Simplified Neal/Lucic trade Poll

[Bingo]

Should make for an interesting stats experiment.

[zamler]

Hate it because the deal bails out Edmonton if only in a symbolic way. Will be very happy to be wrong about Lucic but from what I saw of him last season the guy is washed up and simply too slow. Up until recently the vast majority of CP agreed with this, the turn around is quite interesting to say the least.

[Yrebmi]

I doubt it makes a lot of difference.
I voted dislike before - and not for the exact reason listed - still voted dislike now.

Seems like Neal had to go. So much like I dislike foul tasting medicine, I still accept it as a necessary evil.
Don't even mind getting Looch, just wanted Edmonton to pay a lot more than 15% and a conditional 3rd.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

I doubt it makes a lot of difference.
I voted dislike before - and not for the exact reason listed - still voted dislike now.

Seems like Neal had to go. So much like I dislike foul tasting medicine, I still accept it as a necessary evil.
Don't even mind getting Looch, just wanted Edmonton to pay a lot more than 15% and a conditional 3rd.

You're wrong then.

I've been told the old way swayed the votes, you can't possibly think the same given the massive change in the options.

[MolsonInBothHands]

It's a crap for crap trade, I wish the sweetener was more without conditions because I don't think the conditions get met. I hated both players last year, but I think Lucic has a better chance of playing a role on this team than Neal. The savings in cap space is nice and we also won't have to waste cap on Prout or Peluso.

[Locke]

Overall, I've come around.

Within the structure of this team Neal was expensive and useless. Lucic, pushed farther down the depth-chart because unlike the Oilers the Flames dont suck, he might be expensive but useful in some capacity and the money was spent either way.

It remains a doofus for doofus trade, but on this team Neal was completely useless whereas Lucic might do something? Maybe?

I get all the moving pieces involved overall, but there is at least some hope that Lucic might provide something, anything, more than Neal did. Which was nothing.

The contract is still terrible and I hope Treliving has a fallback plan so that it doesnt bite us in the ass come the expansion draft, but otherwise the trade boils down to:

"The hope of something, anything, in exchange for essentially nothing."

[Vinny01]

Again it is 2 failed marquee signings that have similar dollars and the same term remaining. I went indifferent. I think the flames will be slightly better with Lucic than they were with Neal. The reason I am hesitant to say I like the deal is because Neal could bounce back to being a 20-30 goal guy where I think 30pts would be the high mark for Looch

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

It's a crap for crap trade, I wish the sweetener was more without conditions because I don't think the conditions get met. I hated both players last year, but I think Lucic has a better chance of playing a role on this team than Neal. The savings in cap space is nice and we also won't have to waste cap on Prout or Peluso.

I hear this, but why?

Neal becomes their 4th best forward. A guy who ended his tenure here as a healthy scratch. Hes going to get tons more icetime and opportunity to provide absolutely nothing but muffin-goals just like McDavid.

Neal will produce, but it will come at the expense of guys like Chiasson and Kassian' production....whoop-de-doo. Same goals just scored by different doofuses. Doofi? James Neal? Either way.

I can easily see Neal outscoring Lucic by a wide margin because thats not what Lucic is here for or the role hes likely to play, but in Edmonton they had no choice. He was garbage but just marginally better than their other garbage. In Edmonton he was merely a shinier turd.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Moved my vote from indifferent to love it just to piss off those who were bitching about the last poll not being negative enough.

My god.

[GGG]

I'm excited. Thanks for doing this,

Will be interesting to see if the results change. Though by prejudicing the first poll and using the same sample you might not get a change a results (see me move the goal posts ).

Other interesting ways of phrasing the question would have been

The flames won the Lucic trade Strongly Agree / Agree/ Neutral/ Disagree / Strongly Disagree

or

The flames are in a better position after the Trade -- Agree/disagree

or a bunch of different ways to more or less ask the same thing but will give you slightly different results.

Also Can we get a poll on the Arena deal asking

If I were a city of Calgary councilor I would vote X on the Arena deal as currently presented on Monday Yes / No.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Love it, for the same reasons I outlined in the other thread.

Good riddance to the guy who coasted his way to being a healthy scratch. Enjoy your long offseasons, chump.

The new guy can’t be worse than he was playing in a movable dumpster with AHLers.

[FlamesAddiction]

I chose "like it" because there are things that i like about it and I am choosing to be positive.

But there are some aspects of it that I don't like.

So I am not indifferent, but rather conflicted I guess. You should have conflicted as an option.

[StAlbertFlame]

Neal Traded... Love it!
Neal Gone = Improvement for the Flames on the ice(addition by subtraction) and in the dressing room/chemistry
Neal as an Oiler = Potential to be much more that he was in Calgary, playing in their top 6... one can only hope that Neal does not achieve that potential.

Lucic arrives with Flames = added toughness and size plus is a better option for the Flames bottom six than Neal
Lucic leaves the Oilers = and so does a salary cap paralysing contract that was guaranteed to waste 4 more years of Connor McDavid's contract. Flames GM Rule # 1 - Do not help out the Oilers.. Ever!!! - This is the only part I have a problem with... and why I chose "dislike it"

[jonkaupp]

Only on Calgary puck can you find a group of people that like a trade that is universally panned outside of Calgary and it’s butter soft media.

[Split98]

I voted dislike, as Lucic on that contract doesn't really make for a good team - but it's the lesser of 2 evils. Overall, however, I am optimistic as the team on the ice isn't hurt by the swap. I think looking at this again between hysteria and puck drop will be interesting to see if any opinions have changed.

I don't hate the deal if Lucic could provide an element to this team that's been missing - but I won't like the deal until he proves that everything we saw in Edmonton is behind him. Edmonton-Lucic isn't going to be much of a benefit to this roster.

But the relief we provided the enemy, the player we ribbed them for the most wearing our silks now, the expansion draft now a moment for Flames fans to keep their fingers crossed and we over-paying for toughness all aren't great. Better than an overpaid sniper who can't snipe and provides zero utility elsewhere - but crappy that is what signing Neal resulted in a year later.


Going to be very interesting to see what this looks like around December

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GGG

I'm excited. Thanks for doing this,

Will be interesting to see if the results change. Though by prejudicing the first poll and using the same sample you might not get a change a results (see me move the goal posts ).

Other interesting ways of phrasing the question would have been

The flames won the Lucic trade Strongly Agree / Agree/ Neutral/ Disagree / Strongly Disagree

or

The flames are in a better position after the Trade -- Agree/disagree

or a bunch of different ways to more or less ask the same thing but will give you slightly different results.

Also Can we get a poll on the Arena deal asking

If I were a city of Calgary councilor I would vote X on the Arena deal as currently presented on Monday Yes / No.

Oh no ....

this poll doesn't work either!

Zamler is going to hate his new job.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Only on Calgary puck can you find a group of people that like a trade that is universally panned outside of Calgary and it’s butter soft media.

Yup, I've never seen a single other fanbase with a slant

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Only on Calgary puck can you find a group of people that like a trade that is universally panned outside of Calgary and it’s butter soft media.

Have to say I agree with this.

I've looked around, other sports, other fan bases and I keep coming back to the same. Calgarypuck is biased towards the team that they love. It's embarrassing and I don't know how to fix it.

When I see the objective views from Leaf fans and Oiler fans, and Hab fans and Broco fans, and Celtic fans, and Yankee fans I just shake my head and moan.

And it's not that they actually know the team better than some of the people that you say are in a better position to pass quick judgement without knowing a thing about the team and what they need. It's just biased and possibly paid for hockey fans carrying water.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Only on Calgary puck can you find a group of people that like a trade that is universally panned outside of Calgary and it’s butter soft media.

If only this hot take was accurately reflected in the poll options

[This post is terrible]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Only on Calgary puck can you find a group of people that like a trade that is universally panned outside of Calgary and it’s butter soft media.

Think about how much debate and discussion there has been on this forum. The NHL community probably just looked at the names and made their judgement purely on that alone. There has been so much information presented here for both sides and some fans are starting to like it.