Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

travel_dude

Moderators
  • Content Count

    30,888
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    104

travel_dude last won the day on September 14 2016

travel_dude had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

816 Excellent

2 Followers

About travel_dude

  • Rank
    Cow Bell Aficionado

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Iggy-ville

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If we traded away the riches that Buffalo did, while still failing to build anything from it, we would be in Feaster territory for ineptness. ROR, Evander Kane, Nylander, trading for Skinner.... If an Eichel trade centers around Lindholm or Tkachuk plus a pick and NHL player, it's no question you make the trade. We trade Tkachuk, we lose his leadership but gain Eichel. We give up a player that will get a QO of $9m minimum for one year. We get a $10m player for 5 more years. Lindholm is the more difficult player to lose, since he does everything well. Consider a top 6 consisting of: Gaudreau-Eichel- Mangiapane-Monahan-Lindholm I really like that top line duo. The thing about Gio is not so much what he is worth to us in a trade as much as whether he is preventing us from getting to the next level. He has games where he plays really well, but as many where he is overplayed and puts us in a hole. Does building a future top 4 considting of Valimaki, Ras, Hanifin, Tanev now make us less able to compete? Is using Kylington and whomever on the 3rd pair that bad an idea? If we can get a top 6 RW for Gio, would that not be a win? Sure, we might lose him to expansion, but otherwise it's BSD or Kylington or Bennett. Or we do something to keep the new player.
  2. I'm worried about every game after a win or a loss. Win - time to tweak something or return to some other line combo. Lose - switch out a player that wasn't part of the problem. We had 3 lines that we could play against the weakest team in the league. Couldn't even use the 4th line for more than 5 minutes. Yet, the only times we were scored on was on the PP against the 27th worst PP in the league. That's weird. I don't want to overthink the impact of Ryan coming back, but at most it should impact one or two players that played Saturday and maybe some that didn't. Would like to see if Ryan could form up with Simon and Leivo. I see no good reason to play Buddy. I fail to see the love affair with Nordstrom, other than using him on the PK. Can we really afford to have a speciality player for just the PK?
  3. You make the trades for elite players when they become available. Buffalo has been a problem for so long McD wouldn't help them.
  4. Nothing to see there. Managing Lindholm's minutes. I have bigger issues with the coach over that little thing.
  5. If this is why we have Nordstrom on the roster, I really wonder how usefull he is. On for two PP goals against. Not directly his fault, but what value does he bring if he isn't preventing goals.
  6. I would be happy to see him back. The result would be Gawdin coming out, nobody else.
  7. I really get annoyed when we let the player walk to the net uncontested. That's how the OIlers scored on us a few times. How we give up 2nd and 3rd chances. Passive play sucks.
  8. So, keep him on the NHL roster and pay him. He's there for functional toughness but doesn't really provide it. You may of course be correct. I know some of the logic is he's a big body.
  9. 3 lines looking to be better tonight today. Now, that 4th line.... I have no issue with Gawdin. He's smart but can only carry guys like Buddy and Nordstrom so far. Give him Phillips and Leivo for some support. Or even Ruzicka that could do something at the NHL level. I know, a little early, but it's not like Buddy is doing anything.
  10. Let's worry about having 2 good lines before we worry about depth. Scoring this season has been a huge issue. Only one of the many problems, but need to fix at least one at a time. Funny that we have a coach that thought otherwise.
×
×
  • Create New...