Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

cross16

SeniorMembers
  • Content Count

    26,376
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    359

cross16 last won the day on September 16

cross16 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,377 Excellent

About cross16

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 11/25/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Calgary

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm sure Gaudraeu wants a contract that will take him to retirement. Not sure if that's 7 or 8 but I would totally understand that being his goal. I think if the Flames were going to do that term then the last few years they'd want to drop the cap in order to lower the AAV. Bonuses would come into play there too.
  2. According to Treliving Parsons could not satisfy the quarantine requirements. Sounds like it's vaccine related.
  3. I see a lot of Ferland in Posposil, in that both have good skill/skating for their size but both can play a physical game if they want to. I did like Ferland more at the same age, I think he was the better skater and puck handler, but I am equally intrigued by Posposil as I was Ferland. I do struggle to see Posposil reaching a top 6 role though as I see the situation lining up pretty similar to how Ferland's did in the sense of finding a role. Like Ferland I don't think I see the type of shot or vision that will let him grow into a top 6 role, I see more of that middle 6 or bottom 6 player who can be really effective at both playing the game 5 on 5 but brining a physical element. While his numbers at the AHL were very encouraging, I watched most of his games and he isn't creating the majority of his offence, it's coming from finishing the play. Not to knock him for that, it's just I don't see the Mang comp nor do I see that type of upside in his game. so for me, he is the type of player where finding a role for will be important but having said all of this coming off a major knee injury he 100% should be in the AHL. Too soon, and too limited time in the AHL to try and cast him in a role right now he can still write his own path.
  4. I don't have a problem with the Kaprizov deal. It was such a tricky negotiation. Everything you see on the ice, and his background, points to this guy being one of the next best offensive wingers in the game but the real catch is he's already 24. So while I get the too much for 1 good year the alternative is you try and do a 1 or a 2 year deal because 3 walks you to UFA. Risk in doing that is you've got a player who likely would get more term and $ in Russia if you really want to try and drive a hard bargain for a shorter term deal. I think this was a player who was a must sign for the Wild and i can completely see what it took that amount of $. Not sure it changes the bar much to be honest, because he is in a pretty unique category. Johnny was already probably in the 9 range before this anyway.
  5. The more I watch him the more committed I become to the fact that I don't think he'll ever be a top 6 player but I think he's going to play 8 plus years in the league.
  6. I would have interest, but he isn't a fit for Sutter or Sutter's system so i think the Flames need to pass unless he is cool being in the AHL again (not likely). I still think he could carve similar to Erik Gustafsson but I don't think Sutter has any time for that type of role and I don't think he would trust Niku in his own end.
  7. I personally think it's unfair to criticize Tkachuk based on the comments or really read anything into them nor do I have a problem with what he said. I'm all for players maximizing their monetary value and don't agree with the notion that doing so makes them less of a team player. Do I think the Flames should trade Tkachuk, for the right return absolutely. But the decision should be based on if it makes the team better and not so much the contract or the fact that it may be a tough negotiation given his family. I agree that Gaudreau-Tkachuk-Mang is too much LW depth so unless one of them can switch to RW full time this year and have success it makes no sense to be paying all 3 of those guys the contracts they will get.
  8. I would be shocked if a team signed Tkachuk to an offer sheet. That compensation is just way too much for a player like him. I think there would be trade interest for sure but I waiting for an offer sheet would not be a good strategy IMO.
  9. He is not in camp because his season has started in Sweden already and he’s staying over there.
  10. I’ll be a bit surprised if Brady goes term. I think he’ll get his 8mill but he probably wants a shorter term. Tkachuks don’t really do long term commitments especially with a organization like Ottawa.
  11. I agree with lots of this, in particular that the club is in better shape now and moving forward than many others think. However, to build on that I think it depends on what the end goal of this is. If the end game is to have a team that is competitive, able to make the playoffs more often than not, and maybe get lucky and go on a run than I agree things are on the right path. However, if the end goal is to win a cup than I am very much in the camp that I don't see that happening with the path they are on because I don't see where the impact talent is going to come from. As much as we can say ok well go find a Point or a Bergeron (and without question they should be doing that anyway and I believe they are) I would suggest personally it is very unlikely to happen. But yes if it's being framed that the Flames are doomed so they might as well tank then I hear you and agree with that. I've said in other threads I think this team is built to be competitive for several more years but there is a big leap between being competitive and winning a cup. I don't see the path they are on closing that gap personally, but happy to be wrong there.
  12. To be fair, that wasn't a Feaster call it was Button's. Feaster had almost no say over the draft he let the scouts do their work. the reason was that Kucherov was under contract to CSKA in Russia and it was not well known whether or not he ever planned to get out of that contract (I believe it was 2 more years). Fair to criticize the risk tolerance of the Flames at the time but at the same time passing on a Russian player, again at that time, who also happened to be only slightly bigger than Gaudreau isn't the WTF decision it appears to be in hindsight.
  13. This. This is being over simplified and being presented in a binary argument and that's what bothers me about this debate. I don't think it as simple as saying this way or that way is the right way because it ignores way too many factors. Boston is a good example to hold up of a team built for long term success without a high pick, but that ignores that fact they got a likely Hall of fame center in the 2nd round. How often does that happen (spoiler alert.... it doesn't). It's easy to say "well then draft better" but that ignores that it's not like these opportunities are available in every draft. You don't get players the level of of Bergeron or Kucherov outside the top 10 as frequently anymore. New York Islanders, as already pointed out used a #4 pick to gain Barzal but also got Barzal because he had an injury his draft year. How often does a top 5 talent drop due to injuries (it happens but not every draft). They've also got a perfect match of GM, coach and roster that isn't always easy to do. People will say "sure it is" but what's interesting in including the Islanders in this category is several years ago (before Trotz) the Islanders would have been a case to hold up to say tanking doesn't work. They bottomed out and weren't any good. Yes you have teams like the Oilers, Leafs and Sabres who did it and it hasn't worked out yet but that's because, as Peeps points out here, it's only one step. I happen to believe the Leafs core is good enough to win but what they haven't gotten right yet is the mix around that core. You have to do both, which is what worked so well for LA, Chicago, Tampa and Pittsburgh. A high end core through the top of the draft, but also a good supporting cast too. for me it comes down to less of a this pathway or that pathway and more a consideration of where is your club, what are the current strengths/weaknesses of your club, and what are the up coming drafts like. I think you need to weight all of those when deciding whether or not this course make sense because even though a team may not be a cup contender or may not have a top 2 pick doesn't mean they have to rebuild. I am pro Flames rebuild because I think they have a strong prospect pool with depth, some good supporting characters in the right age range on their big league team but they lack the high end talent to be able to compete for cups, particularly down the middle. When you look at the strength of the next few drafts and the amount of high end talent available, combine it with what is already a solid base, I think you have the makings of a really exciting product in 3-4 years. That wouldn't' have been my answer in 2019 or 2020. Lots should factor into the analysis IMO and it shouldn't be as simple as either get a top 2 pick or you'll never win.
  14. What I think they will do is they will stay the course. I read a lot into the fact that Treliving and Sutter both have contracts until 2023, it tells me that they are going to see this thing through until at least then. But even past that, i'm not sure I see a "rebuild" coming in the near future. I'm using this term in quotes to be intentional around what I'm defining as rebuild, which is the idea th they would tear this down, go to the draft and try to build this back up over a couple of season. When I look at the core of this team now (Tkachuk, Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Backs, Coleman, Mang, Hanifin, Anderson, Tanev, Markstrom) you have an average age of 27. The only reason the Flames "rebuilt" last time was they had to. Their core was all over the age of 30 and were all UFAs within a year or 2 of each other, which isn't the case here and not to mention it all started because Iginla told them he wasn't going to re sign here if the team wasn't going to be good. This is a bit of a semantical argument, but IMO the Flames never decided to rebuild, it was a situation they were forced into and even then they (being ownership) never did really embrace the idea. I don't see why that would change now after they've been operating this way for over 20 years. The x factor in all of this, and what will make this post age poorly, is Gaudreau. I believe he will get signed but if for whatever reason he doesn't then they could reach that point of no return sooner than I'm anticipating now. But with Gaudreau in the fold I believe they've got enough of a competitive core that it will never convince ownership that it needs to be broken apart and rebuilt via draft picks. In terms of changes to the core that player I would have my eye on is Tkachuk. It sounds like they listened to offers this off season but had a very high price tag (as they should) but pending how this season goes I could see those discussions becoming longer. As I said above this isn't what I would do, it's just what I think they will do. I think that core is good enough to bounce in and out of the playoffs here and there and that will be enough for ownership to believe they should keep adding and not be ok with the idea of multiple losing seasons.
  15. Rookie camp open this week, Thursday to be exact. Will have 2 games on September 18th and 20th. Roster is listed below. Reminder- NCAA players are not eligible to attend this camp.
×
×
  • Create New...