Create Your Flames Roster

Kent Wilson
September 01 2010 10:25AM

GLENDALE, AZ - DECEMBER 03:  (L-R) Goaltender Miikka Kiprusoff #34, Jay Bouwmeester #4, Rene Bourque #17, head coach Brent Sutter, Daymond Langkow #22 and the Calgary Flames bench look up at the scoreboard during the NHL game against the Phoenix Coyotes at Jobing.com Arena on December 3, 2009 in Glendale, Arizona.  The Coyotes defeated the Flames 2-1. (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)

 

It's September again. There's already a chill in the evening air in town and soon the Leaves will begin to change color. It's the time of year when young mens thoughts turn to matter of hockey.

As such, it's about time to start posting rosters. There remains the issue of Calgary's cap non-complicance, but that's going to be part of the fun in constructing the line-ups. Who do you demote? Who do you scratch? Until the question is ultimately answered by Sutter, we're free to speculate.

Without further ado, here's how I guess (hope?) things will shake out:

Langkow Healthy Option

Tanguay - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Langkow - Bourque

Glencross - Stajan - Moss

Stone - Conroy - Kotalik

(Ivanans)

Bouwmeester- Giordano

Regehr - White

Sarich - Pardy

(Pelech)

Langkow Hurt Option

Tanguay - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Stajan - Bourque

Glencross - Conroy - Moss

Stone - Backlund - Kotalik

(Ivanans)

I'm loathe to put Jokinen and Jarome together again, but part of me knows that's how things are going to happen initially anyways and part of me hopes they can improve their results if someone else is taking the tough sledding. That someone else would be the Langkow unit in the first iteration, while the hard stuff would have to be spread around if Langkow is hurt. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to see Conroy get a bump to Bourque's line with Langkow in the infirmary, pushing Stajan back down with Moss + Glencross and making the second line the go-to "shut down" trio again.

Potentially controversial is my decision to keep Kotalik and skate him on the 4th line. Despite the cognitive dissonance of paying someone $3M to play at the bottom of the rotation, it's likely the place where he can provide the most value: Kotalik can be completely sheltered at ES with Conroy et al and then would be free to put up results by playing on the PP and scoring the odd shoot-out marker. In addition, keep in mind that the 4th lines as I've constructed them would likely be 10 minute/night units with a good chance to mark the scoreboard, rather than the 5 minute/night detriments that many teams still opt for.

My decision to put Backlund on the 4th line in the second option will also rub some people the wrong way no doubt. However, with Langkow out, the tough assignments are going to be more spread out across the top 9 and the kid is still in the "heavy shelter" territory of his career. Backlund + Kotalik could avoid tough match-ups, take some offensive zone draws and probably cause some havoc against other 4th liners. It puts him in a position to succeed without having to skip a few grades. 

No major changes on the back-end, aside from deleting Staios and adding Pelech. This gets the team under the cap and avoids the Pelech-now-waiver-eligible problem. You will also notice that Jackman doesn't show up anywhere - with the team counting 14 forwards and (with me keeping Kotalik), someone else had to take the short flight to Abbotsford. Jackman can tutor the kids on the farm for his 550k and is good bet not to be snatched up on waivers besides. It's more probable that Stone will be the odd man out should this all go down, but he's 50k cheaper and I think I prefer him anyways. Ivanans is retained because we all know he will be no matter how much I protest. He can be subbed in for Stone on the nights when the other team has a dancing bear of their own.

Potential problems? Well, this roster is just 300k under the cap as constructed. That's certainly enough to start the year, but it's skin-of-your-teeth stuff and doesn't leave much room for error or addition as the year moves along.

Anyways, that's my stab at it. Feel free add your critcisms and line-ups in the comments.

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Former Nations Overlord. Current FN contributor and curmudgeon For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Avatar
#1 Jared
September 01 2010, 10:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Backlund as a 4th line centre??? Flames will never do that! they have said it before if he can not be in a spot where he can use his talents and be a productive offensive player he will play in the AHL. I think you are underestimating how the flames feel about Backlund.

Avatar
#3 Brent G.
September 01 2010, 10:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Jared wrote:

Backlund as a 4th line centre??? Flames will never do that! they have said it before if he can not be in a spot where he can use his talents and be a productive offensive player he will play in the AHL. I think you are underestimating how the flames feel about Backlund.

Rather than having Backlund at the 4th line center why not put Stone there in the even Langkow cant go? Sure they wont be a scoring threat but do think Jackman would replace Backlund on the roster and the cap space would be increased. Kotalik is a waste on the 4th line but is an option to move up for injuries and can play on the PP/Shoot out.

I like everything else but make the 4th line:

Jackman-Stone-Kotalik

(Ivanans)

That should leave about $1 mill in cap space too right? (I didnt doubt check that just judging off memory of differences in salary between Jackman and Backlund).

Avatar
#5 dotfras
September 01 2010, 10:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

That's how I see the roster as well Kent. However maybe throw Reg-White as the top D pairing to play against the heavy's.

I like the idea if Lankgow is hurt to have Kotalik & Backlund together on the 4th. Kotalik & Stone are fairly physical so maybe they would have a go at the goons at the other team and be able to get some good chances. But I'd probably rather see Backlund with Moss & Glencross or even Moss & Hagman with Glencross playing on the 2nd line.

I think without Langkow in the lineup the other team's top line is going to go to town on us.

Avatar
#6 Graham
September 01 2010, 10:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I think this team needs to find a suitable role for Backlund. The flames desperately need to get younger and quicker. I would prefer to see Stone, backlund make the line-up, and Pelech/Pardy play a supporting role on defense. More youth, and more development... Something this team desperately needs.

My take:

http://wizwonders.blogspot.com/2010/08/2010-2011-flames-depth-or-lack-thereof.html

Avatar
#8 Chris
September 01 2010, 11:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguay - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Stajan - Bourque

Glencross - Backlund - Kotalik

Stone - Conroy - Moss

(Ivanans)

Bouwmeester- Giordano

Regehr - White

Sarich - Pelech

Pardy

I have a hard time believing that Backlund wont start the season with the big boys. I also don't think we will see Lankgow until Novemberish. Until he's off the LTIR the Flames have some breathing room to figure out conglomerate of forwards. This should give Kotalik time to prove him self worthy of a spot or be moved else where (Heat). I think I like the bottom 6 the way they are thou. And like Kent said, you never know when you can use a "dancing bear"!

Avatar
#10 Bob
September 01 2010, 12:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

According to Peter Maher on the Fan960, Kotalik is expected to be at training camp but word throughout the Dome it that he will not be on the roster come October.

Apparently Darryl was "shopping" certain players at the draft and at the beginning of July to see what, if any, interest there was. Depending on the shape that guys show up inand seeing who is ready to go and slot into whatever position...Darryl believes he can go back to the GM's he spoke with 2 months ago (and still talks to now) and see if there is still any interest.

I am with you Kent, as the roster stands today, those are the likely players taking the ice come October and I think the line-ups make sense. We all know it would be good to have more cap room than $300 grand...so I guess we'll have to see what kind of magic Sutter can perform. I just don't know if the perceived interest in certain guys that Darryl had talks about in July still exists today.

Avatar
#11 marty
September 01 2010, 12:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

if lanks is hurt i wouldn't mind seeing this and im goin to get ripped but oh well

tanguay - stajan - iginla i for some reason think stajan has some up side not a true #1 but since when did we role with them

Hagman - jokinen - bourque maybe some chemistry from olympics can continue for the fins. a big line that wont get the other teams best checkers. line lacks a setup man. also just getting joker away from iggy

glencross - backlund - kotalik this line could be a pretty good offensive line for a 3rd line if chemistry develops. if kotalik could find some open spots my thinking is he could have some alright goal numbers generated by glencross going to the net and backlunds being a decent setup man.

stone - conroy - moss this line would be a little slow but responsible on the back end and stone if healthy creating some hits which could lead to t.o's

i agree 100% on the defensive end. im not saying what i recommended is perfect but i think it is somewhat balanced and like you say until a trade, opening day or an injury happens all we can do is speculate. great interactive article kent

Avatar
#12 Domebeers.com
September 01 2010, 01:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Graham

Last time I checked the AHL was the developmental league, not the NHL.

Avatar
#13 the-wolf
September 01 2010, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Strongly believe that the Flames should just leave Backlund in the minors. He needs a full season there. Let him play on the first line, 20+ minuts per game, pp, pk and all the rest. Plus, the one-on-one coaching he'll get there is far superior to what he'll get in Calgary. Having him on the 4th line is a waste of development and his numbers in the NHL and AHL just don't warrant being ready yet.

Avatar
#15 Sincity1976
September 01 2010, 01:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla Glencross-Langkow-Bourque Hagman-Stajan-Kotalik Moss-Conroy-Jackman (Ivanan)

Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla Hagman-Stajan-Bourque Glencross-Backlund-Kotalik Moss-Conroy-Jackman (Ivanan)

Avatar
#16 Monaertchi
September 01 2010, 04:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Langkow healthy:

Tanguay - Langkow - Iginla

Hagman - Stajan - Bourque

Glencross - Jokinen - Moss

Cunning - Conroy - Jackman

Ivanans is 13th, Kotalik is in Abbostford or KHL/SEL

Langkow not healthy:

Tanguay - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Stajan - Bourque

Glencross - Backlund - Moss

Cunning - Conroy - Jackman

Ivanans is 13th, Kotalik is in Abbostford or KHL/SEL

Defence:

Bouwmeester - Giordano

Regehr - White

Pardy - Pelech and Seabrook

Staios and Sarich are in Abbotsford or have been traded for picks

Goalies:

Kiprusoff - Karlsson

The cap hit is $55 at most, if Langkow isn't healthy and Backlund plays. Lots of room for picking up a playoff rental at the deadline.

I would like to see Backlund as the #3 centre this year, but then Stajan or Jokinen (preferably) would have to be traded.

Avatar
#17 SmellOfVictory
September 01 2010, 04:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm assuming Langkow won't be starting the season at this point, and I think that's a reasonable assumption, so here goes:

Tanguay - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Stajan - Bourque

Stone - Conroy - Moss

Kotalik - Backlund - Glencross

(Jackman)

Bouwmeester- Giordano

Regehr - White

Sarich - Pardy

(Pelech)

Just took yours, swapped Jackman and Ivanans as 13F, and swapped GlenX with Stone. We can probably agree that Glencross is a better player than Kotalik or Stone, and I think Backlund should have the best linemates he can practically be provided with if he's going to play in the NHL.

Also, if we could include trades, I'd have Sarich traded to anyone for a pick or prospect and replaced with one of the not-so-bad FA dmen.

Avatar
#18 Austin
September 01 2010, 06:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla

Bourque-Stajan-Hagman

Glencross-Backlund-Moss

Stone-Conroy-Kotalik

I want to see a full year of NHL Backlund. Stone is not worthy of the third line, Kotalik and Moss can switch spots don't rly care as long as the one on the third line is producing more offense. Glencross is not top 6 material, but very good for shootouts.

Avatar
#19 Austin
September 01 2010, 06:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

If worst comes to worst, the owenership with bury Staios, looks like Kotalik is going to get another chance, but probably on the fourth line depending on how good Moss does. The ownership DOES NOT want to bury Sarich and Staios' contracts, thats just silly.

Avatar
#20 walkinvisible
September 01 2010, 06:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

$300K is nowhere near enough. presuming the following start the season in the AHL, $300K is: - 44 days of mikael backlund - 21 days of staois - or 111 days of kronwall / young brent.

for an administration who were hording players on the off chance there would be injuries (following the debacle at the end of 08/09), leaving only $300K for replacement players is simply not enough.

Avatar
#21 walkinvisible
September 01 2010, 06:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

aaaaaaand yet again, the awesome formatting at FN bones my post. if only i would remember this when writing.

Avatar
#23 dustin642
September 01 2010, 08:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Line 1: Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla

Line 2: Bourque-Stajan-Hagman

Stajan NEEDS to be given a spot on at least the 2nd line to start in order for him to have a chance at being worth his salary. Like it or not we got him for another 4 years so I want him to play on at least the 2nd line and be able to prove himself worthy.

Line 3: Kotalik-Langkow*-Glencross *If Langkow is healthy, if not sub Conroy/Stone

This line seems like it would do a fair bit of heavy lifting. Glencross has been a great 3rd liner and is speedy and strong. Langkow needs no introduction and putting Kotalik with these 2 seems to be the most reliable option. If his 2 linemates are going to work their butts off every shift of every game, then maybe that attitude will rub off on him as well? (Wishful thinking, I know) Also Langkow will not be 100% probably all season. Most likely 70-75% tops, which is still very good but I would rather put him in a smaller role at least until he was up to 90-100% (Plus Glencross/Kotalik's stats will probably be very nice from Langkow's presence)

Line 4: Moss-Stone-Jackman Scratch: Ivanans I left Conroy out simply because he is a 2-way deal and it was just easier. Plus my *scenario* has Langkow as healthy.

Defense 1: Bouwmeester-Regehr Anaheim had Pronger/Neidermeyer together Chicago had Keith/Seabrook Detroit had Lidstrom/Rafalski why not put your best 2 D-men together?

Defense 2: Gio-Pardy I think this will be a good year for Pardy. There is a lot of talk about our depth and he is a depth player, I think he will make a big jump in improvement this season

Defense 3: Sarich-White Scratch: Pelech Probably not the prettiest "shut down" tandem imaginable but both of them possess the needed tools to do the job. This is a Defense first team, so having the parings a little different is not going to upset the overall balance of this team.

This roster is very tight on cap space with only about $250K remaining, but it does have 13 forwards and 7 defense

Avatar
#24 RossCreekNation
September 01 2010, 08:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

BREAKING (via Larry Brooks)...

A well placed source reports that the league has informed the Players' Assn. that the league will grandfather the recently submitted Kovalchuk 15-year, $100M contract, Luongo's 12-year, $64M deal that is entering its second season and Hossa's 12-year, $63.3M deal that also is entering its second season into the CBA under the following conditions:
1. That the cap hit on future multi-year contracts will not count any seasons that end with the player over 40 years of age. The cap hit would be calculated on the average of the salary up through age 40 only.
2. That the cap hit on future contracts longer than five years will be calculated under a formula granting additional weight to the five years with the highest salary.

The league has given the PA, which is being directed by Donald Fehr, until Friday at 5 pm to accept these conditions. If the PA refuses, or if negotiations fail to yeild a common ground, the league has informed the PA that:
1. It will reject the Kovalchuk contract.
2. It will move to immediately devoid the Luongo contract.
3. It will move to immediately open proceedings for a formal investigation into the Hossa contract.
The NHL owns sweeping punitive powers against teams and players judged guilty of circumvention under Article 26 of the CBA.

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/devils/nhl_gives_players_assn_ultimatum_UEbYgwfB6I4E4y7xGbE1OP

Avatar
#25 SmellOfVictory
September 01 2010, 09:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Looking at dustin's post, I just wanted to query: am I the only person who thinks that White is actually better defensively than Gio? I mean, they play slightly different styles, but from what I've seen I thought White was generally more composed on the ice.

Please don't kill me, WI. I still love Gio and think he's great.

Avatar
#26 SmellOfVictory
September 01 2010, 09:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Wow, the NHL isn't effing around.

Avatar
#27 Austin
September 01 2010, 09:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@dustin642

I agree with your first two lines, as most people do, there's no use signing Stajan to a (correct me if I'm wrong i'm not super up-to-date on salaries bonuses and such) 3.75M$ deal unless he's going to be top 6.

Putting Kotalik on the third line, not necessarily a bad move. BUT, putting Kotalik on the third line that does the HEAVY LIFTING, BAAAD IDEA, he'll bring down Langkow and GlenX.

Your defensive pairings.

Regehr-JBO: Don't have a huge problem with that, but didn't they try that last season and it didn't work out very well?

Gio-Pardy: Giordano is worthy of 3rd or 4th defense man, (maybe even 2nd defenseman, but with Regehr and Jbo around it isn't going to happen) but do not put pardy on the 2nd defense pairing. We're paying White 3.99 for a reason. He has to be at least top 4.

And I think Pardy is starting the year off in Abby.

Sarich-White: Sarich would do well on the third pairing. Shouldn't have too much trouble. White is better than 5th or 6th defenseman. Switch Pardy and White around in your scenario and you got one solid D. Nooooow just to find some chemistryyyy hey?

Avatar
#28 SmellOfVictory
September 01 2010, 09:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Austin

Couple small corrections: Stajan is 3.5/yr and White is 2.99

Avatar
#32 RossCreekNation
September 01 2010, 09:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

My question is: Why when the "super-smart" management team in Detroit 'invents' these long-term cap-circumventing contracts, everyone applauds, but when "evil" Lou Lamoriello & the Devils sign a deal similar, he's 'that bastard that's trying to ruin hockey'... that's what makes me most sick about this whole ordeal. I don't particularly like the Kovalchuk deal, but to me, IF they approved the others, they approve his... simple as that.

This latest news changes things a bit, and if they void some other contracts as well, then fine (although I don't understand how they can void a contract like Hossa's that is already beginning year 2).

Avatar
#33 RossCreekNation
September 01 2010, 09:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Just to be a lil different...

FORWARDS
Niklas Hagman ($3.000m) / Matthew Stajan ($3.500m) / Jarome Iginla ($7.000m)
Rene Bourque ($3.333m) / Daymond Langkow ($4.500m) / David Moss ($1.300m)
Alex Tanguay ($1.700m) / Mikael Backlund ($1.271m) / Olli Jokinen ($3.000m)
Curtis Glencross ($1.200m) / Craig Conroy ($0.500m) / Tim Jackman ($0.550m)
Raitis Ivanans ($0.600m)
DEFENSEMEN
Jay Bouwmeester ($6.680m) / Mark Giordano ($0.892m)
Ian White ($3.000m) / Robyn Regehr ($4.020m)
Steve Staios ($2.700m) / Matt Pelech ($0.600m)
Adam Pardy ($0.700m)
GOALTENDERS
Miikka Kiprusoff ($5.833m) / Henrik Karlsson ($0.500m)

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS
(these totals are compiled using the bonus cushion)
ROSTER: 22; CAP:$59.4m; PAYROLL: $56.521m; CAP ROOM: $2.879m; BONUSES: $0.425m

Avatar
#34 R O
September 01 2010, 10:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Thoughts of Langkow doing "heavy lifting" with Kotalik as a linemate are laughable. Those opinions can be safely ignored.

Same with any thoughts of Backlund playing any role other than benchwarmer. The name of the game is to win, not to see our mediocre prospects constantly lose puck battles.

Anyways. Without Langkow it's moot trying to put lines together, none can handle tough minutes so you might as well bend over and pray. With Langkow, the lines at even strength pretty much shake out predictably, you know, by how good the players are at even strength:

Tanguay/Langkow/Iginla
Hagman/Conroy/Bourque
Glencross/Stajan/Moss
Stone/Jokinen/Jackman

And the Dmen similarly:

Regehr/Bouwmeester
Sarich/White
Giordano/Pardy

The two place where I waver are:

1.) If Tanguay can handle the PVP job. If not, Bourque takes that spot. But a healthy Tanguay is clearly superior.

2.) Whether Giordano suits up against secondary or tertiary oppositon. It's not a question at all if Sarich is healthy (the latter having a superior track record at EV defending) but health is the question.

"Spreading the talent" didn't work last year and just doesn't work as well as one would think.

Avatar
#35 R O
September 01 2010, 10:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm pretty okay with skating close to the cap too. I think the 08/09 debacle had more to do with the fact that we couldn't put anybody on LTIR at the end of the season.

I mean 300K prorates to about 1.5M if my math is correct so that's enough for three replacements. Obviously you don't want to come less than 100K as you may not even have enough prorated for injury replacements.

But at the start of the season, the risk seems low and the utility of the saved cap dollars marginal. We can talk about trade deadline 2011 but let's try to get there with a healthy lineup and a coach with sensical game plans first, shall we?

Avatar
#36 RossCreekNation
September 01 2010, 10:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@R O

Agreed on 08/09 debacle... but if they suffer a couple short-term injuries early on, wouldn't it affect their ability to call up reinforcements?

Avatar
#37 Ash
September 01 2010, 10:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguay- Backlund- iginla

Avatar
#38 R O
September 01 2010, 10:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Agreed on 08/09 debacle... but if they suffer a couple short-term injuries early on, wouldn't it affect their ability to call up reinforcements?

The effect on the game wouldn't really matter anyway. If a good player goes down for a few games (e.g. Bouwmeester) then I don't think it really matters whether Pelech is able to draw in or if Pardy has to play more minutes. In fact I'd wager Pardy would give us a better chance to win.

I mean I wouldn't want to play another game with 16 skaters but surely that's got to be considered the far outer marker in the range of reasonable expectations. Having to dress 11F and 5D... small impact compared to not being able to replace the impact of whoeverwent down.

Another reason the 08/09 cap situation was overblown IMO. Losing your best centre and Dman (Lanks, Regehr), well, replace them with kids or don't replace them at all, you are going to lose games.

Avatar
#39 R O
September 01 2010, 10:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Sorry make that "14 skaters"... which is what I think it was? I forget. Tried to erase the memory of a dominant season lost to bad goaltending and cheaters.

In any case the numbers don't really matter as much as the quality of whoever goes down.

Avatar
#40 Marcus
September 01 2010, 10:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I agree Kotalik makes the team and Skates with Backlund in favorable matchups.

Salary cut is between Sarich and Staios. Sarich stays.

Conroy is nowhere near the starting roster regardless of Langkow.

Moss is falling off the depth chart and fast.

Prediction: 5th place with the Division in reach.

Avatar
#41 R O
September 01 2010, 10:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Conroy is nowhere near the starting roster regardless of Langkow. Moss is falling off the depth chart and fast.

Damn, thanks for the tip.

I don't know much about hockey, see I didn't realize that Conroy and Moss were such bad players. All I ever did was watch the games over the past few years, I mean by the way they were keeping plays alive and generating scoring chances I could have *sworn* they were good.

So, thanks. I needed that reality check.

Avatar
#42 dustin642
September 01 2010, 10:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Conroy on the second line is a bigger laugh than Kotalik/Langkow/Glencross. I like the guy and all but this is not 2006, he is old, slow, and wearing down. I hope that he pulls out a big one for us this year but not many are counting on it. If they were he would not be here for league minimum on a 2-way deal. Sure Kotalik is not a "heavy lifter" but putting him on a line with 2 very capable linemates does make sense. Ideally I would have him gone to the KHL or traded away and use his cap $ for someone a little more useful, but it does not look like that is going to happen. No team will trade for him and no Ownership group will want to pay him to play in the AHL. And why waste Jokinen on the 4th? Sure everyone can be bitter at the guy for not living up to the hype. But has anyone ever lived up to the hype out here? Any big named high end player via trade or free agency ever really fulfill the role that was expected of them in Calgary? Outside of Langkow (who will not be close to 100% for at least a few months in to the season, and should not be put in that role if he is anything but 100%) he is the best option for a #1 center we have. Spreading out the talent is really the only option that we have, we do not have a "big 3" top line. What we do have is depth. As crazy as that sounds...

Avatar
#43 R O
September 01 2010, 11:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tell me, on the balance of scoring chances, how do you think Conroy did in 09/10?

I mean reasonable people don't need to know that Conroy outchanced his opponents, playing quite difficult icetime for a guy his age, because they saw how good he still was on the ice in putting the puck in the good end.

But the numbers bear it out anyway, Conroy went 143-139 at even strength.

(Incidentally Lanks went 202-160. Surprise surprise, a guy who looks like a good player on the ice is helping the team win. Give him Kotalik as a linemate!)

And of course scoring chances lead to goals so a guy who outchances his opposition (especially in more difficult icetime) is going to outscore them over the long run. And, dammit, I coulda sworn I heard somewhere that you win by scoring more goals. So let's bury the guys who do that at the bottom of the roster, presumably give them less icetime and crap for teammates. Winning formula.

The mouth-breathers have taken over now, it seems.

Avatar
#44 icedawg_42
September 02 2010, 09:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@R O

I think connie is still a good clutch face-off guy...and clever on the PK - he sprung Glencross a few times last year.

I wouldnt want to see Backlund on the 4th line, he's a skill player not a mucker. Dont know where else he slots in with this lineup though, so if it takes another development year in Abby, im fine with that.

Avatar
#45 Dano0049
September 02 2010, 09:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla

Hagman-Langkow-Bourque

Glencross-Stajan-Backlund

Stone-Conroy-Moss/Kotalik (depends on who is demoted/traded)

Jackman and Ivan the terrible as scratches.

A third line of Glencross-Stajan-Backlund would eat up other third lines with their speed and skill IMO.

If Langkow is hurt:

Tanguay-Jokinen-Iginla

Hagman-Stajan-Bourque

Glencross-Backlund-Moss/Kotalik

Stone-Conroy-Moss/Kotalik

Avatar
#46 Reidja
September 02 2010, 12:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

R O. Conroy got 3 goals in 63 games. You're talking scoring chances. Dude.

Avatar
#47 R O
September 02 2010, 12:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Opinions really are like buttholes.

I'm just hoping that the simple minds and low brows aren't connected to the team in anyway. We'd be well and truly screwed, with lines of thinking like "3 goals..." without context like "on probably 30+ individual scoring chances".

Avatar
#48 Reidja
September 02 2010, 01:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

It's not rocket science it's hockey man. How many 3 goal scoring forwards are playing in the league? I guess you know something that no one else knows.

Why not put conny up with iggy RO? And Moss too. Yeah, and jokinen's a 4th line center.

Avatar
#49 Reidja
September 02 2010, 01:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tanguy - Jokinen - Iginla

Hagman - Backlund - Bourque

Glencross - Stajan - Moss

Stone - Conroy - Jackman

JBo - Gio

Reg - White

Sarich - Staios

That's how I'd like to see it start but I'd fully expect to see Backlund drop down to 4th line if it goes poorly (with Stajan upto 2nd and Conny upto 3rd). When Lanks comes back center would have to be re-evaluated across the board.

Avatar
#50 R O
September 02 2010, 01:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The really perplexing thing here is why garbage opinionaters like #48 even bother to come here at all.

I mean Kent's a pretty plugged-in blogger, his content really should only appeal to those people who've got a clue.

Somehow that's not the case. I thought "Kotalik as Langkow's linemate" was as off-the-rails as it could possibly get. Then I saw the response to Conroy's EV scoring chances and I knew I was wrong. It can, and will, get a lot worse.

I feel for Kent. He's a way more industrious and patient blogger than I am or ever will be, he deserves better.

Comments are closed for this article.