[GT] GM Craig Conroy Live in Studio with Robb Kerr

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Which was not the point I was responding to in the first place. I was correcting the factually inaccurate claim that "those old teams do not win in hockey."


Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

But they aren't old.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

There was no talk of Kylington, but everything we have seen this summer indicates that he is currently training, and will be back for camp in the Fall.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Ya. I saw that too. But he has missed an entire season of play plus overcoming what kept him out in the first place. Hoping he’s back to his old self but is that reasonable to count on that is my question. LD is looking thin. Prob for another thread but was hoping the plans for the blueline came up.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Redrum

But they aren't old.

Based on the metric provided by the poster to whom I was responding, yes, they are:

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Having all your best players in their 30’s is a recipe for disaster.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Fun fact: most of the Stanley Cup champion's best players are in their thirties.
Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I'd love to see some data on this for the last decade.

I'll answer my own question here. A team with an average age over 27.5 winning the stanely cup is definitely an exception. Vegas, however had an average age of 28.1. I'm not sure how relevant this average age is to the argument that an older core can win the cup. But this data suggests that having a lot of young players is common amongst teams that win it all.






https://novacapsfans.com/2023/04/19/...022-23-season/


https://www.canadasportsbetting.ca/w...RS-1-digit.png

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They literally missed the playoffs 2 seasons ago.

The year Jack Eichel missed 48 games coming off major surgery? Mark Stone missed 45 games. Alec Martinez missed 56 games. Brett Howden missed 35 games. William Karlsson missed 15 games. Reilly Smith missed 26 games. Max Pacioretty missed 43 games. Brayden McNabb missed 13 games. Zach Whitecloud missed 23 games. Nicolas Hague missed 30 games.


I guess their 7 playoff series wins in 4 years leading up to that injury plagued season means nothing.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Which was not the point I was responding to in the first place. I was correcting the factually inaccurate claim that "those old teams do not win in hockey."


Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if you look at cup winners over the past decade, their core players are below 30 or maybe just turned 30.

[jayswin]

Yeah, this is a weird reach to suggest the Flames are doing things the right way bu pointing to Vegas. Signing 3-5 players to retirement contracts that start at 29-32 while not currently contending for the Cup is not good by any metric.

The Vegas comparisons are hilarious.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you...

Ya think?

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Yeah, this is a weird reach to suggest the Flames are doing things the right way bu pointing to Vegas. Signing 3-5 players to retirement contracts that start at 29-32 while not currently contending for the Cup is not good by any metric.

The Vegas comparisons are hilarious.

No one is "reaching," and no one is suggesting that "the Flames are doing things the right way by pointing to Vegas."
The ONLY thing at issue here was the false notion that teams with a significant number of core-players over 30-years-old cannot win the Stanley Cup.


Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[Redrum]

I don't think anyone had a problem with 30 yr olds. Just beginning multiple 8 yr, high dollar contracts at 30. Meaning we would more worried about 35+, which Vegas isn't. They also had a much better reason to gamble.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Redrum

I don't think anyone had a problem with 30 yr olds. Just beginning multiple 8 yr, high dollar contracts at 30. Meaning we would more worried about 35+, which Vegas isn't. They also had a much better reason to gamble.

Yep, seemed pretty clear to me. If you're mentioning Vegas in relation to Calgary, like so many have since the Cup win, them it's obvious you're making a comparison. If you're just saying "yes, a team with some 30+ players can win a Cup, then yes....they can.

The nuance obviously being where they're at in their contender build, and which players are 30+ and how far into their contracts are they.

"A team can win a cup with players in their 30's" is utterly meaningless without nuance. I mean looking at that simple question - How many teams have won a cup without players in their 30's?

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

No one is "reaching," and no one is suggesting that "the Flames are doing things the right way by pointing to Vegas."
The ONLY thing at issue here was the false notion that teams with a significant number of core-players over 30-years-old cannot win the Stanley Cup.


Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Well if we're not using Vegas as a comparable then can you list a bunch of other examples? Teams that have majority or a handful of key players above 30.

[PeteMoss]

Average age is completely meaningless. You need to weigh it by ice time or something of meaning.

The Flames will likely drop their average age this year because Stone retired and the 7th/8th defenseman will be someone younger. That person will still barely play.

Washington is one of the youngest teams on that list but nearly all of their most important players were older than that average age - Ovi, Backstrom, Oshie, Eller, Carlson, Holtby, Niskanen. The only younger players who made a big impact will Wilson, Orlov, Wilson.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Average age is completely meaningless. You need to weigh it by ice time or something of meaning.

The Flames will likely drop their average age this year because Stone retired and the 7th/8th defenseman will be someone younger. That person will still barely play.

Washington is one of the youngest teams on that list but nearly all of their most important players were older than that average age - Ovi, Backstrom, Oshie, Eller, Carlson, Holtby, Niskanen. The only younger players who made a big impact will Wilson, Orlov, Wilson.

Oh totally, it is far from a perfect representation, I said as much in my OP. I would love it if something else wanted to do data collection for the average age of top line players age and playoff contribution. I don't think it would show data that is all that different.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

Hartley might not be a great coach, but he's most definitely wasn't an awful coach. And worst coach in Flames history?


I'll raise you Greg Gilbert, Glen Gulutzan and Brent Sutter!

Don Hay too!

[CKPThunder]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Listening to the interview, Conroy references a player the Flames liked who was selected one pick ahead of their own pick early in the draft. That player has gone on to be really good. Without having looked, yet. I wonder who that was?

That was a good interview to listen to. I enjoy listening to Conroy.

As for the pick, my guess it was Filip Forsberg in 2012 which made the Flames pivot towards Jankowski and trade their pick to Buffalo in hopes of getting him later in the first.

Or maybe it was Lindholm?

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by CKPThunder

That was a good interview to listen to. I enjoy listening to Conroy.

As for the pick, my guess it was Filip Forsberg in 2012 which made the Flames pivot towards Jankowski and trade their pick to Buffalo in hopes of getting him later in the first.

Or maybe it was Lindholm?

My bet would be Dawson Mercer. Rumors had Calgary loving that kid, and he ended up going at 18. We had pick 19 - and then proceeded to trade down not only once, but twice, ultimately selecting Zary.

[FanIn80]

I think using Vegas as any kind of real metric for measuring a championship team is dangerous. Not every team can put Mark Stone on IRL and use that cap relief to acquire Jack Eichel and then have them all active at the same time in the playoffs. Couple that with them only having to beat WPG, EDM, DAL (with the Markstorm version of Oettinger) and then a beat up and cooled off Eastern champ that had to sit around for two weeks before the Finals started.

Like, I'm just saying Vegas was good... but they had a lot of things go their way as well. I'm not certain I'd be trying to copy them too much.

[Huntingwhale]

Loved the interview. Put it on this morning and those 2 hours just flew by. Could listen to him speak all day. I did notice, like other said, some of Kerr's interuptions. But wasn't all the bothered by it, as he seemed excited to have him on and did a good job directing the flow.

I don't know if Connie's tenure as GM will work out the way we all hope, but I sure a #### will be rooting hard for him. I just pray if things go sour one day, the fanbase doesn't turn on him. What a solid dude. Don't think I've ever wanted a Flames GM to have more success than him.

[FanIn80]

I like that he talks about involving lots of people in his decisions, making sure he's getting help and/or perspectives. I also like that he gives of a "but it's my decision in the end" vibe to go with it. I was worried that he'd just be the face of a "GM by Committee," which does seem like a very Flames-esque thing to do. I'm much more relieved after watching his demeanor in interviews since the announcement though.