end of his contract, great 3rd line c)

Andersson (talent and drive)
Hanafin (easy to forget that he is the age of most rookies)
Kylington (best skater on team)
Valimaki (too much potential to ignore)

Rittich (closest to #1 since Kipper)

So, 1/2/3C 1/2LW 1/2/3/4 D and a goalie. If you were to blow everything up and build around that core, you are still doing well in my estimation. It's not as grim as it looks.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The flames don't have a young core.

Monahan is 25. Lindholm is 25. Gaudreau is 26. Compared to yours and my old asses that's young, but have you looked around the league lately? O'Reilly had already established himself as a premiere 3 zone player by 25. Brayden Schenn was a 70 point 3 zone wrecking ball by age 26. Is Monahan as good as either of those guys? Does he look to be on that trajectory now? Tarasenko was a 4 time 30 goal scorer by the time he was 26.

Tkachuk is the only member of the core group who is young. I suppose Hanifin, but I don't consider him a core member considering he looks expendable now.

But the Flames Bridged Tkachuk, so he's probably gone in 3 years anyway.

Also, that core group has never shown much of anything so I don't understand the idea that they are good either.

Sometimes I feel like I've been watching a different team than you guys. The Flames have done absolutely nothing of note in 15 years. Last season was really fun, but, like, 1 playoff win and then the doors were blown off.

Without looking it up, can anyone name the team that finished 2nd overall 2 years ago? It's meaningless.

'A gritty centre' isn't going to fix things. There are fundamental issues with the roster that can only be addressed by the draft at this point.

Last year was the year to go all in and the Flames ended up with Fantenberg. When you have a shot you need to take it, because 7 months later the Flames look like they will miss the playoffs in maybe the weakest division in the league.

There is nothing worth saving about this group.

Your views are pretty binary
"All in" or "Re-build"
"only can be addressed by the draft"

The reality is that there is more variability year to year in the NHL than ever before. The idea that they need to strip it down to the Tkachuk only bones seems a bit extreme.

What the organization needs to assess is which players they think are part of the roster going forward and which can be used to extract value.

But i don't see thinks as nearly "This or that" as you do.

[dammage79]

Is painting a dystopian future for the Flames being considered "being realistic" now?

No one wants to be here, everyone will leave. Team is forever doomed to suck because they wont do it this way or that way or my way.

It's not a good season. Especially coming off a nice lightning in a bottle regular season last year. It really makes things worse than they are.

Reality is the parity in this league is so close that you can in fact o e year be the best and then moss the playoffs the next
It's the nature of this cap era.

Few teams go full scorched earth rebuild anymore.
I think depending on how this season ends ( still half a season to watch unfold), we will see some form of cut into the core. How deep depends on the final results of the year

It's been a weird year. Starting with the offseason where the team just wanted one more roll of the dice with pretty much everyone back. It hasnt gone to well.

I still say you keep drafting. Dont trade picks. Build a stronger base to build on. Worst case scenario is you have too many player assets.

Anywho. It's pretty glum no doubt, watching this team this year. But projecting the future as dystopian as some of you are making it out to be. Easy to be consumed by negativity.

[Robbob]

Missed the game and skimming through the PGT I see Brodie left or didn't play. Was he injured or something? Any info?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Missed the game and skimming through the PGT I see Brodie left or didn't play. Was he injured or something? Any info?

Just sick

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Just sick

Oh good, the Flames are a better team with him so that is good news he won't miss any more games.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Anywhere that isn't in the cellar of the league because they've bottomed out without an appropriate rebuild.

What is the draw to stay in Calgary, exactly?

You have made some valid arguments re the construction of the Flames.

The bolded part is a flat out unsubstantiated embellishment.

Secondly, Tkachuk is a big production, character and leadership piece. He will be highly valued and paid market value by the Flames after this contract, should he continue to ameliorate.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Anywhere that isn't in the cellar of the league because they've bottomed out without an appropriate rebuild.

What is the draw to stay in Calgary, exactly?

Who knows? Thats 3 years away.

I know this though, he is the one guy that if I am GM, I am not letting go. He will be RFA with arb rights at that point, but I dont let it get that far. By then he will likely be established as either a top tier NHL player/captain type guy, or as a secondary piece who will be much coveted.

I mean, he just turned 22. He is a guy you build around much like Monahan/Gaudreau were. 4 years ago would you be saying that ^^^ about those 2? Of course not.

Yes the team needs some change, but suggesting they go scorched earth is just silliness.

Move a core guy (maybe 2 depending on what you consider core) this off season and graduate a couple others to fill gaps we are seeing this season, and go from there.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by timbit

You have made some valid arguments re the construction of the Flames.

The bolded part is a flat out unsubstantiated embellishment.

Secondly, Tkachuk is a big production, character and leadership piece. He will be highly valued and paid market value by the Flames after this contract, should he continue to ameliorate.

Someone got a word of the day calendar for Xmas!
I had to look that one up.

[dammage79]

And early yet to be saying I was right in my pre season predictions. But Ritter is looking eerily similar to last year where he may be only good for X amount of games before hes used up. Doesnt mean we dont get awesomeness out of him but looking more like a 1b (lighter workload) who would pair extremely well with a Lehner or Crawford. I called that Ritter would do the put of gas thing and Talbot would gradually take over the net. We will see how this finishes.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Someone got a word of the day calendar for Xmas!
I had to look that one up.

You didn't know timbit is refulgent and crafty as a wordsmith?

But he is CP's own egghead, so its all good!

[timbit]

Originally Posted by transplant99

You didn't know timbit is refulgent and crafty as a wordsmith?

But he is CP's own egghead, so its all good!

Another illuminating Latin derivative.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Your views are pretty binary
"All in" or "Re-build"
"only can be addressed by the draft"

The reality is that there is more variability year to year in the NHL than ever before. The idea that they need to strip it down to the Tkachuk only bones seems a bit extreme.

What the organization needs to assess is which players they think are part of the roster going forward and which can be used to extract value.

But i don't see thinks as nearly "This or that" as you do.

This is jargon, Jiri. Corporate speak to say nothing at all.

We both used to laugh at the idea of a flames 're-tool', so what's changed? Do you need things to bottom out Iginla-Flames style to see what's right in front of you? This core group hasn't accomplished anything and they look like they will struggle to make the playoffs this year.

What is worth saving? Isn't this core group stalling out enough evidence for you that you need to build through the draft?

Even the blues team that just won the cup essentially tore things down after a conference final appearance 3 years prior.

Out:

Paul Stastny
David Backes (Captain)
Kevin Shattenkirk
Troy Brouwer
Patrik Berglund
Ryan Reeves
Brian Elliott
Sobotka

If you're not contending, you're rebuilding. Doing anything in between is Calgary Flames mediocrity. Moving 1st round picks for players that get you to the playoffs is mismanagement. Moving 1st round picks for elite level talent is good management.

Hard to put a finer point on it than that. If you think Treliving took over in year 1 of the rebuild, well, it's year 6, the rebuild is over, and the team looks to be on the decline. This isn't worth salvaging.

Again, I wonder what hockey people have been watching. Last year was fun, but this organization has less 7 playoff wins in 6 years. There is basically no difference between Tre's tenure and Feasters or Sutters at this point. A whole lot of nothing, mixed in with a couple of league wide embarrassments and underachieving hype.

If you think the Flames have a chance like the Blues, we're talking a 3 year concerted effort of rebuilding through trades and stockpiling of assets. If you look at that list of players the Blues traded and walked away from and compare their role to the Flames, there isn't much left besides tkachuk.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by AC

What's striking to me these last 2 seasons has been how the style of attack changes dramatically when we need some goals late.

Instead of making East to West passes in the neutral and offensive zones or dumping and chasing, someone just takes control and drives wide to establish possession. We get the pucks to the point for tips/screens/rebounds, or else pass it down low for a stuff attempt / pass through the crease / pass into the slot.

Seems like when we do make that change we've been dominant. Is there an obvious reason why that isn't the style of attack normally?

It's my hope that whatever style of play CGY coaches want to employ the players buy in totally and execute. However and I could be totally wrong and don't know what the hell I'm talking about, the style they are using right now is too much like the Gulutzan era.

I have to admit I didn't really watch much of the CHI game or VAN game but I knew it from the EDM (which they won) that it was reminiscent of the end of the Gulutzan era style.

The D to D passes would go up to a stationary winger who would chip it in. This is what Gulutzan did and I see Ward doing the same. I don't think giving up possession of the puck is playing to the team's strength:

Take the Edmonton game:
Mangiapane's first goal definitely was from great plays from Tkachuk (hit) and Lindholm (quick pass) but those weren't the key play on that goal. RNH retrieved the the CGY chip in and mishandled it - then Tkachuk hit him. That play and this style is dependent on the opponent making mistakes or CGY forcing them into mistakes rather than CGY creating offense by making plays with the puck.

Tkachuk's goal in the game was similar - Great play by Mangiapane but only came about because the puck skipped over Nurse's stick at the blueline - without that error CGY does not even get a chance.

This chip and chase game is too simple and doesn't allow for the strength of this roster to shine: Hockey IQ ie creativity. I think you can play too simple and it detracts from winning.

CGY is a skilled fast team that is at it's best when they are making plays. The hold on to pucks, gain zone entries and let their creativity shine make plays. D to D for a chip works good when the opponent can't make clean plays in their end but when they do CGY plays the entire game chasing the play.

I think Ward saw that early on this year CGY was not making the same quality transition plays as beginning of last year. The exits were not clean, the forwards were not getting the puck in stride or they were not able to take a great transition pass and make plays (opponents were countering) so Ward wanted the puck out of his end and into the offensive zone as fast as possible:

D to D then up for chip. I can understand the rationale but this is not playing to the strength of the team. It feels like playing to minimize mistakes or turnovers but it is actually too far and it's taking away from the team's ability to take the attack to the opponent. Create offense. Make plays in a sustainable way that doesn't rely or focus on mistakes. I think that is not an aggressive, assertive style of play that dictates or takes control of the game. Rather its a worry about mistakes style of play.