Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

So I only have one question.

 

How many decades of the Flames inability to scout, draft and develope an NHL caliber goaltender will it take before you change from blaming the prospects?

If most every team in the league weren't having the same issue, I would gladly blame Flames staff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

If most every team in the league weren't having the same issue, I would gladly blame Flames staff.

 

A lot of current NHL starters were drafted and developed by their respective clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

 

A lot of current NHL starters were drafted and developed by their respective clubs.

Looks like about 10. But we're talking about one goalie each, pretty much. Not a lot of constant success stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Looks like about 10. But we're talking about one goalie each, pretty much. Not a lot of constant success stories.

 

Some teams have multiple goalies they have developed that have not yet stolen the starter job. And if you consider just development from FA signings, the number is even higher.

 

Calgary has a long history of poor goalie development, and considering neither Rittich or Kiprusoff were drafted by the Flames it's easy to see why some here believe it's an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Looks like about 10. But we're talking about one goalie each, pretty much. Not a lot of constant success stories.

I would say closer to half the league has a starter that was either drafted and/or developed internally, with about 3-4 having both goalies developed from within.

 

I'm on the same page as others believing the Flames fall well below the average in goalie development. Whether that is pinned on scouting, drafting, coaching, culture, who knows, but when in the entire history of the team (inc. Atlanta) theres been only 5 goalies with over 200 games played with the franchise thats not just bad luck with individual attitudes/motivation.  There may be a diamond in the rough with Rittich but if history tells us anything  it will go 2 ways. 1- he becomes a franchise goalie and the team continues to ride him with minimal regard for futures developmant, or 2- he'll peter out in a year or two, the team will give up him, trade him off for another reclaimation project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarasti said:

 

Some teams have multiple goalies they have developed that have not yet stolen the starter job. And if you consider just development from FA signings, the number is even higher.

 

Calgary has a long history of poor goalie development, and considering neither Rittich or Kiprusoff were drafted by the Flames it's easy to see why some here believe it's an issue.

There certainly could have been things done differently. If the Feaster crew had have treated the closing out on Kipper seriously, things would be different. Maybe we have Vasilevsky, Bishop etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luck has a lot to do with a goalie's development.

Murray came up at the exact right time.

Playing well in the AHL and had a contender in front of him.

He doesn;t seem to be magic right now.

Binnington came up amid a coaching change where players were fighting fo their jobs.

He's have 1/2 a good season and 1/2 a good one this year.

Could be a stud.

 

Rittich is a find.

Developed properly, at a later age, but still developed well.

Gillies was a big guy that looked like he could be a thing.

He's far too inconsistent and has not improved his weknesses much.

Ortio had a chance, but couldn;t even beat out lesser guys.

Inving....

Missed pick.

 

When you miss out on picks, you have to look outside.

And be lucky when one is available.

Bishop, Andersen, Bob, MAF...

All except Andersen became available due to being too expensive to keep (and drafts).

There's only a few actual prospectes turned NHL goalies out there.

And the sample size is still small.

And the chance of them having long careers is just as small.

 

We have a few guys developing that could take the next step.

Zagidulin and Parsons.

Wolf later.

Sure, the ones closest are not 18 year olds.

Very few are ready that early.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Luck has a lot to do with a goalie's development.

Murray came up at the exact right time.

Playing well in the AHL and had a contender in front of him.

He doesn;t seem to be magic right now.

Binnington came up amid a coaching change where players were fighting fo their jobs.

He's have 1/2 a good season and 1/2 a good one this year.

Could be a stud.

 

Rittich is a find.

Developed properly, at a later age, but still developed well.

Gillies was a big guy that looked like he could be a thing.

He's far too inconsistent and has not improved his weknesses much.

Ortio had a chance, but couldn;t even beat out lesser guys.

Inving....

Missed pick.

 

When you miss out on picks, you have to look outside.

And be lucky when one is available.

Bishop, Andersen, Bob, MAF...

All except Andersen became available due to being too expensive to keep (and drafts).

There's only a few actual prospectes turned NHL goalies out there.

And the sample size is still small.

And the chance of them having long careers is just as small.

 

We have a few guys developing that could take the next step.

Zagidulin and Parsons.

Wolf later.

Sure, the ones closest are not 18 year olds.

Very few are ready that early.

 

 

I have high hopes for Wolf. I think he may be a steal. His numbers this year are ridiculous.

 

I'm a big Parsons fan as well and I think he's full of potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading an article about Talbot's offseason. He was struggling and went back to an old coach to get back to where he was.

It highlights just how hard it is to be an NHL goalie. You veer, even just a bit, off of what makes you successful and your career is suddenly in jeopardy.

I will admit, I do not think BT understands goaltending. He needs to pass it on to someone else and open the wallet.

From the 3 headed monster to Elliott to Smith, he wants to cheap out on goaltending imho.

I've never thought BT is good at managing the G position. Just constant band-aids that aren't good enough.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarasti said:

 

Some teams have multiple goalies they have developed that have not yet stolen the starter job. And if you consider just development from FA signings, the number is even higher.

 

Calgary has a long history of poor goalie development, and considering neither Rittich or Kiprusoff were drafted by the Flames it's easy to see why some here believe it's an issue.


calgary for sure has a long standing problem I don’t think anyone is denying that. 

but I think the point is it’s not just a Flames issue. Hockey in general, at all levels, struggles to evaluate the goalie positions. It’s not an easy fix nor is it an easy problem to pinpoint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the team needs to play a better TeamD game. Do we have the guys to do that? If we were able to play better TeamD then I think goaltending would look better.

 

id love to have a game saver goalie - a guy that steals a bunch of games, but I also want a punishing D that Is suffocating. I’ve liked Nashville and St Louis’s D. 
 

we say we would like to develop our guy, but traditionally, goalies sift through different organizations before reaching potential. How many teams hadBishop been on before he settled in a Dallas? Anderson is on his second team. 
 

Elliott was supposed to be a starter, even he ended up with how many teams? He did really well with the Blues but didn’t match our system of play. 

 

Anderson in Ottawa would’ve been great for us but didn’t end up here and went back into the draft. He was on 4 or more different teams as well. 
 

goalies are tough and if we look at teams who didn’t develop their goalie, how many teams has their goalies played for prior to settling? Even Rask wasn’t drafted by the Bruins, but developed by them, yes. 
 

would anyone here take Markstrom? He was drafted by a different team but a lot of his development happened the last few years with the Canucks. 

 

could it be goalies might not make it due to the way the Flames play in front of them as well? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

I think the team needs to play a better TeamD game. Do we have the guys to do that? If we were able to play better TeamD then I think goaltending would look better.

 

id love to have a game saver goalie - a guy that steals a bunch of games, but I also want a punishing D that Is suffocating. I’ve liked Nashville and St Louis’s D. 
 

we say we would like to develop our guy, but traditionally, goalies sift through different organizations before reaching potential. How many teams hadBishop been on before he settled in a Dallas? Anderson is on his second team. 
 

Elliott was supposed to be a starter, even he ended up with how many teams? He did really well with the Blues but didn’t match our system of play. 

 

Anderson in Ottawa would’ve been great for us but didn’t end up here and went back into the draft. He was on 4 or more different teams as well. 
 

goalies are tough and if we look at teams who didn’t develop their goalie, how many teams has their goalies played for prior to settling? Even Rask wasn’t drafted by the Bruins, but developed by them, yes. 
 

would anyone here take Markstrom? He was drafted by a different team but a lot of his development happened the last few years with the Canucks. 

 

could it be goalies might not make it due to the way the Flames play in front of them as well? 

 

 

I'd take Markstrom in a heartbeat. He's been stellar for Vancouver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I was reading an article about Talbot's offseason. He was struggling and went back to an old coach to get back to where he was.

It highlights just how hard it is to be an NHL goalie. You veer, even just a bit, off of what makes you successful and your career is suddenly in jeopardy.

I will admit, I do not think BT understands goaltending. He needs to pass it on to someone else and open the wallet.

From the 3 headed monster to Elliott to Smith, he wants to cheap out on goaltending imho.

I've never thought BT is good at managing the G position. Just constant band-aids that aren't good enough.

 


 

I also don’t think that High caliber goalies come available very often. When they do what price can you pay? Some might say sell the farm, while others would say it’s too expensive. 
 

I hated the Elliott trade right away. Just felt the Flames’ system was not to his game and it left him vulnerable. We are/were not the Blues. 
 

Something went wrong with the Bishop trades, possibly the owners. And they also have to agree to signing money to players, and possibly veto deals paying goalies too much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cross16 said:


calgary for sure has a long standing problem I don’t think anyone is denying that. 

but I think the point is it’s not just a Flames issue. Hockey in general, at all levels, struggles to evaluate the goalie positions. It’s not an easy fix nor is it an easy problem to pinpoint. 

Drafting by stats is painful. With goalies, I'd basically look at Rittich.

Even an 18yo already should have the foundation on the basics. If you get an athletic guy like Parsons, it might not work out. Goaltending is 75% science imo.

I don't think at that age you would expect to teach a guy lateral movement, angles, anticipation, vision, etc.

That should be in place already, then just attention to detail.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, cross16 said:


calgary for sure has a long standing problem I don’t think anyone is denying that. 

but I think the point is it’s not just a Flames issue. Hockey in general, at all levels, struggles to evaluate the goalie positions. It’s not an easy fix nor is it an easy problem to pinpoint. 

I equate them to QB's in the NFL.  Some teams can successfully go from one to another while others go through decades of struggling to get their own.  I find in both cases they are tougher to scout than other positions based on the quality of the competition, and the abilities of their teams.  

 

Who was the Kings last quality goalie drafted and developed prior to Quick?  Tampa's before Vasilevsky? Pittsburgh before Fleury?  Sabres before and after Miller? Senators besides Emery? Hurricanes besides Ward? Coyotes since Khabibulin? What have the Leafs done since Potvin (Rask doesn't count)?  Can't give the Oil any credit for Dubnyk either.  

 

But a reminder too is that teams that have had more recent success have failed on as many or more prospects as they have graduated. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talbot, Jones, Andersen, Allen are good examples of how hard t is to bcome a starter.

You toil away behind the best goalies and never get the right chance.

Talbot's career derailed under a fake defense in EDM.

Jones is behind the worst D bunch I could imagine.

Andersen suffers from a mobile defense that only cares about scoring.

 

Rittich is our best chance of turning a backup into a stellar starter.

Maybe we can develop Parsons and Wolf, but beyond that we have mostly crappy stuff.

Zag is adjusting to winning, but struggles with the size of the ice.

Still trying to figure it out.

He may be another Rittich, but it remains to be seen.

 

I agree that BT has no clue about goalies, and Sigalet has done little to solidify the scouting/drafting.

How did we end up with Elliott, Hiller, Ramo, Mason, Gillies, Smith?

Some haven;t exactly been cheap either, whether salary or trade chips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Even an 18yo already should have the foundation on the basics.

 

I don't think at that age you would expect to teach a guy lateral movement, angles, anticipation, vision, etc.

 

Athleticism is definitely an advantage, but if you don't have the fundamentals down, a lot of pucks are going to get past you that shouldn't...

 

I read this book when I was a kid, and then read read it a few times more...   It was re-released around '97...   While goaltending has come a long way since then, the basics will always remain the same...

 

            d4a40cfcdc06ded20f57d03a60444e8b.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

If most every team in the league weren't having the same issue, I would gladly blame Flames staff.

 

Ah but you wouldn't.   We've had but one decent goalie since the cup win, Kipper.  And that was far from development.

 

It's just not who you are and that's ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

So I only have one question.

 

How many decades of the Flames inability to scout, draft and develope an NHL caliber goaltender will it take before you change from blaming the prospects?

 

In times of uncertainty, or times of failure:

 

One can kick the team while it's down, or one can defend it to its bitter end.

 

What is the proper course of action?   Both perspectives are needed.   Both reality and hope are always needed.

 

The only thing that is not needed is disdain or lack of respect for differing perspectives.

 

At least, that's what I'd say if our discussions on here had a real world impact  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Ah but you wouldn't.   We've had but one decent goalie since the cup win, Kipper.  And that was far from development.

 

It's just not who you are and that's ok.

I just don't get the, "Development" aspect.

At 18 or 26, if you want $6mil per, you can't struggle with the basics. It's amazingly hard to find goalies that don't struggle with the basics. You don't just learn starting at 18, it has to be there already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I just don't get the, "Development" aspect.

At 18 or 26, if you want $6mil per, you can't struggle with the basics. It's amazingly hard to find goalies that don't struggle with the basics. You don't just learn starting at 18, it has to be there already.

Here's an anecdote thats kinda relevant. During my years at midget level back in the day I both played against  and with Trevor Kidd (AAA Selects). There was absolutely no way at the time anyone would think he had NHL potential. Even making it to AAA he wasn't the clear starter, but he did well enough to get to Brandon and apparently thats where it started coming together. Add in the fact that the likes of Belfour, Joseph, Healey, and currently Bobrovsky, Talbot, and Jones were never drafted at all shows not all is lost if you're not a standout by the time you're 18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre Kipper/D. Sutter era we shared a farm  team. That fact alone makes our goalie and team development substandard.[insert luck here]

 

Since then what success stories have we had? 

This bunch has trouble developing, drafting, fixing or until Rittich, finding backups let alone Starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Pre Kipper/D. Sutter era we shared a farm  team. That fact alone makes our goalie and team development substandard.[insert luck here]

 

Since then what success stories have we had? 

This bunch has trouble developing, drafting, fixing or until Rittich, finding backups let alone Starters.

 

They tried to fix Rittich by teaching him to play the puck more.

How's that working?

 

Honestly, if it wasn;t for Rittich's skills, we would have another failed goalie.

Keep them away from JS until they are fully developed.

Parsons is better off in Kansas right now.

I don;t know much about the guy in Stockton.

Gillies has been playing better and Zag continues to win.

Then again the team is dominating on the scoresheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2019 at 12:16 PM, sak22 said:

I equate them to QB's in the NFL.  Some teams can successfully go from one to another while others go through decades of struggling to get their own.  I find in both cases they are tougher to scout than other positions based on the quality of the competition, and the abilities of their teams.  

 

Who was the Kings last quality goalie drafted and developed prior to Quick?  Tampa's before Vasilevsky? Pittsburgh before Fleury?  Sabres before and after Miller? Senators besides Emery? Hurricanes besides Ward? Coyotes since Khabibulin? What have the Leafs done since Potvin (Rask doesn't count)?  Can't give the Oil any credit for Dubnyk either.  

 

But a reminder too is that teams that have had more recent success have failed on as many or more prospects as they have graduated. 

 

Agreed for 2 reasons. 

1- There really aren't that many great ones. The ones that would be great no matter where they played and in what system/situation or what team they played for. There are more good goalies/QBs than very good/great ones and that leads to point 2.

2- For the rest of the good goalies/QB, you need the right mixture of team, scheme, coaching etc.

 

So unless you are getting a really great goalie, which again due to scarcity is tough to find, you need a lot to intersect to really feel good about your goaltending situation. 

 

At the same time though a lot of this discussion is losing me because of the play of Rittich. I see a lot of "well the  Flames have been bad at developing until Rittich". Well, just like a good QB, sometimes you need to only get it right once (which is often the case for many NHL teams). 

 

That being said the 2 models, or teams, that i think you've seen do well with goalies is Anaheim and Washington and they've done well by continuing to take goalies at all point in the draft, no matter what the situation is on the NHL club. That's not a model the Flames have done well until recently, so that is the model they should continue. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2019 at 10:36 AM, cross16 said:

 

Agreed for 2 reasons. 

1- There really aren't that many great ones. The ones that would be great no matter where they played and in what system/situation or what team they played for. There are more good goalies/QBs than very good/great ones and that leads to point 2.

2- For the rest of the good goalies/QB, you need the right mixture of team, scheme, coaching etc.

 

So unless you are getting a really great goalie, which again due to scarcity is tough to find, you need a lot to intersect to really feel good about your goaltending situation. 

 

At the same time though a lot of this discussion is losing me because of the play of Rittich. I see a lot of "well the  Flames have been bad at developing until Rittich". Well, just like a good QB, sometimes you need to only get it right once (which is often the case for many NHL teams). 

 

That being said the 2 models, or teams, that i think you've seen do well with goalies is Anaheim and Washington and they've done well by continuing to take goalies at all point in the draft, no matter what the situation is on the NHL club. That's not a model the Flames have done well until recently, so that is the model they should continue. 

 

I'd add Nashville and NYR to the teams you mentioned as well.

Rinne/Saros and Lundqvist/Georgiev is solid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...