Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Thebrewcrew

2021 Offseason Thread

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sure, take Phil Kessel out of the Coyotes and see how far they go?  Like, VAN without Pettersson.  CBJ without PLD.  Etc.  Still need to score even if you play well 5-on-5.

 

At the end of the day, we didn't underachieve by much.  Sure we expected the playoffs but the expectation was one round at most.  We are not a good team and management doesn't trust it's depth.  

 

I hope we do it right.  I'm just thinking losing Gaudreau alone could be enough because our team is so bad to begin with.  Like, If it's broken, then don't fix it.  Of course, I hope we move more veteran pieces out for picks and prospects.


For me if the flames moved Gaudreau they’d be the coyotes right now, not the coyotes minus Kessel. 
 

how much they underachieved is fair debate. I think it’s quite a bit personally and had Markstrom been healthy or they have Sutter for the whole year i think it’s easily an 8-10 pt standings swing so i think there is more runway down to the bottom. 

Share this post


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

 

I think the Coyotes are a good example. Pretty good D core, avg to below avg offence but a good d core, goaltending and a defensive structure keep them from bottoming out. That would be my fear with moving Gaudreau for picks, unless your willing to go deeper of course. 

 

I just think if you want to rebuild and do it right it's gotta be deep. Your moving out Gaudreau, Backs, Gio, Tanev and Markstrom. Anything shy of that and i'm just not sure I see a bottom 5 team unless they had a big run of injuries. 

 

I just agreed with another one of your posts.   I marked it down.   I somewhat disagree that a deep rebuild would be needed to go bottom 5.  I think age will do a lot of that.    But, big picture, I agree.

 

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

Tank Right for Shane Wright!

 

Is "tank" too racist and transphobic?  Sorry don't mean to trigger any sensitive people here.   "Retool"... Let's retool right.

 

Don't forget Bedard!

 

 

Yes what are we calling this:    A "full retool"?    lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2021 at 9:45 AM, lou44291 said:

double post - but I'll use it. This one is for you JJ:

- If we do acquire Eichel, and it's not going well, we've got a pretty valuable asset to trade on the market for futures and whatnot for a rebuild. What do you think? Does it make an Eichel trade more palatable for you? Or is rolling the dice for Bedard, etc more worth it in your eyes? Honest question here. I have no knowledge of the up and coming talent. But we do know a bonified #1 C is unprecedentedly available on the market now. 

 

thanks for the thoughts,

 

In terms of risk, I put Eichel as extreme high risk.   not a lot of players successfully come back from that type of injury/surgery he'll be coming back from.

 

I put Bedard (and consolation prizes) at relatively low risk.    I mean sure he's high risk now but he won't be by draft day.

 

Based on that, I think you let Eichel do his thing elsewhere and you focus on Bedard, picks.  It takes longer but it's a much better percentage play.  Plus from what we know now, Bedard is a whole other level above Eichel   (if he projects).

 

 

On other notes:

 

I'd scrap the GM and President.    The owners need to sit down and figure out what they're doing.   Someone has too much influence there I think, others not enough.  Lock them in a room type thing.

 

You know, I'd be inclined to keep Sutter.  But someone needs to sit down with him and be like...look man.   We ain't winning the cup for a while.  You're here to build leaders and great hockey players.   You up for it?              He'd have a mental breakdown for a few days but he might just come back and say yes.

 

And quite frankly there's a lot of sissies out there these days that could use him as a coach.

 

We call it a rebuild for a reason, we don't call it a tank.

 

Tanking is purposely being bad for picks.

 

A rebuild, yeah.  You sell all your assets for picks.   But then you sign undrafted prospects.  You bring prospects over from Europe.   You sign young UFAs who want minutes.  You build that team up again, right away.      And you build leaders.
and...yeah.   everyone should have the understanding that if some players develop value, they may go come trade deadline and end up in the playoffs with another team.     But nothing is wasted, every acquisition and every move is to build and get better now and in the future.

 

So Sutter is interesting.   But he would have to make that choice if he wanted that role.

 

 

I would also keep Harvey the Hound.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I just agreed with another one of your posts.   I marked it down.   I somewhat disagree that a deep rebuild would be needed to go bottom 5.  I think age will do a lot of that.    But, big picture, I agree.

 

 

Don't forget Bedard!

 

 

Yes what are we calling this:    A "full retool"?    lol

 

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

 

Sorry, I mean full retool hard for Bedard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

 

Sorry, I mean full retool hard for Bedard!

 

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

Tank hard for Bedard!

 

Sorry, I mean full retool hard for Bedard!

 

It's much more difficult to set up to fail for two years.

One year hard enough, but failing for the future or for two years?

Almost impossible.

 

The first year last place lotto win would result in immediate fire GM and coaches.

Trades would consist of young players for vets with just enough juice to get a year close to the plyoffs or in.

 

And that assumes you can even construct a lineup that fails so badly.

Since a rebuild scorched earth is last possible scenario, re-tool brings back enough juice to win about half your games.

That's solid 5th in a division.

4th in a weak division.

 

 

Share this post


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

 

It's much more difficult to set up to fail for two years.

One year hard enough, but failing for the future or for two years?

Almost impossible.

 

The first year last place lotto win would result in immediate fire GM and coaches.

Trades would consist of young players for vets with just enough juice to get a year close to the plyoffs or in.

 

And that assumes you can even construct a lineup that fails so badly.

Since a rebuild scorched earth is last possible scenario, re-tool brings back enough juice to win about half your games.

That's solid 5th in a division.

4th in a weak division.

 

I'm not saying that we will definitely get Bedard, but your thinking here makes me even more confident we're in the running.

 

Age our team and our existing prospects by two years on paper.

 

It's catastrophic.

 

Any of the above meddling will only make it more catastrophic, and that has been shown here time and time again.  Wat you think happens next here, they fire the coach and Bennett decides to reverse the trade?

 

We headed for a big ol bucket of top draft picks and ain't nobody changin that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm not saying that we will definitely get Bedard, but your thinking here makes me even more confident we're in the running.

 

Age our team and our existing prospects by two years on paper.

 

It's catastrophic.

 

Any of the above meddling will only make it more catastrophic, and that has been shown here time and time again.  Wat you think happens next here, they fire the coach and Bennett decides to reverse the trade?

 

We headed for a big ol bucket of top draft picks and ain't nobody changin that now.

 

My thinking?  I'm describing how ludicrous a double tank is with this particular team.

Neither the rebuild I described nor the re-tool is inevitable.

Those would be the worst case scenarior for both.

This past season has to be one of those worse case scenarios, between career down years by top players and winning just enough.

We aren't like to rebuild, so let's just drop that.

As for a re-tool, no GM is about to do it just to end up the same or worse.

So, that takes out basement doesn't it.

 

Whether I agree with any of the moves or not, the owner/manager/scouts will make move to improve the team.  Spending to the cap, trading top players for top players, signing UFA's, trading picks, whatever.  They have a business to run and don't see long term, slow growth as being a win.  Melnyk didn't tank to rebuild the team, he did it to save money then and now.  Not every owner has that "vision".  

 

Share this post


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

 

My thinking?  I'm describing how ludicrous a double tank is with this particular team.

Neither the rebuild I described nor the re-tool is inevitable.

Those would be the worst case scenarior for both.

This past season has to be one of those worse case scenarios, between career down years by top players and winning just enough.

We aren't like to rebuild, so let's just drop that.

As for a re-tool, no GM is about to do it just to end up the same or worse.

So, that takes out basement doesn't it.

 

Whether I agree with any of the moves or not, the owner/manager/scouts will make move to improve the team.  Spending to the cap, trading top players for top players, signing UFA's, trading picks, whatever.  They have a business to run and don't see long term, slow growth as being a win.  Melnyk didn't tank to rebuild the team, he did it to save money then and now.  Not every owner has that "vision".  

 

 

We all know the Flames ownership won't tank, especially for two years.  I mean sorry, have a "very deep retool".  Of course they won't.

 

But do you personally think they SHOULD if we want to win the Cup in the next 10 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think I agree with this. For full disclosure I am in favor of a rebuild so I think if they want to do this it has to go deeper than Gaudreau.

 

This isn't going to land well for most people, but the reality is the Flames actually played some really good hockey under Sutter. At 5 on 5 since March 10th:

5th best in the league in CF%

4th best in FewickF%

8th best in ShotsF%

11th best in goalsF%

3rd best in XGf% (they trailed only Toronto and Colorado)

5th best in Scoring chances F%

3rd best in High danger chancesF%

6th worst in Save %

 

What sticks out there is the Save% because under Darryl the Flames became on the best defending teams in the entire league at 5 on 5. All of these numbers above are due to improvement in the defensive side of the game, they were avg offensively. Not to pin this all on Markstrom (I think his injury is really what derailed his season) but Flames get avg or slightly better goaltending under the first month or 2 with Sutter they are in the playoffs right now.

 

Argument could be made that if the team is already avg offensively so take our their best offensive player and what do you have? It's a fair one but i guess I would counter by saying what is the read on Markstrom? on Tkachuk? I bet both players bounce back next season so then the argument becomes is the loss of Gaudreau offset by that? Even if they don't is the loss of Gaudreau worth 10 points in the standings when they were already a below avg offence? I don't think it is personally. 

 

Not advocating the Flames are a good team or that a rebuild isn't necessary or anything like that. Based on observations of the team game under Sutter I just don't think a rebuild is as easy moving Gaudreau, you'll need to go deeper but I am in favor of having that conversation. 


 

we hear that every year. If the Flames get average or above average goaltending they’d win. It’s frustrating. I get that numbers say differently. But for me the eye test still doesn’t cut it. Not saying markstrom wasn’t bad, but also saying it can’t be just get the save% down and you get better results... I get you didn’t say that fully. This team has tendencies to leave goalies out to dry and then have great D percentages, then it looks like it is all on the goalies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I would be in favour of a rebuild, a return to the Pacific Division may nullify that.

 

Vegas and Edmonton are the two best teams on paper.

The Flames are better than the Canucks

Anaheim and SJ are rebuilders.

LA could be a surprise team

Seattle is an unknown.

 

Not all that hard to see the Flames being a top 3 team in the Pacific and that's more an indictment on the Pacific than it is a compliment to the Flames.

 

I think the Pacific being what it is will be a driving force behind the moves the Flames make this offseason 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

We all know the Flames ownership won't tank, especially for two years.  I mean sorry, have a "very deep retool".  Of course they won't.

 

But do you personally think they SHOULD if we want to win the Cup in the next 10 years?

 

I think we have some players that we need and should keep.

I also see about half a lineup that should not b here.

Frustrated that we don't improve our D.

We are not going anywhere with Gio.

We need a top D like Seth Jones (just an example).

Our bottom 6 is ineffective.

Not that it should score half the goals, but we had a bottom line that barely got any.

Lucic an necessary player, but expecting him to be a shutdown player is dumb.

Backlund being wasted.

Trade him to improve somewhee else and have a decent 3rd line C.

Our best RW used as a #1C because...

 

I don't know exactly what makes sense to re-tool.

It's harder to come up with players that you don't want to keep to improve.

Balance that with what gets you the most bang.

 

Best trade assets:

Guadreau, Tkachuk, Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Dube, Mangiapane, Valimaki, Ras, Tanev, Gio.

 

Players that can improve your team by keeping them and surrounding them with good players:

Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Valimaki, Ras, Tanev.

 

I think it comes down to Monahan, Tkachuk, Backlund and Gio being the ones moved.  Tkachuk would hurt the most out of that group, but it's either him or Gaudreau.  Gaudreau can improve any player we bring is as a #1C.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


 

we hear that every year. If the Flames get average or above average goaltending they’d win. It’s frustrating. I get that numbers say differently. But for me the eye test still doesn’t cut it. Not saying markstrom wasn’t bad, but also saying it can’t be just get the save% down and you get better results... I get you didn’t say that fully. This team has tendencies to leave goalies out to dry and then have great D percentages, then it looks like it is all on the goalies. 

 

I think the issue with Markstrom was injury.  He was good to start, when we were not a good defensive team.

He was good to finish, when we were better but couldn't score.

The middle was poor defensive play but he was concussed and took time to overcome it.

 

One thing not mentioned was the Flames shooting themselves in the foot so often.

A simple mistake in the net.

That is not a goalie problem and is about as unlucky as you can find.

Many of them were a combo of miscues.

 

Blowing games we should have won.  That's really what the numbers show.  We are not the only team to deal with it, but we didn't help the cause by scoring our way out of it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think we have some players that we need and should keep.

I also see about half a lineup that should not b here.

 

Perfect man.  I think we are all on the same page.

 

Flames won't do it for sure.  But I sure hope we do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

While I would be in favour of a rebuild, a return to the Pacific Division may nullify that.

 

Vegas and Edmonton are the two best teams on paper.

The Flames are better than the Canucks

Anaheim and SJ are rebuilders.

LA could be a surprise team

Seattle is an unknown.

 

Not all that hard to see the Flames being a top 3 team in the Pacific and that's more an indictment on the Pacific than it is a compliment to the Flames.

 

I think the Pacific being what it is will be a driving force behind the moves the Flames make this offseason 

 

 

On one hand yes.

 

On the other hand, if we can trade Gaudreau, Monahan, Backlund, and Giordano for picks and prospects AND still make the playoffs as the 3rd seed in a weak division, then we absolutely should.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Perfect man.  I think we are all on the same page.

 

Flames won't do it for sure.  But I sure hope we do.  

 

It's a given that about half won't be back.

Okay, maybe a third.

Without even getting into the core players, Nesterov, Stone, Ritchie, Simon, Leivo, Nordstrom, Froese, Robinson and Domingue won't all be here.

Stone, Nordstrom and Ritchie were okay for what we expected them to be.

Leivo was a slow starter.

Those are not names that win you games.

Fine if you want to bring back a couple as extras.

But that's $6m committed to marginal players as it stands.

 

The core has problems.  Some of them just can't raise their game when we need it.

No Playoff Same Bennett TM, no sacrifice to win a game players (except maybe one or two D).

Plenty of skill, just only a small handful of players that can strap others to their backs and drag them into the fight.

And do the things we need done.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

While I would be in favour of a rebuild, a return to the Pacific Division may nullify that.

 

Vegas and Edmonton are the two best teams on paper.

The Flames are better than the Canucks

Anaheim and SJ are rebuilders.

LA could be a surprise team

Seattle is an unknown.

 

Not all that hard to see the Flames being a top 3 team in the Pacific and that's more an indictment on the Pacific than it is a compliment to the Flames.

 

I think the Pacific being what it is will be a driving force behind the moves the Flames make this offseason 

 

 

I wouldn't even say EDM is a top 2 on paper.

They won games when 2 guys scored and they got enough PP's.

Or when a 38 year old goalie was fully rested and had a rennaisance season.

On paper they had little depth beyond about 4 players up front and 2-3 in the back.

 

They will need to get Seattle to take Koskinen to be able to afford their RFA's and replacements.

And find a new starter.

If we did nothing, we would still have better depth, which is sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

My thinking?  I'm describing how ludicrous a double tank is with this particular team.

Neither the rebuild I described nor the re-tool is inevitable.

Those would be the worst case scenarior for both.

This past season has to be one of those worse case scenarios, between career down years by top players and winning just enough.

We aren't like to rebuild, so let's just drop that.

As for a re-tool, no GM is about to do it just to end up the same or worse.

So, that takes out basement doesn't it.

 

Whether I agree with any of the moves or not, the owner/manager/scouts will make move to improve the team.  Spending to the cap, trading top players for top players, signing UFA's, trading picks, whatever.  They have a business to run and don't see long term, slow growth as being a win.  Melnyk didn't tank to rebuild the team, he did it to save money then and now.  Not every owner has that "vision".  

 

 

I do admire you

 

monty python fight GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

On one hand yes.

 

On the other hand, if we can trade Gaudreau, Monahan, Backlund, and Giordano for picks and prospects AND still make the playoffs as the 3rd seed in a weak division, then we absolutely should.  

 

I recently learned of a new corporate word for this  (because "reorgs" are now bad words).

 

This would be a "realignment"

Share this post


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

 

I do admire you

 

monty python fight GIF

 

And you are being really silly.  It's not realistic to think that the Flames do a re-tool to the extent of losing two seasons (which is what I was aying).

I would say the chances of a rebuild is less than 5%.

So that leaves a re-tool on the fly and a team impatient to improve.

Not a two year lotto teams.

 

We get it.  Rebuild or bust.  You want to load up on 1st rounders this and the next 2 year, at least one being a franchise altering player.

Use one on a goalie.  Whoops, then we have to use one 1st on a goalie, lessening what we get with the other(s).

 

I guess the first part of the plan is to find teams that offer 1st rounders over the next three drafts for a limited bunch of players.

Have to be teams that are not going to make the playoffs, but whoops we traded them something to help them make it.

Balance that with the NTC's we have to limit the trades to playof likely teams.

Even getting lucky and getting one of two franchise altering players leaves you with a bunch of possible Zary's or Valimaki's.

Or Poirier's and Klimchuk's and Kylingtons.

5 years from now we are closer to Buffalo than Colorado.

Share this post


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

 

And you are being really silly.  It's not realistic to think that the Flames do a re-tool to the extent of losing two seasons (which is what I was aying).

I would say the chances of a rebuild is less than 5%.

So that leaves a re-tool on the fly and a team impatient to improve.

Not a two year lotto teams.

 

We get it.  Rebuild or bust.  You want to load up on 1st rounders this and the next 2 year, at least one being a franchise altering player.

Use one on a goalie.  Whoops, then we have to use one 1st on a goalie, lessening what we get with the other(s).

 

I guess the first part of the plan is to find teams that offer 1st rounders over the next three drafts for a limited bunch of players.

Have to be teams that are not going to make the playoffs, but whoops we traded them something to help them make it.

Balance that with the NTC's we have to limit the trades to playof likely teams.

Even getting lucky and getting one of two franchise altering players leaves you with a bunch of possible Zary's or Valimaki's.

Or Poirier's and Klimchuk's and Kylingtons.

5 years from now we are closer to Buffalo than Colorado.

 

Guilty as charged, if that GIF was accurate for the Flames, he would have a perfectly intact left arm, although probably too small to hold up a sword.

 

Mind you, he'd have no legs.  No right arm.  And no head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JJ it's not going to happen as much as you want it to.  Pacific is too weak for us to bottom out.

 

Monahan is not going to grab you much in return having a down year or two and being injured.

Gio is not going anywhere unless he wants to move.

Gaudreau wants to stay apparently but do the managment want him?

You should not move Lindholm when he is on such a good contract in a flat cap world.

The only real trade chip you have in the forwards to get anything half decent back is Chucky.

I agree you do not move Mangeipane.

 

I can see them standing still with the D.  Would not surprise me to see Stone back on a minimum contract 1 way as 5/6D

Is Mackey good enough to cement a spot next year so you can move one of Valimaki, Andersson or Hanifin?  Not saying I want to just looking at what trade chips we might have from the players.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's great that Johnny has been vocal about wanting to stay, but at what cost?

 

The flat cap and economic landscape of the league may help the Flames, but it still won't be cheap. Gaudreau has been one of the top 10-15pt producers in the league his entire career. Just looking at some comps, Gaudreau's body of work puts him in line with the Benn/Kucherov/Stone/Seguin deals, which all come in at around 9.5x8.

 

I don't know if he will get that much from the Flames, or any team for that matter, but that's what the ask will be. It's the 2nd contract of a players career where you pay for their potential, in the 3rd deal you pay for the body of work. I really appreciate what Gaudreau has done since 2014, but I'm not sure the juice s worth the squeeze, in regards to an extension. Good luck building a winner when you haven't been able to do so with Gaudreau at 925k or 6.75 when you're paying him 8-9.5. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

It's great that Johnny has been vocal about wanting to stay, but at what cost?

 

The flat cap and economic landscape of the league may help the Flames, but it still won't be cheap. Gaudreau has been one of the top 10-15pt producers in the league his entire career. Just looking at some comps, Gaudreau's body of work puts him in line with the Benn/Kucherov/Stone/Seguin deals, which all come in at around 9.5x8.

 

I don't know if he will get that much from the Flames, or any team for that matter, but that's what the ask will be. It's the 2nd contract of a players career where you pay for their potential, in the 3rd deal you pay for the body of work. I really appreciate what Gaudreau has done since 2014, but I'm not sure the juice s worth the squeeze, in regards to an extension. Good luck building a winner when you haven't been able to do so with Gaudreau at 925k or 6.75 when you're paying him 8-9.5. 

I believe it’s time to move on from JH. Part of it is his struggles in the playoffs, the other part, sadly, is that I feel everyone else on the team gets a free ride while he’s here. Ship him off, push the “team” into the spotlight instead of the individual, and bring your work boots every game. I agree with TBC that we haven’t gotten a sniff at the cup with JH at 925k or 6.75, and it would be asinine to turn around and give him more than 10% of our cap space and move forward with him in the fold. It would hurt our chances even more. 
 

Mony + Johnny 

real estate house GIF

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, lou44291 said:

I believe it’s time to move on from JH. Part of it is his struggles in the playoffs, the other part, sadly, is that I feel everyone else on the team gets a free ride while he’s here. Ship him off, push the “team” into the spotlight instead of the individual, and bring your work boots every game. I agree with TBC that we haven’t gotten a sniff at the cup with JH at 925k or 6.75, and it would be asinine to turn around and give him more than 10% of our cap space and move forward with him in the fold. It would hurt our chances even more. 
 

Mony + Johnny 

real estate house GIF

The most I'd do is 7.75x6 with Gaudreau. I doubt he'd accept though. The fact that this hypothetical extension would happen a couple years after the likes of Kuch and Stone would make it harder for me to give him max term.

 

Even then, many of us have had this conversation, Gaudreau isn't necessarily the guy to build a winner around. He's an incredible talent, but a lot like Phil Kessel. If he's your 3rd or 4th best player, you have an incredible team. If the Flames are paying him 8+, like a franchise player, that's too much for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...