• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by cccsberg

  1. All of those suggestions on teams making a run for the playoffs so almost zero chance these guys are available.
  2. So we've come to the end of another season, out of the playoffs prior to the Draft Lottery and obviously in need of more. What went wrong? What tangible things need to be done? Where will we be on July 15th, mid-Summer 2017?
  3. 38 year old rental. Yeah, like someone is going to pay that. Not even close, and even if we did, where does he play? Its a bad idea, but hey, if a 3/4th rounder would suffice, he can come in and rotate at 3LD with Kylington and Valimaki.
  4. Despite what input we get from SF, a look at Gillies' career stats are probably more insightful to the current Stockton situation. Over the past 4 years Gillies has been in Stockton and had these SAV% stats: 0.920 0.910 0.917 0.867 His first 3 years he averaged 0.916 and was remarkably very consistent. The drop-off from that to this year is 0.49 pts, which is MASSIVE. In spite of that we continue to hear some fairly positive game reports from SF, albeit with the usual "the D let him down... D offered no help... D left him out to dry...." If you look at Parsons' stats, albeit much more limited you'll also see a huge drop this year in Stockton, dropping 0.32 pts when comparing his London numbers. I'm not getting into an argument about different levels, injuries...blah, blah, blah.... all valid but not relevant to the point. This year Gillies has shown a huge drop and it almost certainly is due to the crappy/ineffective/non-existant D corps currently toiling away there. Any evaluation of our goalie pipeline needs many, many more eyes on the goalies, and also needs to vigorously judge the impact of overall team/D quality in Stockton which is currently low/depleted.
  5. Although we all love and enjoy SFinest's insights and commentary, as a single person the views are going to be biased. Think of it this way, pick one single FN blogger here to be THE commentator for the Flames. Depending on the pick you would get VASTLY different views from that single person. More inputs is going to provide a better, more balanced view. Personally I believe Smith has been playing fairly well the past couple months. His record (results) is also very good, though as some have pointed out, the stats are poor. To me the issue of Smith comes down to 2 things above all else. What is the cost? Previously I have seen a projection that we could get a solid back-up (Mazrek, Mcilhenney) for a 4th rounder. Doubtful but if so, ok. Secondly is what is the impact on the team chemistry? Smith is fiery and demands a lot of himself, and others. Is that attitude a detriment to the room, or is it the driver to enhanced, more focused play we are seeing this year across the board? I have no idea, but I'm pretty sure replacing Smith WILL have an effect broadly in the room and it WILL NOT be so simplistic as replacing whatever stats "X" new goalie has for Smith's stats, like many on here seem to assume.
  6. Looking at your suggestions: Calgary=Rittich, Smith, Gillies, Parsons, Mcdonald, Schneider Winnipeg=Hellebuyck, Brossoit, Berdin, Comrie Tampa=Vasilevski, Domingue, Ingram, Pasquale Anaheim=Gibson, RMiller, CJohnson, Boyle/Redmond/Eriksson Ek Looking at the starters and their seasons to date, its very close to even across the board, with Rittich trailing the others only due to experience. Back-ups I'd put Smith and RMiller at par heading the pack, then Brossoit due to experience and Domingue trailing. 3/4=I'd take Gillies/Parsons over them all, or at least even with the exception of Chad Johnson due to more experience....but we already had Chad and know he's not really a good long-term solution. If Brossoit is more than a flash in the pan playing on a very strong defensive team, then Winnipeg I agree has the best top4 goalies as Brossoit is young and a potential long-term solution. I'd say Calgary is slightly ahead of both Tampa and Anaheim overall long-term, but a lot remains to be seen. If this is the best of the NHL then the Flames are doing just fine, thank you very much...
  7. Agree, and having a better, and speedier Lindholm has made a huge difference. They seem to have definitely matured, but as we see with the purple Gatorade, are still enjoying themselves too.
  8. I'm making an assumption but think it's likely, that all of us are hoping the Flames continue to burn it up and take that all the way to the Stanley Cup. With somewhat limited playoff experience that might be asking a lot, but I think it is within reach. Upgrading the team is always a focus, but there is always the question of cost, and team chemistry and at this point the upgrades would have to be massive (e.g. Mark Stone) or peripheral depth in my view. Yes, things happen and the top teams rarely make it all the way, just look at Tampa Bay the past many years for proof. We definitely have a shot and no matter what "upgrades" are made things can still go off the rails. That's just the way it is. I agree goalies for next season are still an open discussion, but if Rittich continues to shine at least we have the main piece already in place, our starter. The back-up issue can wait till summer.
  9. Smith certainly IS playing at an NHL level this year. What do you think the Flames are, AHL? bwahahahahahahah..... Next year can be dealt with this summer. Our SOLE focus at the moment should be this year and the upcoming playoffs. And, btw, BOTH Gillies and Parsons are back-up options for next year. See Rittich, last summer, as reference. All Smith is doing is winning games for the Flames, which I suspect, would continue if called upon in the playoffs. The issue is not Smith, the issue seems to be your confidence, but that is altogether another thread..... IF you can get either Mrazek or McElhinney for a 4th, why wouldn't we? Go for it. For a fourth they can sit in the press box and eat popcorn. Unfortunately, that is not going to happen, but I can understand your strident urgency if you really believe we can make that trade..... I challenge all you doubters to find another team with better 4-deep goalie options versus the Flames, all things considered and not stats-only. Offhand I can't think of any, though I'm sure many will question our top2, especially if you throw Smith to the curb even though he has a great record.
  10. Right you are, my mistake. Even better for the Flames, BOTH right and left shot options soon available.
  11. JTech, your comments are almost as good as Oiler trolls for a good morning laugh.... Perhaps it would be instructive to look back at your own/Travel_Dude's/others comments about goalies from last summer versus how things actually worked out. It should be instructive for all and help temper demands for unnecessary changes just to appease your fears. The Flames DO have internal options, and until they are needed we will not know if they would be effective or not. In addition, trade options that many are clamouring for are not necessarily better than what we currently have and there is no guarantee they would be successful if and when needed, much less destroying the delicate team chemistry currently in play. It is one thing to fill obvious holes in a line-up and it is something altogether different to make changes for the sake of change, just because someone chooses to consider a worst-case scenario most likely, and focuses almost exclusively on negatives and over-simplistic stats. The Flames are humming along at a President's Trophy rate, playing excellent overall hockey and clearly head and shoulders above all but a few other teams in the NHL. They have no obvious, clear-cut weakness at this point, and injuries are being met with internal options. On the injury front we are getting healthier and should be "adding" several key pieces soon with injured players. On the goalie front, the "incompetent back-up" from the summer has transformed into a near-Vezina stalwart, veteran Smith has filled in sufficiently to have a hugely successful record while getting rested and refocused should more be required, and both Gillies and Parsons have steadied their play in front of frankly very-depleted/poor defence in the AHL. Nobody is calling them up unless it's an emergency but the Flames can certainly do worse. Relax.... Enjoy... Flames fans haven't seen this level of play for decades.
  12. Smith has already proven he can make a serious run in the playoffs, we are planning Rittich to do the same, and we have both Parsons and Gillies who have led their earlier teams to championships as a fall-back. Frankly, a few of you guys will not be satisfied with ANY of our goalies, even as your continuing fears have proven to be wild hallucinations and our current crop is playing outstanding. No one can predict the future, but getting another goalie should not be on the critical needs list of BT at this time. As far as that goes, the Flames will be adding, at zero cost, a solid, physical left shot 4/5/6D with a wicked shot. They will also be adding a fast, young Top Pair-potential/5/6 left shot D who is well rested and eager to earn his spot back. They are likely also adding a gritty, clutch goal scorer with vast playoff success who has been getting adjusted to a new team and line mates. If anything, their only "weakness" is perhaps a big, fast, physical 2/3/4RW to add another dimension to their game. Of all the guys that might be a fit, perhaps Mark Stone from Ottawa, Athanasiou from Detroit, Perry from Anaheim or Simmonds from Phillie? Of the 4 the later is probably the only one available and I would not give too much if anything off the roster to get him....
  13. First off, there is no need for either, we have our own internal options if there was, and no matter, the price you are willing to throw away is ridiculous.... in my view.
  14. So true, but after the Oilers fall on their face and get crushed it is so satisfying.
  15. Yes you’re right. Pathetic, bad call.
  16. The third line was ineffective without Neal. Hopefully he's back tomorrow.
  17. 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.
  18. 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!
  19. 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......
  20. Injury?
  21. 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....
  22. We have this and two more full seasons before the Expansion draft. No issues with excess D anytime in the near future.
  23. 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.
  24. Yes I did. Good movie, good reference. Ha! We agree on something.....