All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. OK so both Andersson and Fox are NHLers but limited to 3rd pairings is what you are saying. Well we should keep him then because we eventually need someone lesser paid than Stone.
  3. Rittich is a back up Goalie what is to be confused about. If anything he may allow us to trade one of Gilles or Parsons.
  4. Not to take anything away from Mike freaking Smith, at all. Is there any forecast on what we'll do with Rittich? He's put up great numbers since he joined us 3 years ago. But his starts are so limited, I can't make heads or tails of it, outside of the Mike freaking Smith part. Really has me wondering, with Gillies coming up soon I'd imagine, what is our end game, or do we have one? I like the depth at G in case the unmentionable happens. But if it doesn't, how do we come out of camp next year? Just wondering if anyone else is less confused than I am. Rittich's numbers, here or the A, describe a goalie you would assume you have no problem starting. Watching his starts shows exactly the same thing. Yet...here we are. Feel free to go off on me, but I just don't understand the ongoing kid gloves with Rittich, are we hiding him, what are we doing?? If we're hiding him, would that only be to up his trade value? #confused.
  5. Today
  6. So with the call-ups, we're at a 22 man roster. Is td correct in bringing up Prout? Then we can still waive the worst of him and Bart...mercifully, lol. Prout is like free candy, "what? you'll give us something for Lack"? Or maybe it's just our worst for your worst.
  7. Guessing 6-10 weeks, just read it's 4-8weeks after the wires come out.
  8. No surprise there. Anyone know Frolik's timeline is for return. Fractured jaw, it's been about 3 weeks now. Is there a relatively standard timeline for that injury?
  9. I would say he is right around Stone's ability from what I have seen. For an offensive puck moving defenseman that's not good enough. I see the same issues with Fox. Maybe their smarts can make up for their lack of skating, but with the way the game is going, speed and being able to play with pace is a premium.
  10. You are always bringing up skating issues so who IYO would be a comp to Andersson's ability to skate, Stone ? Is he worse than Stone ?
  11. You have been very condemning of Brouwer and to label him as incapable of covering off the injury to Frolik is so wrong. Why would you want to disturb what Bennett and Jankowski are building which could be made even better by adding Tkachuk You want to see prospects audition and do well get them in positions to succeed in the first place. Mangiapane or Hrivik on LW with Backlund and Brouwer would challenge them to be their best IMO. Prout is here whether he gets called isn't real important as far as I'm concerned.
  12. Here's your answer: Calgary Flames‏Verified account @NHLFlames .@CortexBusiness Transaction Alert: The #Flames have recalled @Hrivo15 and @andrewmange13 from the @AHLHeat. That's Hrivik and Mangiapane. Hope Mangipane goes Yeast-mode when he plays again.
  13. If you want Marner, we are talking about Andersson, a 1st and possibly a roster player. That's not going to happen. Brodie and Gio can skate, I don't see anywhere near the same skating ability with Andersson, and really that's the main reason I don't see him making as big of an impact at the NHL level as he has at lower levels.
  14. ^^^^^ Maybe we have few RW or RHS's in the AHL right now, but we do have some interesting prospects outside of that: Joly Gawdin Fischer (who has picked up his scoring since walking away from the Tigers) Phillips I get that you're not a fan of Andersson. Doesn't mean that his limited showing on the Flames and AHL game has him projected to be no higher than a 3rd pairing at best. What was Brodie at that age? Lesser numbers in junior. Similar numbers in the AHL. How about Gio? Maybe Kapenen is fine. He should have had a chance by now in TO. He hasn't won the trust of the coach. I don't make that deal myself. Talk to me about Marner and I would have a different opinion.
  15. Brouwer was doing just fine on the 4th line. He chipped in on the PK. He was playing the right amount of minutes for the numbers he was putting up. Do you think it makes sense to use a 4th liner to cover off the most important line? Bennett has been one of the best defensive players in the last month. Better than players from the top line. Wouldn't it make sense to use that to the benefit of the Backlund line? Tkachuk has been a beast, but it's not because Brouwer is playing with him. Maybe you don't see it, but Brouwer is making mistakes left and right. 2-1's that die on his stick, weak clearing attempts that are basically passes to the other team. The entire team makes mistakes, too true. It's more costly when the Backlund line makes them. Personally (though Gully said basically the same thing), I feel that Brouwer gets the minutes because he's a good soldier. He's not particularly skilled at anything, but he wear the 'A'. Prout is just a big D-man that can play a heavy game. He will fight anyone. He's fought Lucic a few times. I would prefer that we have a guy like that in the lineup for a few games, because teams try to take on Gio and Ferland. We need those guys out of the box. Would love to see Prout tune up Looch. Not because I like fighting, but because I like to see Looch get off his game. When he's mad, he loses his skills.
  16. See I don't see Kapanen as a bust or in the same category as Colborne or Lazar. He is only 21, the same age as Andersson. He is also stuck behind Toronto's depth on the right side, similar to Andersson being stuck behind our depth on the right side. I know I am in the minority, but the times I have watched Andersson, I have never seen a player with top 4 upside. I am just not sure I am willing to trade away established defensemen like Hamonic and Stone, while taking a chance on Andersson. Right now Hamilton, Hamonic, Stone and Prout are ahead of Andersson on the depth chart. We also have Fox, on the way and he probably won't want to play in the AHL. We lack prospect depth on the RW. Right now we have Foo, who probably isn't going to make the NHL, Poirier who hasn't looked like a NHL prospect for some time now, Carroll who can't even make it into the AHL lineup on a regular basis, Smith who is in the ECHL, Fischer is basically another Carroll, Tulola is intriguing but ultimately us a long shot to make the jump to the NHL, and Joly again intriguing but at best he is a 3rd liner. We have no propsects coming to play the RW, Tkachuk, Bennett and Gaudreau are all staying on the LW, Bennett might get moved to C again, but none of them are going to end up on the RW. Hathaway and Lazar are 4th liners. So we have a hole on that side of the ice.
  17. Has Brouwer's performance been much less than Frolik was providing ? I don't think so and who in your opinion would have been better to cover off Frolik's injury ? Until Frolik returns I agree Mangiapane and Hrivik should be here. Prout isn't important right now, stay with Kulak like GG has been.
  18. I think this is missing the point, it isn't so much about Mangiapane as it is to get Tkachuk off Backlund's line so that line can grow into the playoffs.
  19. http://jimrome.com/2018/01/18/glen-gulutzan/
  20. https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/18/amazon-reveals-top-20-city-candidates-for-its-second-hq/ Yesterday's news. Calgary didn't make Amazon's short list.
  21. Ya Totals man. Outside of this message board, i hardly talk politics with anyone (which might be hard for some of you to believe). Maybe it's the anonymous part of the internet that lets me go freely. But ya, bubbles and echo chambers. Need to challenge each other every now and then. I know i'm always like "Leftists this and Leftists that", but I'm still human at the end of the day and i get the moral side of the argument even though i may not acknowledge it in my replies. See, this is where it's easy to say "stop giving single mothers any help" but it's hard to actually do because it's such a close issue to our lives. But then we need to attack the problem at it's core. Single motherhood is not always the mother's fault. It's the father's fault too. There's always accidents like the Father died when the kid was young and that's always a wedge issue because it's a situation worthy of everyone's empathy. I mentioned IQ because it's such a key in the battle against all battles. I'm generalizing but studies have shown that high IQ people, especially men, tend to stick around to invest in their kids. Furthermore, high IQ married couples tend to invest everything in only one or two kids maximum to give them the best chance to develop optimally. In contrast, low IQ men and low IQ people in general tend to adopt a strategy of "spray seed randomly and see what grows". You literally here of men fathering 10 kids with 8 different women and can't pay child support so he has to go to jail. The idea to not subsidize single mothers is to force women to choose wisely and thus not allowing men to "hit and run". Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it), you may never agree on what i'm about to say. I also don't say this to be racist but you simply cannot hit certain populations with a Harvard curriculum because you will never get any meaningful results. A certain level of IQ is required to absorb that level of education. In turn, a certain level of education is required to sustain a country that enslaves it's people in the American dream working 9 to 5 and can't buy a big house. And in turn, a country that goes after the American dream is what generates decreasing reproduction levels. Again, i use China as a case study. They forced people to have one child maximum by law. After that didn't work, they industrialized and was lucky to have a high IQ population to work with. They tricked their population to go after the American dream (big money, big house, big cars, etc) and made them into 9 to 5 indentured servant like people. The result, Chinese voluntarily have 1 kid now. So good news is IQ can be developed and evolved over time (slowly over generations). IF we do this right, then we have a chance to equalize the playing field among all races. At the end of the day, the Theory of Evolution is what we need to apply. Natural Selection. Survival of the fittest. That kind of brutal and nasty stuff (because we sure weren't created by some magical being 6000 years ago. And if we were, he was sure racist). I do believe we evolved, at least to some degree on a micro level. Europeans and East Asians were once hunter and gathers too who were not able to build two storey buildings just like most third world countries still cannot do to this day. But somewhere along the lines, something happened. IQ started winning out in Europe and Asia. Perhaps the cold weather forced them to plan ahead. Perhaps the winters forced innovation. Those who were smart and inventive lived on while those who didn't died out. But wait, evolution didn't stop there. Today, we often here Japanese, South Korean, and Hong Kong kids jumping off buildings and committing suicide because they failed to get into a prestigious university. Sounds so crazy but the side effect of that is... well, Samsung, LG, Sony, Toyota, Playstation, Satoshi Nakamoto (just had to throw that in there). So you're saying "education all around" but sadly, you cannot just give them the education that is required for a population to sustain an economy that makes everybody work consistently 9 to 5 and so thus cannot afford the time and big house to have 3+ kids. This applies across the board not just in third world countries but in "third world communities" in our cities and neighbourhoods. If we are talking about blacks specifically, then we need people like Neil Degrasse Tyson to have 1000 kids while 1000 other blacks have zero. But of course the irony is, high IQ people generally invest in only one or two kids to give them the best possible chance to succeed in life.
  22. Being on a run I believe is exactly when I think we need to mess with the bottom 6. Our #1 line was stone cold until right around Mangia's call up. That isn't because of Mangiapane, it's because everyone else feeds off of, "hey, I remember being that guy", imho. Take the positives where you can find them. The farm has been a big plus this year. We have to get further reading on it, because we've never done it with any kind of confidence, imo. Good teams do and have to rely on it. Yes we have a lot of D prospects. No have we ever had a position of strength for trade. Outside of all of our draft picks that are gone... Why rush it now? Keep building with what we have, there's no magic goose in a trade. So why diminish the depth you build if you don't get great value in a trade? If we move Bennett or Tkachuk to RW, we start looking pretty darned balanced. But again, EVERYONE has to play to potential, or sit.
  23. To me it's not messing with lines as much as it is trying to find the bet possible lineup. I personally don;t think that Brouwer is the answer to missing Frolik. Just because he hasn;t had too many mistakes that have hurt the team doesn;t mean he's helping. That doesn;t mean he's playing horribly. He has been good on the PK. He's chipped n a few. He's fought a guy. 18 minutes a game he should be doing something. The Flames are going to be rusty. Having Mangiapane and Hrivik comng off a week in the AHL can only help. NExt week we have a B2B against the Kings and Oilers. I would like to see Prout brought up as the extra D-man, since we may otherwise will probably see Bart.in one of them.
  24. Not a fan for a couple of reasons. One, I don't love Kapanen and I think he is dangerously close to bust territory. These rescues rarely work out (see exhibit Lazar, Colborne, etc) and they shouldn't cost you a top D prospect if you do roll the dice on them. Two, I think the Flames would be better off leveraging this defensive depth in the summer by moving an established guy like Stone, Hamonic, or Brodie rather the depleting it with moves without much upside.
  25. Mangiapane is showing what he has got, and it's really good. He has transformed the fourth line and he is developing a tonne with his time in the NHL. He has made an impact and made people take notice. That's great for a first call up and will serve him well at camp next year. The Flames are on a run. Messing with lines just to rush a kid up the line up doesn't make much sense imo.
  26. We will give Parsons a couple of weeks before calling him an AHLer (instead of one game)? How generous of us The Flames are getting top end goal tending in the NHL right now from both goalies, one of which is 25. Gilles has turned a corner and Parsons is still a top prospect. Bottom line with goalies is: 1) You measure their progress over years not weeks, and 2) Chances are your best starter is coming from somewhere you didn't expect. Sure there are exceptions to the rules, but they ARE exceptions. Given Smiths age we definitely need to find a long term option. I also agree adding a prospect or two won't hurt. But I like the goalies from top to bottom and I definitely think it is WAY to early to be coming to conclusions on Rittich, Parsons, or Gilles.
  27. Maybe I just had higher expectations for him. I would like to see top 5 by the end of this year. There was a time when he was extemely, extremely, highly rated. I would like to see him reclaim that. He is close but not there. I think he has the ability to be the best goalie in the AHL. I would settle for top 5. I'm certainly nowhere close to counting him out, I just think he can do more and needs to do more.
  1. Load more activity