Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

jjgallow

SeniorMembers
  • Content Count

    5,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

jjgallow last won the day on June 21

jjgallow had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

524 Excellent

About jjgallow

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

22,174 profile views
  1. I think you're right that Laine will be signed, and I think you're right that on the Jets, he could struggle next year too. But If Laine were to be traded, whether it be for Gaudreau or Backlund or whoever else in the NHL, I believe whoever acquires him would look like a landslide winner 5 years from now. Stamping that.
  2. cd Definitely offer the Camry but I do think you need a Porsche to get this deal done. I think you're getting the better player by a significant margin. And the younger player too. Backlund would be that Camry as suggested by travel_dude. Laine has never had compatible linemates either. Prior to the NHL he was a point-getter too. IMHO on the Flames I think a healthy Laine would be setting many many NHL records.
  3. IMHO, I don't think that's a tough one at all, back to Buy Low and sell high. Of course it is actually tough haha.....you're right,, But him having a down year should be a Requirement for considering him. We should NEVER be acquiring players in their career years, ever. We should only be selling players in their career years (and don't have to). So first requirement met (this is the only year he'll ever be anywhere near affordable). What do we know? We know he's one of the top 3-5 most talented young players in the NHL right now. I would personally say it's a tossup between him, McDavid, and a couple others. Except he's had an aweful season. Step 1: Why did he have an aweful season? First question to ask. https://www.nhl.com/news/injuries-hindered-patrik-laine-during-season-and-playoffs/c-306950966 Answered. Step 2: His attitude? Despite recent media remarks, I would say good. He is definitely frustrated right now. But I refer to his playoff performances. His performances in the playoffs are elevated. He is a championship winner. Step 3: Is his current situation reversible? Answer: Yes. Look at this quote: "Nothing I couldn't handle," from the above article. This guy, one of the brightest stars in the NHL, is being allowed to self-manage a serious back issue and play 82 games. He's 21, so his back can probably be fixed. But, he's being mismanaged 100%. One of the top talents in the NHL playing 82 games with a back injury should be a fireable offense. I thought only Edmonton was this dumb. He should have INSTANTLY gone on injured reserve and be sent to the best back specialists in the world with dedicated staff giving him a recovery plan. Step 4: Laine for Gaudreau and Lucic Or something like that. Step 5: Do what you do with Any Ferrari and get him sent to the experts. Don't think twice about putting him on injured reserve for half the upcoming season. Don't even flinch.
  4. ok, so let's be fair... We traded Iginla at the age of 57 or something like that. Bouwmeester too. Those aren't reasonable comparisons. Also keep in mind the reality that whatever disadvantage we have imagined, is the exact same disadvantage for the other trading party. Another way of saying this is come on guys let's not be ridiculous. So literally I just watched the conversation go from "trading Gaudreau is ridiculous and we would never do that, and".. .. "let's trade Tkachuk for Laine". Like literally. lol. You keep Tkachuk. Which is why what's happening now with his contract, and the Lucic move, scares me half to death. And I'm not the only one. Laine: Offer Gaudreau. Gaudreau for Laine. Negotiate pieces on the side from there. Your team instantly gets huge, and all your top talent now performs in the playoffs (or can). You get way younger, you're scoring more goals than you are now (Gaudreau is mostly assists). And.....for those who think we will lose on Gaudreau.... Yeah you're probably right because we'll keep him until he's 35 and trade him for a bag of pucks. But if he were in play for Laine, the same is true on both sides. Winnipeg is also worrying about how they get similar back. This solves that, more or less. So really I see only two big problems: 1. We don't know Laine and what baggage he comes with 2. We'd pretty much have to buy out Lucic because of that totally insane trade we made. Or send him as part of a package and assume some of the salary. I'm just saying guys, everyone's getting all emotional about trading Gaudreau and how you can't trade franchise players and then three seconds later we're all talking about trading Tkachuk. lol. Now you're going to make me emotional
  5. jjgallow

    Goaltending

    Except the trend of us never being on that list since Kipper. Or even anywhere close to it. That's a trend. So 4 to 5 out of 5 of those goalies were developed in-house. Which is pretty much what you get when you look at Stanley cup winning goalies, which matters more, except the trend is even stronger. 4 to 5 out of 5 were identified as 1As by or before the age of 26. Same with Stanley cup winning goalies but even stronger. Only exception I can think of is Tim Thomas. Those are, quite honestly strikingly high correlations. And again I think you get better data out of Stanley cup winners, but this aligns pretty well. Probably one more trend, that I can't validate: Pretty sure if you look at the teams responsible for developing those goalies, their organizations Do believe in trends, and recipes, and put resources into them. And I think you'd find they produce a higher number of quality goalies in general. Not seeing a lot of Voodoo here.
  6. Nobody suggested a bag of pucks. So with regards to teams who traded top players to win a Stanley cup, the answer is all of them, including St. Louis. Franchise player trades are rare but imho Gaudreau is not a and should not be a franchise player, that is the whole crux of this. A franchise player delivers in the post-season. Binnington himself was a result of the Eric Brewer trade. A technicality perhaps, but these teams all make trades and if you Look at those trades, they are with the future in mind. Some very strong arguements for keeping Gaudreau were just made above. Very strong. But they are all based on the premise that he is our franchise player on a team that is building for the Stanley Cup. Which simply isn't true and we all saw it in the playoffs. It's what we want to believe. Anyway. Can't build a team around a guy who can't show up in the playoffs. We all know it
  7. Agree and agree. But Gaudreau is a regular season franchise point-player. Not a playoff franchise player. And not a franchise goal scorer either. I am fine with trading for a player with a higher ceiling than Gaudreau (height pun not intended), and they are out there. Even on this team we have Tkachuk. Would a team give us a Tkachuk-type talent for Gaudreau? They'd give us a lot more than that. You'd have to assume some risk and they would likely be in the prospect stage. But we assume greater risk doing nothing. Package deals are just fine too.
  8. That's news to me. https://www.nhltraderumors.me/2019/04/rumor-connor-mcdavid-demands-trade-out.html History shows that point-getters in the top 10 are tradeable. Really though we should be looking at goals first. And from there, you have 18 others, many more under trade consideration. Totally agree, and this is why he holds incredibly high value. The returns would be astronomical. So if you look at the top 10 point getters from the previous season (17-18), how many then improved upon that performance? 2 out of 10. Which happens to be pretty much bang-on what you would expect if you look at it historically and even if you adjust for age, and don't consider size. So, you are suggesting that the best route to take is to make him a 100+ points player, which has odds of about 20% being very kind. Very kind indeed. Then, making Gaudreau a scoring force in the playoffs. Which is literally next to impossible and has no precedence. So this approach is admirable. But it is low probability. It just is. Couple with the reality that the Flames have not done as you suggested. They have done very little in any direction other than failing to sign Tkachuk.
  9. Yeah I don't think you are either, I think you're following your own course of logic. But 99% are. And that is why you're right about it being a fireable offense. Comes down to the ticket sales etc. (even though the returns would be massive and probably lead to even more sales over the course of a few years, they're still assuming risk) I never think of it in terms of whether a move makes us better. It think of it in terms of whether a move makes a Stanley Cup more likely in the future. Organization has to think of it in terms of predictable, low risk revenue. And even intangibles. Like, you've got Gaudreau fans on council.
  10. Can just feel the emotions boiling over here of even...talking about how you can't talk about Gaudreau lol. Our best player is perhaps the easiest sniper in the NHL to shut down in the playoffs. Even though nobody has a logical answer to that, it is clearly me not getting the point. I'm committing high treason in the court of Man Crushes which in these parts superceedes over hockey facts lol.
  11. Not sure I follow. So if you look in the same sentence as that quote, it referred specifically to Tkachuk. And that is hardly a controversial statement right now.
  12. Glad you agree. Because that is exactly the appropriate way to act as a supporting fan in the post season. This is the off-season, a time for facts.
  13. So this I disagree with, at an extremely high level of confidence. It is the complete opposite of the St Louis situation. Which was an extent of aweful that is unforgiveable to this day. It would be worse than trading Gaudreau's rights out of college. It would be like somehow giving him up for free in college. To draw from that comparison is completely unfair. Also to say Gaudreau has consistently improved is to ignore the only time of year that matters, the playoffs. It is also counter-intuitive to your point that he had better linemates this year. Even if you were right that his progression has been linear improvement, that is still a strong statistical indicator for him having peaked. Nobody has ever improved year after year for 10 years. Improvement nearly always happens in waves. Better examples would be Iginla, Fleury, Nieuwendyk, Gilmour. What we did, didn't do. In all cases, you factor in his size, age, teammates, performance and I think you draw the conclusion that this is his max value. Gilmour, we managed to trade at an absolute low. Much like the fans are suggesting we do with Bennett, Monahan now. We've learned nothing. Big pictures are lost to most and always will be. BTW, I don't think Gaudreau even has the highest ceiling on this team. That might be Tkachuk atm. And management seems fine with letting him go. This I agree with. Unfortunately I think there is value in Cities that have high hockey IQs. Ours doesn't. We are Canadian but few have lived here all their life. If anything the IQ has dropped off considerably. If the Flames pulled a Gilmour deal right now (which had fans screaming mad at the time), I actually think current fans would give management a pat on the back (examples alluded to above). So much so, that, I won't give all the specific reasons I am this confident Gaudreau's value has peaked. It would cut too deep and I don't have time to start an online battle like that. Yes, there is a possibility his value will go higher next year. But I give it 10-15% chance. I'll explain it when it's pallatable. which might be when he's 35. And in that regard, when I come on here and blame management, the truth is I'm just being nice. Management is giving us exactly what we're asking for. Le sigh.
  14. I am about 85% sure he's peaked. But your arguements, while I disagree with them, are why his value is also sky high right now. He is seen as an elite NHL talent with many years left in the tank. Which is true, on the surface. Many many teams would gladly take the risk to see if they could have better luck with him in the playoffs. And then there are those teams who just need a regular season star.
×
×
  • Create New...