HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Calgary Flames
Notices

Old Rumor About Sakic

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-08-2005, 01:04 AM
  #1
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Old Rumor About Sakic

Interesting read.

http://www.calgarypuck.com/Patrick_060501.htm

Obviously a very old article, but things may well change considerably in the upcoming years. If winning is the main thing, Calgary would be very attractive to any number of players looking to find a new home.


Last edited by abracanada: 05-08-2005 at 01:11 AM.
abracanada is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 01:37 AM
  #2
Glacier
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 125
vCash: 500
Considering Sakic loves Denver and has only played for one team in his career, this is unlikely. Currently, there are around 10 other teams which have a higher chance at a cup than Calgary. I don't want to sound like the ***** I am, but take another look at Calgary's roster, subtract the 2004 playoffs, and you'll see what I'm talking about. Vancouver, Carolina, Buffalo, Washington, Anaheim, and Florida have also made amazing runs to the cup. But only one team is a contendor at the moment, and it has taken them a decade to get to this position. This was a fluke, just like the other 6 runs these teams have had. There is nothing to make me believe that Calgary will win the cup next year, or even make the playoffs honestly. Other than having the best Forward, and an awesome goaltender, this team is fairly weak to be honest.

But getting back to the subject, there's no way Sakic will leave. This would be like speculating Yzerman departing Detroit, there's no chance of it.

Glacier is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 02:32 AM
  #3
Ozy_Flame
Registered User
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glacier
Considering Sakic loves Denver and has only played for one team in his career, this is unlikely. Currently, there are around 10 other teams which have a higher chance at a cup than Calgary. I don't want to sound like the ***** I am, but take another look at Calgary's roster, subtract the 2004 playoffs, and you'll see what I'm talking about. Vancouver, Carolina, Buffalo, Washington, Anaheim, and Florida have also made amazing runs to the cup. But only one team is a contendor at the moment, and it has taken them a decade to get to this position. This was a fluke, just like the other 6 runs these teams have had. There is nothing to make me believe that Calgary will win the cup next year, or even make the playoffs honestly. Other than having the best Forward, and an awesome goaltender, this team is fairly weak to be honest.

But getting back to the subject, there's no way Sakic will leave. This would be like speculating Yzerman departing Detroit, there's no chance of it.
You speak realistically, but the bolded statement is way out there. Iggy is one of the best forwards in the league, Kiprusoff was one of the best goaltenders in 2004, and Calgary touts probably the best young blueline in the Western Conference. The reason I say this is because there are equally good talents out there in their own rights when talking about Iggy, such as Joe Sakic or Petr Forsberg. Kiprusoff was good, but one good year does not make a goaltender (re: Jim Carey). And if anything else, having a defense consisting of Regehr, Leopold, Phaneuf et al is a hell of a lineup to speak of.

I'm not disputing your claim, but careful how it's worded.

Ozy_Flame is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 09:55 AM
  #4
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glacier
This was a fluke, just like the other 6 runs these teams have had. There is nothing to make me believe that Calgary will win the cup next year, or even make the playoffs honestly. Other than having the best Forward, and an awesome goaltender, this team is fairly weak to be honest.
Why? Simply because you say so?

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 11:44 AM
  #5
Ice Cream Man
$1 Oysters
 
Ice Cream Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 4,837
vCash: 500
Glacier, you do realize that that article is OLD, right?

Your post makes it seem that the rumour is new,when in fact, it's far from it.

Plus, Calgary demonstrated excellent team play, a sound two-way transition game, tenacious defense/checking, and ample secondary scoring. Please tell me why Calgary does NOT have a chance to do it again.

And as for last year being a fluke, I don't agree. While this was the first time Calgary made the playoffs in a while, they were in contention all of the 2003-04 season. They finished sixth in a tough conference, and then people started to watch them play - they found out what all us Flames fans had been watching along.

I'm willing to bet that you don't follow the Flames, and therefore when you see them in the playoffs, you assume its a fluke. You'd change your mind on that if you actually followed them throughout the enitre last season, and realize they weren't a 'fluke' at all. They were the real deal, and with Sutter again behind the bench and the core of the team intact, I don't see any reason as to why they can't repeat their performance.

Ice Cream Man is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 12:33 PM
  #6
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Glacier (I wonder where he is from) clearly adheres to the New York Ranger school of thought. Big names on the roster win cups. Good luck with that.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 02:14 PM
  #7
Ice Cream Man
$1 Oysters
 
Ice Cream Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 4,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
Glacier (I wonder where he is from) clearly adheres to the New York Ranger school of thought. Big names on the roster win cups. Good luck with that.
Careful when you say that. In the last ten years, the majority of cup-winning teams have had 'big' names on them. Detroit, Dallas, Colorado and to some extent, New Jersey and Tampa Bay all had big names on them. They do win cups; it's just perennial losers like Philly, NYR, and Toronto that use that strategy without successful results. You can, most definently, win cups with big-name teams.

Ice Cream Man is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 02:35 PM
  #8
Big Deaner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Big Deaner
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glacier
Considering Sakic loves Denver and has only played for one team in his career, this is unlikely. Currently, there are around 10 other teams which have a higher chance at a cup than Calgary. I don't want to sound like the ***** I am, but take another look at Calgary's roster, subtract the 2004 playoffs, and you'll see what I'm talking about. Vancouver, Carolina, Buffalo, Washington, Anaheim, and Florida have also made amazing runs to the cup. But only one team is a contendor at the moment, and it has taken them a decade to get to this position. This was a fluke, just like the other 6 runs these teams have had. There is nothing to make me believe that Calgary will win the cup next year, or even make the playoffs honestly. Other than having the best Forward, and an awesome goaltender, this team is fairly weak to be honest.

But getting back to the subject, there's no way Sakic will leave. This would be like speculating Yzerman departing Detroit, there's no chance of it.

I'm tired of hearing the same old crap from bitter, jealous Vancouver fans. If the NHL ever returns Calgary will still haev an extremely solid lineup. Like you said we have one of the best players in the world in Iginla, one of the top goaltenders in the world in Kiprusoff and a defence that could rival anyone in the league.

This team will never finish first in the regular season or have 5 guys selected to the all-start game but come playoff time everyone will be crossing their fingers hoping not to have to face the Flames in the playoffs.

Oh, but, you already know all about that as a Canucks fan right!

Big Deaner is offline  
Old
05-08-2005, 11:31 PM
  #9
King_Brown
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 276
vCash: 500
It was not a fluke. We have possibly the best defence in the NHL which is not even reached there peak, we have possibly the best coach also in Sutter. To say Calgary will not make the playoffs next year is stupid. We will challenge for a division title.

King_Brown is offline  
Old
05-14-2005, 03:31 PM
  #10
Vote for Rory
Registered User
 
Vote for Rory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,055
vCash: 500
best defense in the league? Have to disagree with that statement totally. You have one of the best up and comming defense possibly yes, but right now? not at all. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its the worst, its still up there, but isn't simply the best. I'd say there are about 4-5 teams ahead of Calgary simply because of depth at defense with, plainly, Calgary doesn't have.

As for this whole fluke thing, I am also a Vancouver fan and part of me wants to think its a fluke but another part wants to think this team is the real deal and will only get better. I think after the lockout ends if they can keep there team together, which is hard to say for other teams (cough vancouver cough), then they will make the playoffs for sure. Will they challenge for a Stanley Cup? I'm not sure about that, they lost a key guy IMO in Conroy who had to have been a big guy in the lockerroom.

For Flames fans sake, I hope Calgary has a great year whenever the league starts back up, I've always liked the flames team. Oh and as for Kipper, I don't think hes in that Brodeur plateau yet (though I dont think anyone is comparing him to Marty) but I do think Kipper is very able to get there.

Vote for Rory is offline  
Old
05-14-2005, 03:35 PM
  #11
FlyersFan10*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanks
best defense in the league? Have to disagree with that statement totally. You have one of the best up and comming defense possibly yes, but right now? not at all. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its the worst, its still up there, but isn't simply the best.
I don't get this "well, they're up and coming" or "wait till the prospects become players" type nonsense. The fact is that they are playing in the show, the players on the blueline have at least two years experience, so there's no more prospect type or up and coming type. They're only going to get better from here on in. This is a bonafide group of defenders and they are very good. There probably are 4 or 5 other better group of defenders throughout the league, but in their division and conference, it's probably a top 2, top 3 defense.

FlyersFan10* is offline  
Old
05-14-2005, 03:43 PM
  #12
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
I don't get this "well, they're up and coming" or "wait till the prospects become players" type nonsense. The fact is that they are playing in the show, the players on the blueline have at least two years experience, so there's no more prospect type or up and coming type. They're only going to get better from here on in. This is a bonafide group of defenders and they are very good. There probably are 4 or 5 other better group of defenders throughout the league, but in their division and conference, it's probably a top 2, top 3 defense.
Well, I rate them up there with any group - after all, they turned the club into one of the best defensive teams in the league statistics wise, and pushed them to the finals and along the way, they beat a few of the teams that are supposed to have a better defence. Oh, and the kicker? They are only going to get better.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-19-2005, 04:02 PM
  #13
ukstipe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 31
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King_Brown
It was not a fluke. We have possibly the best defence in the NHL which is not even reached there peak, we have possibly the best coach also in Sutter. To say Calgary will not make the playoffs next year is stupid. We will challenge for a division title.
I think this has more to do with the run tahn all of it.....they could even make cloutier look good.

ukstipe is offline  
Old
05-19-2005, 09:02 PM
  #14
King_Brown
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanks
best defense in the league? Have to disagree with that statement totally. You have one of the best up and comming defense possibly yes, but right now? not at all. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its the worst, its still up there, but isn't simply the best. I'd say there are about 4-5 teams ahead of Calgary simply because of depth at defense with, plainly, Calgary doesn't have.

As for this whole fluke thing, I am also a Vancouver fan and part of me wants to think its a fluke but another part wants to think this team is the real deal and will only get better. I think after the lockout ends if they can keep there team together, which is hard to say for other teams (cough vancouver cough), then they will make the playoffs for sure. Will they challenge for a Stanley Cup? I'm not sure about that, they lost a key guy IMO in Conroy who had to have been a big guy in the lockerroom.

For Flames fans sake, I hope Calgary has a great year whenever the league starts back up, I've always liked the flames team. Oh and as for Kipper, I don't think hes in that Brodeur plateau yet (though I dont think anyone is comparing him to Marty) but I do think Kipper is very able to get there.

#3 ranked defence in the league, and also we where right up there with shots allowed. We have plent of depth, a prospect with the abilities of a Phanuef would probablly have step right into a #2 or 3 role on any other team, with the Flames we have the luxury of using him as a #6 or 7, which I highly doubt will happen, but its just goes to show the depth we have.

King_Brown is offline  
Old
05-20-2005, 11:02 AM
  #15
Hunter74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanks
Will they challenge for a Stanley Cup? I'm not sure about that, they lost a key guy IMO in Conroy who had to have been a big guy in the lockerroom.

Yes we lost Conroy which imo is no big deal. But we also picked up Langkow who is a better center than Conroy is.

Our defense is very deep so deep that Sutter felt that we could move Gauthier and still have enough depth in the regular season. Sutter doesn't seem like the kind of guy that likes to part with defenseman so when he does move a defenseman that in itself speaks volumes.

The biggest question mark imho for when the NHL starts back up is wether Kipper can repeat his performance. I think he can just b/c of the quality of defensive players on the team helping him out.

Of course the biggest weakness the team has is pure scoring threats. With only Iggy and Langkow as bonofide point getters some think of this as a big problem. But the Flames proved last year that a team of 10-15 goal scorers can be very effective and the club looks to improve on how many 10-15 goal scorers they will have in teh lineup.

Hunter74 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.