Mark Giordano as Captain

[dino7c]

every time the team struggles we seem to blame the few guys who actually play decent more often than not

[1991 Canadian]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

With the Flames dreadful home record last year and this embarrassing loss, when does Harvey the Hound start being held accountable. All of these home embarrassments happened under his encouragement

You joke, but the way Harvey bangs the drum is completely out of rhythm with the typical Go Flames Go chant. It's way too fast. I think you're right in finally calling him out.

[joejoe3]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

You joke, but the way Harvey bangs the drum is completely out of rhythm with the typical Go Flames Go chant. It's way too fast. I think you're right in finally calling him out.

Deep inside he's crying for help.

*Bang Bang Bang*
Get - Me - Out

*Bang Bang Bang*
Get - Me - Out

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

You joke, but the way Harvey bangs the drum is completely out of rhythm with the typical Go Flames Go chant. It's way too fast. I think you're right in finally calling him out.

I think what your saying is, in some cultures it's acceptable to eat dog.

[kman35ca]

I honestly don’t know what’s wrong with me this team, but something isn’t right. Especially if they blow it again tomorrow.

I got a sneaky suspicion some of our more talented players feel a touch to comfortable. I also think, while it’s great to have a room full of “Great guys.”

Which I interpret as really nice guys. I think they just don’t have enough nasty side to them. And I see this in our GM also. Why the hell would he even think bringing Hamilton’s brother here last year to help make Dougie feel more “Comfortable.” That just reeks of entitlement.

Now He does that for Hamilton, what do you think he might be doing with other star players on this team? I really don’t know. But I have heard a lot about how some guys love to party on this team. I know that’s not new amongst players.

As for Gio, I think he is an amazing player, and has a heart of gold. Love the guy. But do we have an overly passive team? Are players more worried about hurting someone’s feelings, rather than being honest with them?

Idk, just something isn’t right with this core. Maybe they’ll come out tomorrow and go on a run. Maybe this will wake them up and they’ll start playing with pride.

I’m just highly sceptical. And I think we will continue this Dr Jekyll Mr Hyde play.

I’m calling it now. This team will not be a contender, until we get a new GM, probably coach too, even though I don’t mind Peters. And trade some of our top players. And do a mini rebuild.

Hope they make me eat my words, but I’m convinced something to do with the core of this team is rotten.

[Diemenz]

I think comfortability is the bloody last thing that the players feel

1. ####ty Arena....like one of the ####tiest in the league? Yep
2. Uncertainty of the future in Calgary? Yep
3. Facilities that rival high schools in the states? Yep
4. A fan base that overreacts to everything and is consistently negative*? Yep
*Calgary loses 9-1 and the entire front page is riddled with negative, ridiculous threads; and yes players do read this site and social media and it does impact them. Think about if you read on a daily basis how crappy you were at your job and how you should be fired....Even if you are 0.16% of the population who can actually do your job. These players are human beings and regardless of how much you get paid you have feelings and those feelings will impact your performance.

I work for a private equity company and every time we start digging into acquiring a company or asset that company or assets performance drops...EVERY SINGLE TIME. This is because the staff all the way to the executive team all start getting worried about where they are going to be next year and what role they will have in the future.

The players aren't comfortable. Not at all.


Edit: This thread belongs in the garbage.

[Brick]

Many of the players are far too comfortable losing. They get paid an average 3.3 million per year, win or lose. There is very little anyone can do to hold them accountable.

What many players really do care about the most are things related to the money that they make, not actually hockey. It's like they've won the lottery.

It's mostly the fans that aren't comfortable when they lose.

[Brick]

Of course there are also players that do care if they win. Not all of those players have the necessary talent. Some teams are loaded with talented players that strive to win.

There aren't a lot of teams in that category. Quite an imbalance in the NHL really, when it comes down to it. So many teams are destined for mediocrity in perpetuity.

[Erick Estrada]

This is a tough one because Gio is still a good player and when he first became captain you could see some positive shift in the way the Flames battled harder. That's been lost over the years and I do believe the effects of the team captain are overblown but it would be nice to have a bit of a hot head every once in a while to strike fear into players that mediocrity just isn't good enough. That was an issue under nice guy Gulutzan but from what I have heard Gio has started to fall into the Iginla nice guy, silent leader follow by example territory and I'm not sure if that's what some of these young players need. I didn't like Hartley's system but I do think this team really needed to be whipped constantly to get their best. Maybe Peters can push the right buttons but these players need to get conditioned to not accept losing or they are never going to take that step forward we have been waiting for.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Lindholm and Hanifin have just as many tools in their belt as Ferland and Hamilton do.

Agree to disagree. The guys we traded away had size, speed, skill, and dynamic shots. The guys we got back are far closer to the average NHL player in terms of tools. They're decent skill players, but both smaller, both worse shooters, not necessarily better playmakers, and in the case of Lindholm not faster. Hanifin is faster than Hamilton but seems to struggle with defending the rush which makes his skating a bit useless. If they turn out the better acquisitions in the long term, that's awesome, but in the short term we seem to have downgraded.

Hamonic was brought in to be a steady #3/4, and that is what he is. Price paid and structure of the deal (non-lottery protection) can be disputed, but let's be honest about the player and his role when we do revisit it.

Hamonic isn't a #3 on any half decent team in the league. And with just how weak his offensive game was last year, he may not be a guy you want in your top four D.

I assume you're talking about Backlund, but it's strange to see 'lead-footed' associated with him. He's not the fleetest of foot, but this is the first time I've seen his skating targeted. The Flames don't have a lot to work with at the center position, but I feel Backlund has been a reliable 2 A/B type of player that can play up and down the ice.

I wasn't talking about Backlund. Come on now, lead-footed center who we're building around. You can put two and 2C together.

Even with all we know, Derek Ryan is still a bit of a wildcard IMO. I knew what I was supposed to expect, and we all know what he is capable of, but he's a small sample size with no consistent track record. Term was concerning given this, but it's up to the player to prove that those tools and skills carry westward.

How's he a wild card? He's a soft bottom six center who might give you 35 points and seems to offer little else in terms of intangibles. He's not terrible but I think what I said is a fair assessment.

Ok, what? You can prove that 31 other teams had zero interest in James Neal? Can we please be honest with respect to stuff like this?

A perennial 20-30 goal scorer with an edge that has played in the last 2 Stanley Cup Finals. Nobody wants him?

I'm willing to assume nobody wanted Neal at the salary and term Treliving signed him for. You think he signed in Calgary because he thought we were a cup contender?

Of course plenty would take him at a discounted rate and with less term. But that wasn't what I was referring to.

Though slightly overpaid, Stone has been every bit as advertised. He's been far from shaky in the #5/6 role he's been asked to play, and surprisingly effective when thrust into the #4 role.

Agree to disagree. Stone's not an awful 3rd pair defenseman, but he's not a guy who anchors a strong third pair either and he's not a guy you want in your top four.

Everyone wants and loves the mantra of always earned, never given. This is a prime example. Kulak fell down the depth chart, and didn't look any steadier or more reliable than any of the players he was competing with.

He was the odd man out in the end, and instead of sitting him or losing him for nothing Treliving gave him the opportunity he wanted to make an impact in Montreal.

You are talking about preseason. Remember how Jon Gillies "outplayed" Rittich in preseason?

Body of work matters and Kulak's body of work is very much that of a steady player, and while I'm not dissatisfied with Valimaki's play, it was and remains a huge gamble especially now that we're about to burn a year on Valimaki's deal and the results don't seem to suggest it has helped.

Let's be intellectually honest, if Kulak weren't on a one-way deal Treliving didn't want to pay for, he would already have been "called up" by now and playing in our top six.

Let's be intellectually honest and stifle the revisionist hyperbole when discussing these things.

I am being intellectually honest. Giordano's not the GM who put together a flawed roster. I don't think the roster is the worst in the league, but they're 5-5-0, not 2-8-0 so if you're going to create a reactionary thread about Giordano's leadership weigh what they "should" be to what they "are". They "should" maybe be 6-4-0 based on talent and they're a game below that pace which is basically just variance.

If my opinion of certain players bothers people, I can live with that.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Agree to disagree. The guys we traded away had size, speed, skill, and dynamic shots. The guys we got back are far closer to the average NHL player in terms of tools. They're decent skill players, but both smaller, both worse shooters, not necessarily better playmakers, and in the case of Lindholm not faster. Hanifin is faster than Hamilton but seems to struggle with defending the rush which makes his skating a bit useless. If they turn out the better acquisitions in the long term, that's awesome, but in the short term we seem to have downgraded.

Not sure how you figure that. It seems from every objective view the trade has been a wash so far. Both Ferland and Lindholm have found a groove on their new clubs, and both Hamilton and Hanifin are experiencing an adjustment period.

They aren't small players and they have just as much speed. Ferland plays with an edge, but Lindholm is more offensively equipped and has more creativity. Plus he can take faceoffs. Hanifin is the best skater in the trade and moves the puck up-ice better. Hamilton has the better shot and offensive instincts. Both struggle in their own end at times.

Different styles and skillsets, but just as dynamic.

Hamonic isn't a #3 on any half decent team in the league. And with just how weak his offensive game was last year, he may not be a guy you want in your top four D.

But he wasn't brought into the Flames fold to play on another team. He was brought in to be a shut-down #3/4 on the Flames, and that is what he is.

I wasn't talking about Backlund. Come on now, lead-footed center who we're building around. You can put two and 2C together.

Come on what? Backlund is the best definition of a 2C. Monahan, by every metric, is a #1 center in this league, and is the undisputed #1 center on the Flames.

And if anything this team is being built around Gaudreau.

How's he a wild card? He's a soft bottom six center who might give you 35 points and seems to offer little else in terms of intangibles. He's not terrible but I think what I said is a fair assessment.

I explained why I formulated that opinion - sparse history, came on late in his career, etc. His contract is in the ballpark for what he can bring. Now it's up to the player to perform consistently.

I'm less concerned about the Ryan signing than I have been of others in the past.

I'm willing to assume nobody wanted Neal at the salary and term Treliving signed him for. You think he signed in Calgary because he thought we were a cup contender?

Of course plenty would take him at a discounted rate and with less term. But that wasn't what I was referring to.

I believe he thought what Iginla thought when he signed in Colorado. He saw a team with a lot of skilled young players on the cusp of breaking out. He could be a leader on and off the ice, while still putting up at least 20 goals from the right side. Everything the Flames needed.

I'm not going to assume anything regarding interest and dollar figures, but a player of his caliber, experience, and skill set would almost certainly have been in demand on July 1. To definitively say no one else wanted him is highly unlikely.

Agree to disagree. Stone's not an awful 3rd pair defenseman, but he's not a guy who anchors a strong third pair either and he's not a guy you want in your top four.

Ideally Stone should not be playing a top 4 role, I agree. However, he is an excellent option in the #5/6. The pairings got noticeably better (though admittedly not good enough) when they split up the rookies, and that is a part of Stone being able to reign in his partner.

And every time he has had to move up the lineup, either due to injury or line shuffling, I think he's been damn reliable and exceeded my expectations. I have no problem with Stone anchoring a third pairing.

You are talking about preseason. Remember how Jon Gillies "outplayed" Rittich in preseason?

Body of work matters and Kulak's body of work is very much that of a steady player, and while I'm not dissatisfied with Valimaki's play, it was and remains a huge gamble especially now that we're about to burn a year on Valimaki's deal and the results don't seem to suggest it has helped.

Let's be intellectually honest, if Kulak weren't on a one-way deal Treliving didn't want to pay for, he would already have been "called up" by now and playing in our top six.

With Peters' tendency to shuffle and mix I have no doubt Kulak would have been tried somewhere in the last 10 games. That said, outside of his first camp and season where he won a spot, Kulak hasn't been all that impressive. A serviceable #6/7, but those are a dime a dozen.

I don't believe Kulak would have made any positive impact to the results we have seen so far. We won't miss him.

I am being intellectually honest. Giordano's not the GM who put together a flawed roster. I don't think the roster is the worst in the league, but they're 5-5-0, not 2-8-0 so if you're going to create a reactionary thread about Giordano's leadership weigh what they "should" be to what they "are". They "should" maybe be 6-4-0 based on talent and they're a game below that pace which is basically just variance.

If my opinion of certain players bothers people, I can live with that.

That's fine, but claims like Lindholm/Hanifin being less dynamic, Hamonic being a bottom pairing guy, and no one wanted James Neal really give off a vibe of hyperbole and revisionism in the wake of poor results. IMO those statements are objectively false.

I was the most excited for a season to begin since I was in 2006-2007, and it had everything to do with the roster and coaching changes. This is a strong roster on paper, and now the players have to step up and prove it.