cccsberg

SeniorMembers
  • Content count

    2,982
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by cccsberg

  1. The third line was ineffective without Neal. Hopefully he's back tomorrow.
  2. With elite-level top 5/6 players (including D), you don’t need massive scoring in the bottom 6. I think guys are buying into a lie as well as create some sort of fantasy line-up that has little to do with reality.
  3. Its just that there is a big difference between "changes are required" and just complaining for complaining's sake. If this Frolik complaining is typical, you'll be upset and urging upgrades even as the Flames are storming the ice for their Stanley Cup photo..... we hope!
  4. Mac, OM gosh, give it a break. The Flames are second overall in the league. I think BP is doing just fine. A little powderpuff "controversy" keeps their minds focused during this doldrums part of the season......
  5. Injury?
  6. With Stockton's poor/depleted defense I have no idea whether Gillies has done well or not. Look how Talbot all of a sudden "improved" once Hitchcock came in. He likely won't get in but he has been excellent before and his numbers I think are pretty irrelevant this season....
  7. We have this and two more full seasons before the Expansion draft. No issues with excess D anytime in the near future.
  8. BPA is a fantasy supported by scouts and reporters and lots of fans to justify their jobs and favourites but with little reality in actual fact. Even if we drafted thirty two 25 year old pros there would be no fully consensus BPA list everyone would agree on. Not even close. If you think of it that way it exposes the BPA problems and the issues about team needs. Heck, even if you tried to get a BPA for top player in the league between the "supposed" top 5 you would get a lot of arguments. It all depends on how you value different skills and abilities versus someone else. Would a goalie be in that list, the most important player on any team? If you set a rigid criteria, like Goals scored, then fine, Ovechkin wins every year, but as you broaden the terms it quickly becomes muddy. The exact same thing happens for 17 year old kids. On top of that, the player who might have been 100% the correct pick at 17 years old may not develop any further and become a bomb at 20 or 23 years old.... Bennett anyone? Since most teams are drafting for those years down the road, developmental projections are critical and if they don't happen you look like a fool. Take Hunter Smith for example. The guy had size, toughness and was just starting to score and put it together at 17, all things a team needed at the draft at that time, functional toughness, which today is hardly needed, or so it seems. Unfortunately the skating and scoring never evolved enough to make him a player at the next level. Also look at McDonald versus Demko. Do you pick proven track record or pick burgeoning potential? Because it won't become critical till 4-5 years later it's a very difficult choice.
  9. Yes I did. Good movie, good reference. Ha! We agree on something.....
  10. Very thoughtful summary. I don’t disagree with your preferences, lower risk and all. The thing is, these are not always available, and certainly not equally so. Although you could possibly make a case that you can perfectly identify when the risky events occur, I believe that most of the time they are happenstance, i.e unpredictable primarily based on the defender’s movements, puck bouncing and ice condition. If that is the case, at least the majority of the time, then he went in thinking it a “safe” play and, whoops, turned out to be more dangerous. How do you criticize that? Regardless, even with the dangerous cases, he”s only been burnt by a goal against 2-3 times that I recall, versus the dozens of time it didn’t. Again, I contend pretty good odds......
  11. I thought I would start a thread specifically about stats, their uses and abuses. Many on here believe stats tell the tale, while others push them too far or out of context. It's the new age of stats-driven hockey, does the eye test still hold water? Weigh in with your favourite stats, their implications and other observations.
  12. Outside of the 4th goal I thought Smith played pretty well. He definitely kept them in it early on. Look, great relief job by Rittich, great win by the Flames. I’m not dumping on any goalie, we need two good ones. What this game showed more than anything is the coach really has the pulse of the team and the boys are really playing for each other, no matter the circumstances.
  13. We’ll know soon enough. What a wild game.
  14. How in the world is that not called? It was 100% obvious and there is absolutely zero excuse to not be a penalty. Crap like this is EXACTLY what fuels all the league manipulation conspiracy theories.
  15. When the league comes up with a means to accurately and consistently track player movements and gather them into useful stats we'll have something useful to discuss. Until then, its kind of a crapshoot. The NHL has been experimenting with uniform-embedded RFID chips that they have highlighted a handful of games the past couple of years. Perhaps that will pave the way?
  16. Honestly, TD, you're seeming more and more like a negative Nancy that can find something to nitpick no matter the situation. To say Smith has "a lot more that result in turnovers" versus setting up the D is so far from reality it's laughable. Sure it happens a handful of times a game but far, far from most likely. If you want to seek out "bad" goals, we can easily find them for both of the goalies. We can also find many exceptional stops. We now have both goalies playing well. I'm not seeing a problem here.
  17. Both are currently playing well. Why not sit back and enjoy it?
  18. Most of what you say is right on. But when you say we don't have another Mony or JH in the ranks you make me laugh. Neither one of those guys ever made the farm team, skipping right into the NHL. If we had more they'd do the same. Down the road, though we COULD have several Top6 forwards from guys we've already drafted, we'll have to wait and see how they develop.
  19. Lomberg reminds me of Rudy from football/movie fame. He brings an essential element to the team, ie work ethic and non-stop compete that is absolutely essential for long-term success no matter what your skill level. Glad to have him. The fact he actually gets into the odd game here and there is a clear signal to others to keep their intensity level high.
  20. Of those 3 I'd say only Duchene is an upgrade on what we have and no way Ottawa is trading him.
  21. Well-earned, he was outstanding. He and Prout were a very solid pairing,which is really saying something. How tremendous is our 3+1 young defenders coming on strong! Anderson also played well with Brodie on that top pairing.
  22. Absolutely no supplemental for the Hamonic headshot, and now the Backlund headshot is unbelievable. There should be some means for the player/team/fans to address these type of grievances.
  23. Not sure about the Bennett move yet, but overall I like both of your proposed scenarios. If Backlund is out it's time to try Tkachuk-Jankowski-Neal.
  24. I don’t have a problem with analytics, I just have a problem with the misapplication of analytics and inconsistencies in data collection. Watching a game the other night on a face-off the Centre drew it back and to the side, yet the opposition player beat the Flames player to the puck and skated away with possession. So, did the Centre “win” the draw or not? And if not, how is the Centre at ‘fault’? (I.e. lower FO%)