HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Calgary Flames
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Allison Would Provide Proven Center Depth

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-17-2005, 07:37 AM
  #51
Gelinas Time
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Deaner
You are missing the point here. The poster was not comparing Reinprecht with Elias, rather he was comparing the Flames and Devils in the fact that both really only have one or a few bonafied top line scorers. Devils have Elais, Calgary has Iginla. But both teams win becaause they play a great system, great team defense, score by committee and have excellent goaltending.

As well, you must have been living under a rock for the past 10 years while the Devils won 3 Stanley Cups. In contrast, the Avalanche, a team with an abundance of scoring have only won 2.
I might be living under a rock last 10 years, but from what I've heard in last year, NHL are planning some rules adjustment to make defensive system much less effective and let offensive skilled players to flourish.

Gelinas Time is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 07:52 AM
  #52
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
As far as this debate goes over New Jersey vs Colorado, who would you rather watch play? Yes, it is nice winning a lot, but that Jersey team is as exciting as watching paint dry. That is one of the reasons the Flames need some creative center ice men.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 08:37 AM
  #53
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 Gelinas Time
I might be living under a rock last 10 years, but from what I've heard in last year, NHL are planning some rules adjustment to make defensive system much less effective and let offensive skilled players to flourish.
Based on WHAT? Can you offer some proof? Gee, we all know the goalie equipment should be smaller, but you've got nothing to base your assertion on. Nothing concrete has been agreed upon. They've discussed every possibility for years, and it hasn't altered the game much in the last decade.

You have no argue against modeling the organization by the Devils model. Maybe if the Flames could compete with the Avs payroll, they could consider following their model. Until then, building the team from the net out, with a strong defense, a sniper or two with a reasonable salary structure, is the way to go.

Practically every one of your posts has:

"I think..."
"I've heard..."
"I disagree..."

Exactly who are you? You seem to believe that the first person singular pronoun requires regular and rigorous exericise. You have not to back up your claims but arrogant opinions. When you get called out, and change the course of the discussion.

Calling the Devils "losers" if the funniest comment since Lou Lamiorello, almost single-handedly, dispproved Gretzky's quip about a "Mikey Mouse organization."

Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
As far as this debate goes over New Jersey vs Colorado, who would you rather watch play? Yes, it is nice winning a lot, but that Jersey team is as exciting as watching paint dry. That is one of the reasons the Flames need some creative center ice men.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 09:19 AM
  #54
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
Based on WHAT? Can you offer some proof? Gee, we all know the goalie equipment should be smaller, but you've got nothing to base your assertion on. Nothing concrete has been agreed upon. They've discussed every possibility for years, and it hasn't altered the game much in the last decade.

You have no argue against modeling the organization by the Devils model. Maybe if the Flames could compete with the Avs payroll, they could consider following their model. Until then, building the team from the net out, with a strong defense, a sniper or two with a reasonable salary structure, is the way to go.

Practically every one of your posts has:

"I think..."
"I've heard..."
"I disagree..."

Exactly who are you? You seem to believe that the first person singular pronoun requires regular and rigorous exericise. You have not to back up your claims but arrogant opinions. When you get called out, and change the course of the discussion.

Calling the Devils "losers" if the funniest comment since Lou Lamiorello, almost single-handedly, dispproved Gretzky's quip about a "Mikey Mouse organization."



Does the fact that you don't have the money to compete with Colorado financially mean you give up pursuing talented players? Especially now when caps are likely and there promises to be a glut of talented players available at reasonable prices (remember the players offerred to take a 24% cut in salaries, and the league said it wasn't enough). In that kind of environment, how much do you think a player like, oh I don't know, Jason Allison might command? I doubt there will be any bidding wars for talent - the rich teams will be butting their heads against a cap I believe, and will be trying to dump some of their overpriced talent rather than creating more.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 09:50 AM
  #55
HuskyFlames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
A few things to consider - there are a number of people on the board who are concerned about the Flames left wing, and totally happy with the center ice position. Where is the scoring depth at center ice? Lombardi went down in the playoffs, and he has had limited ice time a full year later. During this stint, he has not lit it up in the AHL never mind the NHL. Hardly a lock on that second line. Reinprecht was injured for most of last year. He may be healthy when the NHL returns, but he may not. Where is all this scoring depth? Wiemer? Langkow and, who is the lock for the second line center position? If you don't know who it is, just how solid is that position?

The year Allison joined the Bruins from Washington, he was the leading scorer, and the Bruins increased their point total by 30 points. That year was the first time they had been in the playoffs for two years. Also, he scored eight points in six playoff games. He never elevates his game?

The next year, he led the Bruins scoring race again, and the team made the playoffs. Allison scored 11 points in 12 games.

Under Pat Burns, Allison was named Captain of the Bruins. He responded by scoring 36 goals and 59 assists. If that isn't elevating his game, then what is? Pat Burns is not a coach who puts up with attitude from his players, never mind his Captain either. The assertion that he is a poison in a locker room, is crap.

When he moved to LA, they got into the playoffs. As a matter of fact, Allison scored 3 goals and 3 assists in 7 games. This, in spite of the fact that the Kings were a team on the downhill slide ever since they lost Blake. It is true, he did not lead them to the playoffs the following year, but that is kind of difficult given that he was injured all year and played only 26 games. In addition, Adam Deadmarsh only played 20 games that season. People may be comfortable blaming that failure to make the playoffs on Allison, but I think it is ridiculous to do so.

The Flames could use a 6'4 220 pounder at center ice on one of their top two lines. As it stands now, there are far more questions than answers at center ice.
You also forget to mention Nilson who was used for center and did quite well with Donovan and Nemo.

Centers from last year that could play this year:
-Langkow, Rhino, Lombardi (who cares about the AHL numbers, theres tons of guys ripping it up that never make it to the NHL, he is also being used in more of a 3rd line role from what I hear instead of a scoring role), Yelle, Wiemer, Ritichie.

Now look at the LW situation:
Rhino, Gelias (could be gone), Simon, Nilson.

The Flames havea ton more depth at center than LW. If Sutter keeps the Nilson line together that means that the Flames centers will most likely be: Langkow, Lombardi, Nilson, Yelle. On LW you would have Rhino, Simon, Gelinas. The LW side is much quicker IMO and could use a boost. If Conroy could be a 70 point player with Iginla, than Langkow is capable of that as well BUT I do not see Gelinas, Simon capable of that...possibly Rhino but that is a gamble. The Flames need help on the L-side.

HuskyFlames is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 09:54 AM
  #56
HuskyFlames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MainFlame
When the NHL starts up again, i really believe that Lydman will be gone. I hope i'm wrong because Lydman and Leopold are the only Flames D men with any offensive instinct.

Regehr, Leopold, Warrener ( assuming the flames can keep him), and Phaneuf are the likely top 4 in 2-3 years. I don't think the Flames are going to pay lydman 2+ million for a number 4 or 5 position.
Right now I would put Lydman as the #3 Flames defenseman. For 2+ million it is quite a good price for a player who scores on average 25 points a season, just coming of age, plays top minutes (been leading or close to it for the Flames ), and also plays the PP AND PK. For a #3 2-way defenseman, capable of ALL special teams that is a very decent price. Heck, Lydman is capable of more..Sutter has even said so. Think of him as a poor man's Kenny Kenny Jonnson. A quiet player who gets the job done and under the radar as far as value and respect.

HuskyFlames is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 09:57 AM
  #57
HuskyFlames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelinas Time
I might be living under a rock last 10 years, but from what I've heard in last year, NHL are planning some rules adjustment to make defensive system much less effective and let offensive skilled players to flourish.
Ya, but you must also realize that these changes will make the less defensive team's defense even weakier. While defensive teams get worse, so do offensive teams in terms of defense. IMO, no matter the changes..coaches will always find new systems to work a defensive strategy into the system..that is what good coaching can do.

HuskyFlames is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 01:41 PM
  #58
Jared Ramsden
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jared Ramsden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,212
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Jared Ramsden Send a message via MSN to Jared Ramsden Send a message via Yahoo to Jared Ramsden
Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
As far as this debate goes over New Jersey vs Colorado, who would you rather watch play? Yes, it is nice winning a lot, but that Jersey team is as exciting as watching paint dry. That is one of the reasons the Flames need some creative center ice men.
The first time they won the Cup, yes the Devils were boring as hell. But the second time they won it all, they have much more offensive flair, and when they lost in 7 games the next season to the Avs, they had the 2nd highest scoring team in the league. I guess the point is, any system can work in brining home a Stanley Cup, as long as you have the right type of players for that system. That '95 Devils Cup team was not very talented, especially at forward, but since they played their system to a T, they came out on top. The 99 and 00 Devils had guys like Elias, Sykora, Arnott, Gomez, Mogilny, Brylin and Holik all scoring over 50 points.

The Devils may have reverted back to a more conservative style the last few seasons, but to be honest, the way the Flames played in their Cup run last year, was remincient of the way the Devils have played the last couple seasons. The Devils aren't the most exciting team, but they are far from boring. They both were not overly talented up front, but solid defense and goaltending, plus an agressive up-tempo forecheck were their keys to success. Just my take on all this.....As for Allison, while he would be a nice addition, we are plenty deep enough at all the forward positions........

__________________
"I couldn't care less about the team struggling"....A very drunk Joe Namath

2011-12: The start of a new making the playoffs streak!

Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/CalDevil3219
Jared Ramsden is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 01:46 PM
  #59
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick - Flames Fan
You also forget to mention Nilson who was used for center and did quite well with Donovan and Nemo.

Centers from last year that could play this year:
-Langkow, Rhino, Lombardi (who cares about the AHL numbers, theres tons of guys ripping it up that never make it to the NHL, he is also being used in more of a 3rd line role from what I hear instead of a scoring role), Yelle, Wiemer, Ritichie.

Now look at the LW situation:
Rhino, Gelias (could be gone), Simon, Nilson.

The Flames havea ton more depth at center than LW. If Sutter keeps the Nilson line together that means that the Flames centers will most likely be: Langkow, Lombardi, Nilson, Yelle. On LW you would have Rhino, Simon, Gelinas. The LW side is much quicker IMO and could use a boost. If Conroy could be a 70 point player with Iginla, than Langkow is capable of that as well BUT I do not see Gelinas, Simon capable of that...possibly Rhino but that is a gamble. The Flames need help on the L-side.
Here is the way I see the left side stacking up:

Reinprecht replaces Saprykin (improvement)
Simon (was on first line last year)
Nilson (exceptional play since he came to Calgary
Nieminen (you seem to have left him out completely - and he too brought a lot to the Flames including offense)
Wiemer replaces Oliwa, and maybe Gelinas. (improvement over Oliwa, regarding Gelinas, remains to be seen)

Now the way it looks to me, the Flames have improved on the left side already. They have three players on the left side who are capable of scoring 20 or so goals, maybe more if you include Nieminen. At center, they have Langkow, and Lombardi (if he repeats his rookie season - which often doesn't happen), and if he is healthy - which at this point, is questionable. You may slide Reinprecht in there, but his best years have been playing the wing. He has never scored 20 goals. He also may be prone to injury. So you have two iffy second line centers, and you are comfortable with that? If Reino plays left wing and goes down, you have Simon who has played on the first line and scored over 20 goals before, and you have Nilson. During his regular season stint with the Flames, Nilson was on pace to score 3o + goals over an entire season. He was revitalized and inspired. The only reason he had been pressed into playing the center was because of the injuries. You want him to play the second line center position over the year? It may work, but the operative word here is may. If you leave him at l.w., you have depth their, and a replacement center in case of emergency.

With the number of talented centers that are likely to be sprung free and at a reasonable cost, why would you want to rob a left side that is pretty solid and deep, to come up with makeshift repairs to a position (center) that you didn't fix properly in the first place, when you had a chance?

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 01:55 PM
  #60
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Ramsden
The first time they won the Cup, yes the Devils were boring as hell. But the second time they won it all, they have much more offensive flair, and when they lost in 7 games the next season to the Avs, they had the 2nd highest scoring team in the league. I guess the point is, any system can work in brining home a Stanley Cup, as long as you have the right type of players for that system. That '95 Devils Cup team was not very talented, especially at forward, but since they played their system to a T, they came out on top. The 99 and 00 Devils had guys like Elias, Sykora, Arnott, Gomez, Mogilny, Brylin and Holik all scoring over 50 points.

The Devils may have reverted back to a more conservative style the last few seasons, but to be honest, the way the Flames played in their Cup run last year, was remincient of the way the Devils have played the last couple seasons. The Devils aren't the most exciting team, but they are far from boring. They both were not overly talented up front, but solid defense and goaltending, plus an agressive up-tempo forecheck were their keys to success. Just my take on all this.....As for Allison, while he would be a nice addition, we are plenty deep enough at all the forward positions........
I understand what you are saying, and all the more power to the Devils. They are a well coached, deep, defensive team. Defensive is not as exciting as offensive. The Devils have been great, but the Avs are more fun to watch. As for Allison, just for once, I would like to see what Iginla could do with a truly gifted, offensive linemate, especially at center.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:16 PM
  #61
HuskyFlames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
Here is the way I see the left side stacking up:

Reinprecht replaces Saprykin (improvement)
Simon (was on first line last year)
Nilson (exceptional play since he came to Calgary
Nieminen (you seem to have left him out completely - and he too brought a lot to the Flames including offense)
Wiemer replaces Oliwa, and maybe Gelinas. (improvement over Oliwa, regarding Gelinas, remains to be seen)

Now the way it looks to me, the Flames have improved on the left side already. They have three players on the left side who are capable of scoring 20 or so goals, maybe more if you include Nieminen. At center, they have Langkow, and Lombardi (if he repeats his rookie season - which often doesn't happen), and if he is healthy - which at this point, is questionable. You may slide Reinprecht in there, but his best years have been playing the wing. He has never scored 20 goals. He also may be prone to injury. So you have two iffy second line centers, and you are comfortable with that? If Reino plays left wing and goes down, you have Simon who has played on the first line and scored over 20 goals before, and you have Nilson. During his regular season stint with the Flames, Nilson was on pace to score 3o + goals over an entire season. He was revitalized and inspired. The only reason he had been pressed into playing the center was because of the injuries. You want him to play the second line center position over the year? It may work, but the operative word here is may. If you leave him at l.w., you have depth their, and a replacement center in case of emergency.

With the number of talented centers that are likely to be sprung free and at a reasonable cost, why would you want to rob a left side that is pretty solid and deep, to come up with makeshift repairs to a position (center) that you didn't fix properly in the first place, when you had a chance?
#1 - Why do you give credit to Rhino when you list him on the LW and YET when I list him as a center you take away from him for being injured last year. That is quite hypocritcal. Rhino is a questions mark, whether at center OR LW.

#2 - Simon did NOT always play on the top line last year. Heck, Gelinas played the majority of time with Conroy/Iginla in the playoffs. While Simon is a solid pickup, his endurance is terrible. A year off from the NHL and not playing has most likely added to him being not fit for solid top line minutes and doing it well all the time.

#3 - Nilson was at his best last year playing center for the Flames. Why remove him from an element he excelled at last year? Doesn't make sense to me right now.

#4 - Nemo is a welcome addition and added to the lineup.

#5 - You forget to mention the loss of Deano from the LW. He has quite solid and consistant for the Flames last season. While Sappy may be replaced by Rhino and Langkow replaces Conroy..what about Deano? Offensively, I do nto think Simon will replace Deano's constant all-around offense for the Flames. Then if Gelians leaves..the LW side is even worse off. At every position the Flames have a few young players that are showing promise for their position.

IE - Iginla/Kobasew for RW or Lombardi/Langkow for C or Regehr/Leopold/Phaneuf for D

Now what about the LW? The Flames have who that has shown top 6 potential for the LW? They traded Sappy and Nystrom could be a 2nd liner is it pans out AND Chuko is years away from touching the NHL. The Flames need a young LW that is NHL ready and can play top 6 time and contribute offensively.

HuskyFlames is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:51 PM
  #62
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 Mr.Hunter74
Letting Gelinas leave is addition from subtraction imho.

He is very inconsistent during the regular season and seems to be in Sutters dog house most of the year b/c of his style of play.

Considering Gelinas is one of teh faster skaters on the Flames roster I think he was the player who recieved the most hooking and obstruction (lazy penalties) penalties. He was weak on the forecheck and and his aggressive levels were by far not up to par when compared to the aggressive play of everyone else on the team. I dont mean fighting or big hits just that tireless never say die attitude that guys like Nilson and Yelle show. Gelinas really lacked in that department.

After slamming Gelinas I also have to say he did have a knack for being able to fill in decently in a scoring line. I think he still has stuff to offer to a team in the NHL but I think he owuld do much better in a different system with a different coach.

We have better players who are more suited to the 3rd and 4th line role than Gelinas. I would also rather give the 1st and 2nd line LW duties to Reinprecht, Simon or Nilson than Gelinas.
His ability turn it on in the playoffs makes him a keeper. Some lackadaisical play, during the season, can be tolerated in exchange for his penchant for evelating his game a crunch time. People have forgotten how clutch he was, when it really counted.

A lot of people, here, miss McAmmond, but there's no way would've accomplished half of what Gelinas did, last spring.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abracanada
As for Allison, just for once, I would like to see what Iginla could do with a truly gifted, offensive linemate, especially at center.
Yeah, you've said it enough times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick - Flames Fan
Nystrom could be a 2nd liner
That's being overly optimistic. He's more realistically projected to be a prototypical third liner.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 05:55 PM
  #63
HuskyFlames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob

That's being overly optimistic. He's more realistically projected to be a prototypical third liner.
All depends on how well his game translates to the NHL. As of right now, our 2nd liners are basically 12-15 goal scorers for the Flames. Sutter has said Nystrom's game is much more suited to NHL style, in which case I am curious to what Sutter thinks he can expect from him. Nystrom, IMO is at best a very solid 3rd liner with potential to fill the 2nd line if potential is reached. Something to a poor man's Erik Cole to a similar player is in his range of potential.

HuskyFlames is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 06:22 PM
  #64
Hunter74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 687
vCash: 500
The forward ranks are very versatile now that Sutter ahs brought in alot of players who can play almost anywhere up front.

When the NHL starts up again you could see this lineup:

Rhino/Langkow/Iginla
Nilson/Lombardi/Kobasew
Simon/Yelle/Donovan
Nemo/Wiemer/Clark

Spare: Ritchie, Nystrom (Fragile Rhino goes down with another injury(i doubt it) and the lineup just moves up and Nystrom/Ritchie slip in on the 4th line and the team doesn't miss a beat)

Or b/c people loved the Nilson Donovan line so much. I dont b/c it puts and lid on Nilson offensive abilities which were evendent when we first picked him up. But here is a lineup with McAmmond and Gelinas

Rhino/Langkow/Iginla
Gelinas/Nilson/Donovan
McAmmond/Yelle/Clark
Simon/Wiemer/Kobasew - We pay Simon way to much to play 4th line minutes.

Spares: Lombardi, Ritchie, Nemo, Nystrom

First lineup looks like its more cost efficient and bigger.
Plus I would rather give Kobasew another shot at teh 2nd line instead of letting Donovan keep it. Kobasew still has high upside as Dono has most likely topped out and possibly coming back down.

There are so many lineup variations to this new squad that its almost ridiculas. All I know is that the loss of Gelinas and McAmmond arent gonna be felt much at all. Maybe Deaner more so b/c his versatility and play in the last stretch of the season really pulled us into the playoffs.

I agree that Gelinas's contributions to the playoffs were great and much appreciated but he's old and its been a year since the playoffs and I dont think he cna keep up with the hgh tempo the Flames play. Gelinas is just an interchangeable part to the Flames machine.

A full season from Simon(hopefully he's in shape) and Nilson should offset the loss's of Gelinas and McAmmond. The development of Lombardi and Kobasew should also hide the lose of Gelly and Deano aswell. Plus we woudl be knocking off about $3.5mil off the books which really rocks. Thats from there last contracts anyhow so its most likely less considering one is really old and the other has a horrible back.

I cant really argue against Gelinas as his numbers were adequate I guess playing on the 2nd line and McAmmond was great while he was healthy. Its just all a matter of opinion I guess and my opinion is that the new guys will do better statistically and all around play.

Hunter74 is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:20 PM
  #65
Gelinas Time
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
Based on WHAT? Can you offer some proof? Gee, we all know the goalie equipment should be smaller, but you've got nothing to base your assertion on. Nothing concrete has been agreed upon. They've discussed every possibility for years, and it hasn't altered the game much in the last decade.

You have no argue against modeling the organization by the Devils model. Maybe if the Flames could compete with the Avs payroll, they could consider following their model. Until then, building the team from the net out, with a strong defense, a sniper or two with a reasonable salary structure, is the way to go.

Practically every one of your posts has:

"I think..."
"I've heard..."
"I disagree..."

Exactly who are you? You seem to believe that the first person singular pronoun requires regular and rigorous exericise. You have not to back up your claims but arrogant opinions. When you get called out, and change the course of the discussion.

Calling the Devils "losers" if the funniest comment since Lou Lamiorello, almost single-handedly, dispproved Gretzky's quip about a "Mikey Mouse organization."





”You have no argue against modeling the organization by the Devils model.”

I think, but I can't back it up with any facts or pictures, that you’ve missed what I am arguing against. Letting three top Lwers go and replacing them with only Wiemer is anything, but modeling the organization by the Devils model. Devils never had ONE star forward. They always had at least two (Elias, Arnott, Gomez, Nieuwendyke). If you think (yeah, that’s nothing but what you think), that modeling Devils is what Flames should do, then if Flames will get top-six winger, their line-up would look much more like Devils.

You don’t want me to say “I think…”. You want me to post facts? Ok.

“Kiprusoff came from a winning organization”.

Well, we can argue a lot about Sharks being a winning organization or not, but there are two FACTS (not “I think”, if you don’t like it). First Kiprusoff was not important part of the team, and second, Shark made their best playoff campaign right after they let Kiprusoff go. YOU THINK, that it has nothing to do with Kiprusoff departure? Well, I also think so. But who am I? And who are you? The fact is that Sharks had their best playoffs after letting Kipper go.

“The Flames organization is clearly better for having removed non-winners such as Stillman (yeah, it's galling to have his name inscribed).”

The Bolts organizations is clearly better for having acquired Stillman. You wanted facts? Well, that’s what facts are. YOU THINK, that Stillman is non-winner? I think, I agree. But who am I? And yeah, WHO ARE YOU? Stillman just won the cup and that’s a fact. And, yes, Tampa couldn't get any decent playoff campaign before getting Stillman. You can't argue with that coz it's a fact. Yeah, right. That’s the way you want the discussion to be.

You see now, what an awry picture you can get, if man quits “thinking” and starting only to post facts. You say, Flames had second-best campaign ever after letting Stillman go and acquiring Kipper. That's a fact. However, both Bolts and Sharks had their best campaignes ever after getting Stillman and letting Kiprusoff go respectively. That's a fact as well.

"Based on WHAT? Can you offer some proof? Gee, we all know the goalie equipment should be smaller, but you've got nothing to base your assertion on. Nothing concrete has been agreed upon. They've discussed every possibility for years, and it hasn't altered the game much in the last decade."

I think, but I can't prove it with any facts, that you are misunderstanding goals of my posts. I am NOT trying to make anyone (or you in particular) aboslutely sure, that my opinion is right. I am only giving some food for thoughts. I think, an I can prove it with your own quote, that they are talking about changing rules to make offensive players flourish. I was not going to blow you out with that argument and I generally don't intend to crush anyone in public discussions. My point was that there is REAL possibility (based on the fact that they can't sell defensive-oriented hockey, hence lock-out), that defensive-oriented team will look much worse under new rules. That's just a point to consider. We can't pretend that it is impossible just because nothing concrete was agreed.

"you've got nothing to base your assertion on. Nothing concrete has been agreed upon. They've discussed every possibility for years, and it hasn't altered the game much in the last decade."

Based on your logic, we can't suppose, that NHL will ever resume, because NOTHING concrete was agreed upon. Ther are discussing every possibility for years and it hasn't altered the situation much in last year.


Last edited by Gelinas Time: 05-18-2005 at 12:15 AM.
Gelinas Time is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 12:52 AM
  #66
Gelinas Time
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
So let’s go back to winner/loser kind of players and importanca of guys, who were part of winning organizations.

Last Cup was won by Tampa, whose leaders were:

Richards (never was a part of winning organization)
Lecavalier (see Richards)
St.Louis (see Richards)
Khabibullin (see Richards)

I am leaving Stillman off the list here, because it will take us off the course.

Calgary, who went to finals, were led by

Iginla (never was a part of winning organization)
Regehr (see Iginla)
Leopold (see Iginla)
Kiprusoff (was not important player on not-all-that-winning organization)

You see, I took four best players and only one of them (Kiprusoff) was playing (sitting on the bench to be accurate) for winning organization, and I’m not sure, if Sharks are all that winning. It’s not important at all to have guys, who were with any “winning organizations” before. You may say, that some solid, yet not key players on Flames roster were with winning organizations before, well, it’s just a law of averages. If you’ll take 23 random NHL players it’s very likely, that some of them were playing for “winning organizations” at some point of their careers, specially those, who had long careers.

Gelinas Time is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 06:48 AM
  #67
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 Mr.Hunter74
Spares: ...Nystrom
A year on the top line at Omaha would do Nystrom more good than riding the bench in Calgary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelinas Time
Devils never had ONE star forward. They always had at least two (Elias, Arnott, Gomez, Nieuwendyke).
You're just being argumentative. Everybody understood, clearly, what you were saying by calling the Devils "losers." Now you're trying to backpeddle, like you always do. Elias is unquestionably a star. Gomez is decent, but whether he could be considered a star is debatable. Arnott got moved out, just as they had with other top forwards (Claude Lemieux, Stephane Richer, Alexander Mogilny, Bobby Holik). Nieuwendyk didn't play one shift in the Finals, the last time the Devils won it all.

The Devils have been built around Brodeur, Stevens and Niedermayer. Not a bad model to follow. Maybe it's not quite the same, but something along the lines of Kipruosoff, Phaneuf and Leopold, even if it's a poor man's Devils, makes the future look pretty bright. The defense has adequate depth, which could leave the option open for a later trade for a forward, as another poster suggested. This would be a more rational move than getting in a bidding war over Jason Allison, as the thread starter has obsessed over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelinas Time
I am leaving Stillman off the list here, because it will take us off the course.
Good, because he wore out his welcome in Tampa too. He wasn't brought back to defend their championship. Cory Stillman does, and always had, attitude issues with a lack of commitment.

Some floaters have had their names inscribed on the Cup, and plenty outstanding players never got a whiff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelinas Time
Iginla (never was a part of winning organization)
Regehr (see Iginla)
Leopold (see Iginla)
Kiprusoff (was not important player on not-all-that-winning organization)
Not exactly. Iginla was drafted by the Dallas Stars, and Robyn Regehr was drafted by Colorado Avalanche - both successful organizations over the last decade. Granted, that was probably not the point you were trying to make, but when given the right opportunity to be successful in Calgary, they thrived. Jordan Leopold won an NCAA championship. That must count for something. All are unquestionably "winners."

As far as whatever Kiprusoff's status in San Jose...who really cares? If not for the fact that he was buried in the goaltending depth, there never would've been a chance to acquire him for a 2nd rounder. More than a few members of HF Boards ridiculed him as a "third stringer," then a "one year wonder," after he shined. He was the single most important factor in the run last year. Kiprusoff is a winner.


Last edited by Badger Bob: 05-18-2005 at 06:53 AM.
Badger Bob is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 08:59 AM
  #68
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick - Flames Fan
#1 - Why do you give credit to Rhino when you list him on the LW and YET when I list him as a center you take away from him for being injured last year. That is quite hypocritcal. Rhino is a questions mark, whether at center OR LW.

#2 - Simon did NOT always play on the top line last year. Heck, Gelinas played the majority of time with Conroy/Iginla in the playoffs. While Simon is a solid pickup, his endurance is terrible. A year off from the NHL and not playing has most likely added to him being not fit for solid top line minutes and doing it well all the time.

#3 - Nilson was at his best last year playing center for the Flames. Why remove him from an element he excelled at last year? Doesn't make sense to me right now.

#4 - Nemo is a welcome addition and added to the lineup.

#5 - You forget to mention the loss of Deano from the LW. He has quite solid and consistant for the Flames last season. While Sappy may be replaced by Rhino and Langkow replaces Conroy..what about Deano? Offensively, I do nto think Simon will replace Deano's constant all-around offense for the Flames. Then if Gelians leaves..the LW side is even worse off. At every position the Flames have a few young players that are showing promise for their position.

IE - Iginla/Kobasew for RW or Lombardi/Langkow for C or Regehr/Leopold/Phaneuf for D

Now what about the LW? The Flames have who that has shown top 6 potential for the LW? They traded Sappy and Nystrom could be a 2nd liner is it pans out AND Chuko is years away from touching the NHL. The Flames need a young LW that is NHL ready and can play top 6 time and contribute offensively.
#1 - dont get me wrong, I like Rhino, however, if he goes down and is the second line center, who steps in for him? Lombo? We don't know that Lombo will ever come back to the player he was. If he is injured on the LW, there are a number of players who can step in. Yes, Nilson can step in to cover at center ice, but that would further weaken a position that you seem to feel is already weak. Why not recruit more natural centers with talent?

#2. You are right, Simon did not always play on the first line, however, during the playoffs, the reason he didn't always play on the first line, was because of a suspension. If he was playing, he was pretty well the first line LW.

#3. Nilson was not at his best at center ice. He was producing extremely well as a left wing. As mentioned previously, he was on pace to score over thirty goals and most of that time was spent on the left wing.

#4. And Nieminen has been one of the top producers on his club in Europe this year. What about Wiemer? Do you think he will replace Yelle? If he doesn't, where do you think he will play? Sutter described him as a top 9 player - in other words, not a 4th liner. If he doesn't bump Yelle, that pretty well leaves that LW slot on the third line.

#5. While McAmmond played very well, he is not the kind of player you can rely on for the whole year because he is fragile. It was fairly obvious that the Flames did not feel they needed him when they let him go, replaced him with some of the previously mentioned players, and then proceeded to the Stanley Cup finals. The last few games of the Cup demonstrated quite clearly what happens when you rely on older, more fragile guys. They get ground down. There is a reason one of Sutter's goals is to get younger. Nilson did fill in for McAmmond admirably.

And finally, if the Flames are so deep at center, and suspect on LW, why have they had to go with a raw rookie in the second line center spot, or had to use natural left wings like McAmmond or Nilson to fill in there? They drew on the LW depth in order to cover the lack of depth at center. You don't build your solid team by depending on make-do solutions like Dean McAmmond at center. You do it by adding quality players who can excel at their position.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 05:24 PM
  #69
Gelinas Time
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
"Everybody understood, clearly, what you were saying by calling the Devils "losers." Now you're trying to backpeddle, like you always do."

Nope. You missed the maneuver. I said, that Flames need one more top-six winger. You said, they don't need it coz it is good idea to follow Devils model. I said, that I disagree about following Devils model, but EVEN IF Flames should model Devils, they should get one more top-six winger. Right now I am not arguing about should Flames model Devils or not, the point is that we need good offensive winger regardless. It was not like I backpeddled, I just don't see a correlation between modeling Devils and refraining from bringing one more offensive guy.

Devils always had two players with excellent vision&creativity – Elias and Gomez. And they were always bringing in more offensive threats – Arnott, Nieuwendyk, Mogilny, Larionov. Unless you’ll convince me, that Devils went after Larionov because of his grinding and two-way play, I'll stick with my opinion, that creativity, vision and pure offensive talent are important parts of Devils model. Don't get me wrong, Larionov obviously was NOT an important part of their team, but they went after him, coz they ARE going after players with great creativity and vision. They are not stacking their line-ups with those kind of players, but they have two on year-to-year basis and are always trying to bring in third. IF Flames should model Devils, they should bring at least one more creative offensive player. IF Flames should model Avs - they should bring at least one more creative offensive player.That's the point I'm trying to make.

Gelinas Time is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 05:56 PM
  #70
FlyersFan10*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,349
vCash: 500
What if Calgary had an opportunity to sign Cory Stillman? Would any Flames fans be happy with that decision? I mean, Cory played really well in St.Louis and in Tampa Bay. To me, he'd seem to be a good fit on a line with Iginla and Langkow.

FlyersFan10* is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 06:04 PM
  #71
Flames Draft Watcher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
What if Calgary had an opportunity to sign Cory Stillman? Would any Flames fans be happy with that decision? I mean, Cory played really well in St.Louis and in Tampa Bay. To me, he'd seem to be a good fit on a line with Iginla and Langkow.
Not I.

Stillman was worthless at home (scored most of his goals on the road). He wouldn't skate full speed for pucks and looked disinterested without the puck on his stick in the scoring zone.

He's not a Sutter player IMO and I think Tampa Bay won despite having him on the roster not because of him. He certainly wasn't a huge factor in the finals. Stillman is a massive underachiever. Has the skills to be a star player in the NHL but doesn't do a lot of the little things. Who knows, perhaps he's advanced his game a bit since his last Calgary stint (I don't see a ton of Tampa games) but I doubt it.

Usually a team can support one or two floating scorers like him on their team if they aren't in key positions but I don't think our team would pay the price required (in terms of money and/or trade value) to get him. I think Sutter would rather have a less skilled player that plays a more complete game.

Flames Draft Watcher is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 08:19 PM
  #72
Gelinas Time
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Not I.

Stillman was worthless at home (scored most of his goals on the road). He wouldn't skate full speed for pucks and looked disinterested without the puck on his stick in the scoring zone.

He's not a Sutter player IMO and I think Tampa Bay won despite having him on the roster not because of him. He certainly wasn't a huge factor in the finals. Stillman is a massive underachiever. Has the skills to be a star player in the NHL but doesn't do a lot of the little things. Who knows, perhaps he's advanced his game a bit since his last Calgary stint (I don't see a ton of Tampa games) but I doubt it.

Usually a team can support one or two floating scorers like him on their team if they aren't in key positions but I don't think our team would pay the price required (in terms of money and/or trade value) to get him. I think Sutter would rather have a less skilled player that plays a more complete game.

It's rare time when I disagree with you. Sutter can turn a lazy underachiever around (Rob Niedermayer) and is trying to do the same with another one (Eriksson). On the other hand, Sutter never was a big fan of Begin and I can't recall Sutter's superlatieves about Conroy (while I can recall Sutter saying, that Yelle and Niedermayer are by far the best players on his team since he came in charge). It doesn't look like Sutter is all that crazy about hardworking players - it looks more like he's taking fairly talented underachievers and is trying to motivate them. See Regehr, who was a press-box guy before Sutter came.It is exactly because Sutter has so great motivating skills, he doesn't really need to have hardworking players, coz he can make anyone work hard. I completely agree about your comments on Stillman, but I think, that if anyone can turn this floater around, it is Sutter. Not that I am holding my breath for Stillman anyway.

Gelinas Time is offline  
Old
05-18-2005, 09:44 PM
  #73
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelinas Time
It's rare time when I disagree with you. Sutter can turn a lazy underachiever around (Rob Niedermayer) and is trying to do the same with another one (Eriksson). On the other hand, Sutter never was a big fan of Begin and I can't recall Sutter's superlatieves about Conroy (while I can recall Sutter saying, that Yelle and Niedermayer are by far the best players on his team since he came in charge). It doesn't look like Sutter is all that crazy about hardworking players - it looks more like he's taking fairly talented underachievers and is trying to motivate them. See Regehr, who was a press-box guy before Sutter came.It is exactly because Sutter has so great motivating skills, he doesn't really need to have hardworking players, coz he can make anyone work hard. I completely agree about your comments on Stillman, but I think, that if anyone can turn this floater around, it is Sutter. Not that I am holding my breath for Stillman anyway.
I don't agree that Sutter is okay motivating floaters. I think he has motivated some floaters, but overall, he brings in hard nosed, blood and guts types of players. As far as Regehr is concerned, I can never recall a time when he was a bench warmer and he played for Team Canada before Sutter came to Calgary, so I dont think your analysis is accurate there either.

abracanada is offline  
Old
05-19-2005, 06:18 AM
  #74
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 abracanada
he played for Team Canada before Sutter came to Calgary
He did? That comes as news. Regehr was on the World Cup squad. When was he selected to Team Canada before then?

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
05-19-2005, 08:11 AM
  #75
abracanada
Registered User
 
abracanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
He did? That comes as news. Regehr was on the World Cup squad. When was he selected to Team Canada before then?
Ok - Canada's World Cup Team.

edit - word of advice: try thinking before posting, from now on.


Last edited by Badger Bob: 05-19-2005 at 02:01 PM.
abracanada 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 11:13 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.