Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

jjgallow

SeniorMembers
  • Content Count

    4,960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

jjgallow last won the day on June 21

jjgallow had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

521 Excellent

About jjgallow

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

22,091 profile views
  1. Adding this kid to the mix but makes Gaudreau look kinda big https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/446415/artur-gatiyatov
  2. ah, those famous 6 words that let us all know we've lost the trade...
  3. Well done So , this is hard for me. As one of the more negative nellies on here it's my job to be mad at the trade, but at the same time I have the crucial role of being a contrarian. How exactly am I supposed to do this when we all hate the trade? I was looking for a way out.... maybe money, maybe picks, but as outlined above, this is just an aweful trade and it looks like they have had their lawyers make sure that it was not possible for it to be a good trade, down to the last detail. Like they wanted it to be a bad trade and put resources into making sure. I will say that it's not the worst trade BT's made. So there, a little contrarian. Lucic does have more upside. BT giving out first round picks like candy makes this look like a hot win. Although if we run out of cap space and can't sign key players all that could change too.
  4. Have they figured out the draft picks / money yet? It is possible the deal could be ok depending on what we get back. Don't get me wrong...if we start a "fire BT" thread, I'll participate for other reasons. All things aside the players are a moot point. Both are at all time lows. Lucic might have the higher upside. And I always like draft picks. It's the money. that is the thing.
  5. hey guys, so, what if we did like, James Neal for Lucic? Or is that too far out there
  6. I do agree, I'm starting to waiver on this. After several great years of drafting I think I actually just...assumed, they had gone BPA and maybe looked at this with rose colored glasses. Also been very busy. As I'm learning more about this year's draft I'm less sure. But can a 5-9" guy be BPA? Yes. Can a LW be BPA? yes. Does it factor into BPA? Size and position do, yes. But, Not because of the current needs of your team. I would agree that overall NHL scarcity of the RH shots, does give them a certain increased ranking in even BPA. But one has to be careful not to go overboard, because being a RH shot is also an advantage to the player. So they Should have something to show for that advantage come draft time.
  7. I completely agree, Gaudreau is an anomaly. However, I would also suggest that anomalies like this should be expected in a good drafting/development system. Every decent organization always has a few surprises like this at all times. Gaudreau is against every odd, every rule, except one: Every lottery has a winner. The Theo Fleury lottery. The Martin St Louis lottery. The Kipper lottery. The Giordano lottery. All anomalies. All unexpected. But at a macro level we should know that good BPA systems will continue to supply these prospects. Don't buy them too high, don't sell them too low. This is where we've struggled. If you continue to draft/sign the best available prospects, you Can expect to get more anomalies than a team which drafts to fit. And those anomalies are typically worth more over time than the players who were drafted to fit.
  8. True......... buuuut.... the Iginla acquisition for instance. It can be done. Or... Gaudreau. Could we trade him right now and address the right side of the ice with some nearly ready prospects? Just like the Iginla trade? Oh yes we could. the hardest part about that trade, let's all be totally honest.. is our man crush on him. This is not a lack of willingness from other teams to acquire Gaudreau. I still personally maintain: Should we have drafted Gaudreau? Yes Should we do similar in our drafting in the future? Yes. Should we develop man crushes on all our prospects as if we were in a commonlaw relationship? <--- I propose no. Everyone seems to be avoiding the very obvious problem that we have too much of a man crush on some of our favourites to let BPA work like it's supposed to. In other news, I think I have a talent for taking things off topic, even of topics I created lol My apologies for that...quite honestly I think this is better than the original topic
  9. A couple comments: On playoff goon hockey: Yes, the rules change a bit. But, let's be honest, it's mostly the intensity which we couldn't physically handle, not the rules. Case in point, it wasn't goons that put 50+ shots past us a night. It was hockey that put the shots past us. It was our lack of defence that allowed it. And defence is actually still part of hockey. If you look at the way hockey has evolved, even playoff hockey has never been better. But for us to think we can make it with the players we had, would not have Ever worked. So: Drafting... BPA. Simple. Case. In Point. Should we have drafted Gaudreau? -Yes. And it's not a discussion. We all agree on that. Should we have kept him? -No. Our team wasn't physical enough for that. It's not just his size, it's his physical makeup. With the team we had, we should have traded him. Still should. So, here we're debating whether to draft highly skilled NHL talents. This should not be a debate, case in point Gaudreau. Do the BPA. Get paid. What IS apparently a debate, is what to do after. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I am a HUGE prospect fan. But I'd trade them all in a second to put a stanley cup winner together. Stop falling in love with the draft picks kids, and go BPA. It's a draft, not a wedding.
  10. Thanks. I think you've reminded me of that before and you'll probably have to remind me again I actually like our drafting too. I hated it for years. But.. I hate to say it...it changed under Feaster. What changed, I don't know. But it may have simply been that Feaster knew what he didn't know. He trusted the scouts instead of ignoring them. And that was so successful I think it may have become policy. All speculation. I see few reasons why some of these kids shouldn't be considered at some level.
  11. lol when on that note, I do also think your drafting (or training camp invite) doesn't necessarily follow your immediate needs on the team. We could use some size. But who knows what the situation will be when this year's draft class matures. And there's always trades.
  12. Maybe this belongs in NHL talk but there is nothing Stopping this from being Flames related: https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/who-are-the-best-players-who-werent-selected-at-the-2019-nhl-draft So, Are we aloud to do training camp invites with these kids or what? And who catches your eye? I'm curious. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/376443/xavier-simoneau Let's be honest, there are a lot of comparisons to be drawn between this kid and our first overall pick, Jakob Pelletier. When evaluating smaller players, you do look at speed, yes. But you also look at size. there is a difference between a small player who can be bullied, and a tough kid with a low center of gravitiy. Simoneau falls in the category of tough kid with low center of gravity. So did Theo Fleury and Martin St Louis. He weighs similar to them at that age too. And vastly out-weighs our #1 pick, Pelletier. From a muscle perspective, we're taking a much bigger risk with Pelletier. The Russians are always interesting if they can be brought over. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/418068/billy-constantinou None of his problems are beyond development and all of his skillsets are that of a top NHL prospect. Thoughts?
  13. jjgallow

    Goaltending

    never long enough.....lol I understand on the space thing. I guess, when it comes to goalies, I feel like, maybe we should have acquired more, and given them more chances, but less time. I feel we sat on a lot of dead weight for too long without ever giving them an opportunity. Ie., training camp invite. But anyway
  14. 99% of fans did not do this then. Times have improved. Now only 98.5% of fans don't do this. Would someone like Dylan Cozens or a Barrett Hayton make the conversation interesting? To a few of us on here, yes. To most, not at all. People would lose their minds. But if it was Laine, it would be the trade of the century. Even though Laine has regressed and the above might actually have brighter futures. Maybe you're right and it was entirely driven by economics, but acquiring Iginla was a damned good move.
  15. Correct. Yes we would get a huge return after this season. Nobody thinks he's going to the AHL next year. Leave it much longer and that changes. His value is super high right now, end of discussion. That McInnis deal was not the best but to be completely honest never did anything remarkable at all after we let him go, and he was 31, I believe, so it caused a bit of a stir. Gio is well past that mark. Phil was a weak return, but a somewhat forced one. That's not what we're talking bout here. Nobody's talking about trading Gio for a modern Phil. At least I hope not. A couple first rounders or top prospects and we're talking. Just because I'm willing to trade him doesn't mean I'm willing to do a bad deal. The Newy trade is the PERFECT example of a good trade. Things weren't working out here. Why? I don't know. Possibly McInnis. We got Iginla and IMHO both teams won that trade. We just Weren't headed for a cup. We really weren't. With current lineup. But at least Iginla got us within a goal of it. But again, not much relevance here. Gio is Well past that age. Gilmour for Leeman was aweful, and we all knew it the moment it happened. Because instead of trading for the future we traded baggage and lost bad. This is an example of why you trade for prospects.. But again, Gio is Well past the age of this comparable. Yes you can get that imho. If you couldn't I would say it's a bad deal. But maybe you're not getting Today's Laine. Maybe you have to either trade for the Next Laine, or you need to do a package deal. Iginla was a nobody when we acquired him. Most in Calgary had never heard of him. By most, I mean basically all of us. One thing I will say is we have a great scouting system here right now, outside of goalies. Yeah, I'm confident we could pull off another Iginla deal. Which means, a prospect very few of us have heard of with Laine potential. Or, got get Laine in a package deal.
×
×
  • Create New...