Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by kehatch

  1. This season seems to be defined by the players that are costing us. We don't need superstars on the bottom pairing or bottom 6. But we can't rely on guys that are liabilities.
  2. Who to pick on. Bennett. Jankowski. Brodie. Rittich. Rittich has been solid this season outside of tonight. The other three have made us worse all season.
  3. That isn't really true though. He was poor for a long stretch. He recovered a bit statistically but still looked off. Smith still got the starts in the playoffs. I am not saying he isn't or can't be a starter. But I need more then four strong four games in October before I say he is.
  4. Which part doesn't make sense? For two seasons in a row he was stellar until February, and fell a part at the end. He is once again stellar early. Suggesting I want to see if he can sustain this for a full season with a starters load certainly makes sense. Announcing he is a starter and we shouldn't have doubts after 4 games is what doesn't make sense.
  5. We know early season Rittich can be great. It's late season Rittich that struggles. When the calendar turns to February is when the games get tougher, focus is harder to keep, and the body is a bit dinged up. It's then he can prove his is a starter in the NHL.
  6. Bennett is a liability. Bad penalty against LA left us short handed in OT. Stupid play at the offensive blue line while his D is changing costs us a goal. Terrible awareness and no IQ. When he gains confidence he just gets dumber. Worse then replacement level. Makes the team worse.
  7. kehatch


    I think you have to go with Rittich. I get wanting to manage his load and getting Talbot in a game. But part of moving away from Smith was to show Rittich he is the guy. Tough to stay with that message if you don't start him after a two day break following a shutout.
  8. Compared to Colorado, much better game against an inferior team. But similar themes. Top and third lines look good. Second and fourth lines struggling, particularly the second line. Rittich has been strong. D was stronger this game, which you would expect without Colorado top line and with our coach in charge of the matchups. But all three pairings were solid.
  9. -Top line was fine. Struggled five in five at times, but they don't match up with Colorados big line - The 3M line was crap across the board. Frolik was really bad. - The third line was a pleasent surprise. Both Lucic and Bennett had good games and Ryan is usually solid -Top pairing was good -Middle pairing struggled a bit, but I am not worried -Kylington didn't look good. -Rittich was strong -The game was terrible to watch due to the officiating. I felt like I was watching a Bantam 4 game where anybody that fell drew a penalty while actual infractions didn't get called. -The Flames can't blame the penalties. They got two goals on weak calls. They just started slow and couldn't handle the Colorado speed outside of half of the second period.
  10. Reffing is terrible. Benefiting the Flames as much as Colorado. But it's making the game unwatchable.
  11. They figured him out in February but then forgot what they figured out by March? The Flames didn't have a problem scoring in the regular season and the preseason means precisely nothing.
  12. Am I missing something? Did we not score 289 goals last season? Inability to score??
  13. I agree with your gut. It may not happen until after the season starts, but I can't see them passing the deadline without adding a D. Probably earlier then later. But, as you say, we will have to see how the season goes. If the Kylington / Andersson pair is rock solid and the top 6 stay healthy maybe that changes things.
  14. The playoffs were encouraging, I agree. I am fine with giving him a chance. But that is sort of the point of my post. He is a player that needs a good season and hopefully a good start. Making him the line roulette guy is probably not the best way to do that. The guy has been bounced around all three forward positions and hasn't been on a set line all preseason, and we still don't know where he is going to start. For a guy that has struggled but who should have more to show, that seems like a poor approach.
  15. No he isn't. The third line was a liability last season. Not just because of Bennett, but he was a big part of it. He has yet to show he can be a positive player in the NHL on a consistent basis. He somehow managed to be a team leading - 6 on a team with a positive differential of over 60, he takes way more penalties then he draws, his 5 on 5 numbers are poor, and he rarely plays special teams. And last season was an improvement. All that for 27 points and a 2.6.million dollar cap hit. He hasn't been fine. Either cut bait or put him in a position to be successful. But he is almost the last player on the team that should be jumping between all top 3 lines and every forward position.
  16. The coach has indicated Bennett is his guy to move up and down the roster. A little like Ryan was last year I guess. Hopefully it works out okay for him. But personally I think that is the last thing Bennett needs. Everytime he starts to find success on a line they move him. Then when he gets trapped on a line without success they leave him there. I am not in the Bennett fan club. But if your sticking with him at least put him in a situation to be successful.
  17. I am really hoping MacDonald doesn't get a contract. I was fine with a PTO, but after watching him play I am not interested. As the games got faster, he got worse. You can't have a liability on D. Kylington or Stone are better options.
  18. It's an over think. Tkachuk signed a team friendly deal. Point signed a very team friendly deal, in part due to the tax situation in Tampa. I don't think any fan would be okay with Tkachuk missing a portion of the season over the 250k difference between their contracts.
  19. It seems that this argument has found a mind of its own. The point was never that tax rates are the primary motivator for where a player signs. It was simply one of the rationales why Point got 6.75 and Tkachuk got 7.
  20. I like Rieder. I want my fourth line guys to do something other then play 6 sheltered minutes a night. I want them to be able to play up and perform a role such as kill penalties, draw penalties, play physical, etc. Rieder has the ability to play up, kill penalties, and has some offensive potential. Plus, with him on a 2 way minimum wage deal there is nothing to worry about. This isn't a Grossman type deal where the player is a liability and will hurt the team on the ice.
  21. I still think Jankowski is going to be traded. But if he isn't I agree with Cross that Quine is more likely to be waived compared to Czarnik.
  22. The PK is the big one for me. Calgary was an elite team 5 on 5, but our special teams were poor. Especially the PK. Last year out regular forwards on the PK were Lindholm, Jankowski, Ryan, Hathaway, and Backlund. We lost Hathaway and I won't be shocked to lose Jankowski. Ryan and Lindholm are sticking around, but weren't great on the PK. This is a good add.
  23. If you mean the pitch about this being a bridge deal to keep the team in tact, agreed. If that was the objective this would have been done in June.
  24. kehatch


    Good news for sure. Got better every game. As for starts, I guess that will depend on how Rittich is playing and how many starts the org has planned for Talbot. If the are looking at more of a 1A 1B scenario then I agree against LA, and maybe even against Vancouver game 2. But if they are giving Rittich the chance to be a legitimate starter, and he is playing well, my guess is game 6 against San Jose
  25. Mine are close to yours with a few key differences. I need to see Andersson handle bigger minutes before I put him on the top pairing full time. That is one of the reasons I think a Brodie trade is a non-starter right now. Giordano has a career season and won a Norris playing next to Brodie. I don't mess that up unless that pairing doesn't work or Andersson makes a serious push. I don't like Mangiapane in the top 6 yet, but he could earn his way there. I don't like Czarnik in the top 6 at all. My fourth line doesn't look like yours at all. I have: Gaudreau-Monahan-Ryan (Offensive): Ryan gives them a solid RH face off guy, and he plays a similar game to the kind of players that have had success on the top line Tkachuk-Lindholm-Bennett (Blend): Bennett adds a guy who can carry the puck into the offensive zone and add some skill. I like having an energy line in the top 6 and I think having Bennett and Tkachuk together gives you that. Plus, we get another top 6 with a LH RH face off option. Lucic-Backlund-Frolik (Defensive): Backlund and Frolik are obvious. They have been great together. Lucic's possession numbers are strong, plus he has a similar play style to Tkachuk. I also think playing with Backlund gives him the best chance to recover his game due to the so called 'Backlund Bump'. Mangiapane-Quine-Rieder (Sheltered): Quine is showing he is ready and he is a million less then Jankowski. Rieder makes the team to replace the PK time we lose with Jankowski. I think this is a quality 4 line that gives the team depth, special team support, but can contribute a bit on its own. (Scratch) Czarnik: Czarnik is an (almost) ideal 13 forward. He can play if we need him to and it lets guys like Dube develop in the AHL. The only issue is he is paid an extra 500K more then I would like. Which is why I am also open to a trade and bringing back a 700K 13 forward. Giordano-Brodie: This worked last season, and it worked very well. Brodie gets some flack, but he was part B to possibly the best pairing in the NHL last season. Hanafin-Hamonic: Old faithful, no need to mess this match up. MacDonald-Andersson: Kylington hasn't shown he is ready for a full time role. He is also not waiver eligible so he can easily be sent down. Signing MacDonald gives us the option to bringing Kylington up in the future without the pressure of 'do or die'. Stone: He wasn't my first pick for a 7D. But he is on a minimum wage contract and can clearly play at the NHL level, so here he is. This isn't perfect. I would like to see a bit of size on the top line from a player with a bit more offensive ability. I am not a huge fan of Bennett and putting him on the right side adds a bit of extra challenge to a player still working to find his way. I also don't love the lack of a RH shot on the third line. But overall I think this is a deep line up that is mobile top to bottom and that has a good range of offense / defense.
  • Create New...