[Signing] Flames sign James Neal (5 years, 5.75 AAV)

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

The question was asked “which player is worse”.

Wasn’t I just answering the question?

Clearly, under my way of thinking Neal would be the worse player to have.

I’m very confused!

Aren’t we playing pretend? You’re assuming Flames keep Brouwer, don’t buy him out and don’t sign Neal.

So I ask you again. Would you take back everything in the offseason just so they avoid signing Neal?

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Also, if you want to pin any detriment on one player, it has to be Mike Smith, not Neal.

But under your Neal argument: if playing Smith in net as much as we have means we get to have this good of a season, you’d absolutely do it..

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Aren’t we playing pretend? You’re assuming Flames keep Brouwer, don’t buy him out and don’t sign Neal.

So I ask you again. Would you take back everything in the offseason just so they avoid signing Neal?

I’m answering the question that was posed. It was who’s the better player now?

I laid out my rational for Brouwer being the better option. No hypotheticals, just an answer to a question that was asked. Somehow you’ve taken it on a massive tangent involving Lindholm et al, and I’m not sure why.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

But under your Neal argument: if the flames were having this good of a season, you’d absolutely have smith in net occasionally.

Well, they are having this good of a season, and they've had Smith in net occasionally. I'd like to change that going forward, just like I'd explore opportunities to replace Neal going forward... but we've gotten to this spot with Neal and Smith. That's a fact.

It's easier to pin losses directly on goaltenders, and the evidence about Smith's misplays is irrevocable compared to Neal's purported struggles. We can easily examine goals against; it's hard to assess individual shifts when there are maybe 15-20 a game. But based on my viewing, Smith has directly contributed to the Flames' losses this year far more than Neal has. I'm sure much of this board would agree. You may not, and that's fine -- it's your opinion.

However, because of my opinion, I think it's easier to say that the Flames would be better up to now if they'd replaced Smith rather than if they hadn't signed Neal.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Well, they are having this good of a season, and they've had Smith in net occasionally. I'd like to change that going forward, just like I'd explore opportunities to replace Neal going forward.

It's easier to pin losses directly on goaltenders, and the evidence about Smith's misplays is irrevocable compared to Neal's purported struggles. We can easily examine goals against; it's hard to assess individual shifts when there are maybe 15-20 a game. But based on my viewing, Smith has directly contributed to the Flames' losses this year far more than Neal has. I'm sure much of this board would agree. You may not, and that's fine -- it's your opinion.

Sorry, you can’t move the goal posts. I didn’t force you to make that Neal argument (ie: we’re having success so you’re content with the Neal situation as long as the team success continues)

...and now you’re stuck having two different rules for two different players based simply on your subjective view of a player. Be consistent man!

[Phagoof]

I wonder if the Blues would take Neal and 2 1sts for Tarasenko. Tons of rumors of him being moved out.

Tkachuk-Backlund-Tarasenko would be a beauty of a second line and Tarasenko would "hopefully" accomplish what Neal was brought into do.

The only things I see right now wrong with this team are a second line that isn't always a threat offensively, and a 2nd competent goalie. The Flames have everything else.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Phagoof

I wonder if the Blues would take Neal and 2 1sts for Tarasenko.

Tkachuk-Backlund-Tarasenko would be a beauty of a second line and Tarasenko would "hopefully" accomplish what Neal was brought into do.

It’s an Interesting thought!

Would the flames take Lucic and two first for Lindholm? (or insert other comparable player instead).

Maybe that’s not a fair comparison as we’re not rebuilding

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

You don’t know me so I’d thank you for now pretending to know what I’m wanting

You put it in writing, for crying out loud. You were complaining about how bad Neal was going to be the day the Flames signed him, and you have posted about very little else in the six months since then. If Neal hadn't lived down to your expectations, you wouldn't have a thing to say.

And yes, the Flames absolutely brought out Brouwer to make room for Neal. Are you suggesting that would have signed Neal if they hadn’t brought out Brouwer?

The Flames bought out Brouwer because he was so bad that they would rather pay him good money to play against them. The decision to spend their available cap space on Neal, instead of some other player, had nothing to do with that.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

Sorry, you can’t move the goal posts. I didn’t force you to make that Neal argument (ie: we’re having success so you’re content with the Neal situation as long as the team success continues)

...and now your stuck having two different rules for two different players based simply on your subjective view of a player. Be consistent man!

I'm confused that you think I've moved the goalposts. I completely agree with that argument that you've assigned to me. If the team continues to be successful, then of course signing James Neal was worth it, because team success is more important than individual success.

Mike Smith is a goaltender. His position is completely alien from those of his skater counterparts. His statistics include a column for "losses." It is far easier to assign blame to him. As an individual playing a very unique position, it is not ridiculous to say he can be assigned different criteria of blame.

Neal is but one of 12 players that have to combine to form an effective forward corps on any given night. Based on the fact that that forward corps has been one of the most offensive in the NHL, it's clearly been working, and as long as that continues to work, then there is no real need to pursue a replacement for James Neal.

However, at any given time on any given night, the Calgary Flames will only have one goaltender on the ice. Where 12 forwards can combine to be effective, Mike Smith is wholly responsible for the responsiblity assigned to a goaltender during the hockey games in which he plays. As such, it is far simpler to figure the level of his success.

Where James Neal has been a part of a very effective forward corps which has not proven to be an area to address, Mike Smith, as an individual, has played exceptionally poorly. In short, while James Neal may not individually be performing well as a forward, the forward group is, so it is not especially pressing to address.

However, Mike Smith is an individual playing a very individual position that has a far greater impact on the outcome of one game than the play of one individual forward. His statistics indicate that he is one of the very worst goaltenders in the National Hockey League. James Neal has not come as advertised, but he is not near being the worst forward; instead, he has simply been maddeningly average.

James Neal's averageness has not cost the Calgary Flames points, in a way that can be easily identified. Mike Smith's penchant for allowing some terribly inopportune goals against can be identified as a trait severely deleterious to the Calgary Flames' record thus far.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You just said what you were wanting. You put it in writing, for crying out loud. It doesn't take a mind-reader to know what you wrote in plain declarative English sentences.

Show me where I said I just wanted Neal to fail.

You said that “I just wanted Neal to fail”...show me where I put it in writing!

Hey, I’m waiting....

Still waiting...

I can see you’re on-line, still waiting...

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Neal's averageness has not cost the Calgary Flames points, in a way that can be easily identified. Mike Smith's penchant for allowing some terribly inopportune goals against can be identified as a trait severely deleterious to the Calgary Flames' record thus far. .

He’s a -12. There are numerous games (even tonight) where his averageness cost points. The miss on the 2on0. The poor defensive efforts and his awful fit on PP2.

He scores that goal tonight and the flames likely get a point. I agree smith was the main culprit and he needs to go...but blending Neal’s performances in with the success of 13, 19,23 and 28 is a bridge way too far for me.

There aren’t many back up goalies 3 games above .500, if you want to make the argument that the goalie tandem is working as a unit. I don’t want to make that argument, because I think it’s a ridiculous argument. Just like blending Neal in with the rest of the forwards.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

He’s a -12. There are numerous games (even tonight) where his averageness cost points. The miss on the 2on0. The poor defensive efforts and his awful fit on PP2.

He scores that goal tonight and the flames likely get a point. I agree smith was the main culprit and he needs to go...but blending Neal’s performances in with the success of 13, 19,23 and 28 is a bridge way too far for me.

There aren’t many back up goalies 3 games above .500, if you want to make the argument that the goalie tandem is working as a unit. I don’t want to make that argument, because I think it’s a ridiculous argument. Just like blending Neal in with the rest of the forwards.

The goaltender tandem isn't working as a unit because half of the tandem has been absolutely terrible on a routine basis. I'm not trying to say that Neal has been good, because he hasn't been. Using +/- undercuts your argument a little, but you're right about the 2-on-0 miss -- I was yelling at my television.

All that I'm saying is that if Brad Treliving is dissatisfied about anything this season, his first order of business has to be replacing Mike Smith. James Neal has been treading water, but Mike Smith drowned in November. Neal is like a broken car door on a Mustang -- it definitely doesn't look good, it might sacrifice some of the car's structural integrity, but at the end of the day, a Mustang with a damaged door can still go really fast.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

The goaltender tandem isn't working as a unit because half of the tandem has been absolutely terrible on a routine basis. I'm not trying to say that Neal has been good, because he hasn't been. Using +/- undercuts your argument a little, but you're right about the 2-on-0 miss -- I was yelling at my television.

All that I'm saying is that if Brad Treliving is dissatisfied about anything this season, his first order of business has to be replacing Mike Smith. James Neal has been treading water, but Mike Smith drowned in November. Neal is like a broken car door on a Mustang -- it definitely doesn't look good, it might sacrifice some of the car's structural integrity, but at the end of the day, a Mustang with a damaged door can still go really fast.

That was a lot of effort for us to just about agree with each other. Enjoyed the debate though!

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

That was a lot of effort for us to almost agree with each other. Enjoyed the debate though!

Of course. Although you might want to ease up before using the troll label next time.

Thanks for the discussion.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Of course. Although you might want to ease up before using the troll label next time.

Thanks for the discussion.

It was supposed to be tongue in cheek, please accept my apologies

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

I’m answering the question that was posed. It was who’s the better player now?

I laid out my rational for Brouwer being the better option. No hypotheticals, just an answer to a question that was asked. Somehow you’ve taken it on a massive tangent involving Lindholm et al, and I’m not sure why.

Not a massive tangent. You made your feelings on Neal quite clear.

I’m curious if it overrides your feelings for the offseason as a whole. But you don’t have to answer that question if you don’t want.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Not a massive tangent. You made your feelings on Neal quite clear.

I’m curious if it overrides your feelings for the offseason as a whole. But you don’t have to answer that question if you don’t want.

They Lindholm trade was excellent- very happy

BT makes great trades
BT makes bad FA signings

Overall I’m happy with the off season. But I’d be happier if Neal was eating popcorn on the odd occasion.

[Phagoof]

He should be sat on Sat. And then thrown back in and see how he responds. Czarnik and Dube both deserve to be in over him.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Phagoof

He should be sat on Sat. And then thrown back in and see how he responds. Czarnik and Dube both deserve to be in over him.

Make some calls, make it happen!

[Phagoof]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

Make some calls, make it happen!

Will do!

That 2 on 0 should of been an easy goal for any competent NHL winger. He missed a mile wide.

At least, Bennett would of shot it into the goalies chest and we would of got a offensive face off out of it.