Postgame: Men Playing With Boys

Pat Steinberg
January 05 2011 10:56PM

We talked about Wednesday's game between Calgary and Vancouver being a real opportunity for the Flames to be honest with themselves.  And after watching a 3-1 win for the Canucks, it's pretty clear how honest the Flames need to be.  You can't knock the Flames effort necessarily but this was a Vancouver team toying with their opponent and coasting to a far-too-easy win.

What Happened

The Flames didn't start this game very well, with Ryan Kesler scoring just 70 seconds into the hockey game.  After an offensive zone turnover, the Canucks went down the ice and Mason Raymond fed Kesler in front of the net, and his 20th of the season put Vancouver up 1-0.  They'd go up by two late in the period with Kevin Bieksa scoring his fifth of the season at 16:12 and it put the Canucks into a very comfortable situation.  It was a pretty bland first for the visitors, as they generated four scoring chances on 12 shots, but for the most part were controlled by the home side.

Speaking of bland...how about that second period for the Flames.  They generated 14 shots on net, and only one of them could be considered dangerous, so don't let the 14-5 shot edge fool you.  Once again, the Canucks gave the Flames almost nothing from the blueline in, and midway through, they'd score their third goal...Daniel Sedin redirected his 22nd at 9:27 off a Bieksa shot, and that's all the Canucks would need.  Scoring chances were 3-1 in favor of Vancouver, even with the lopsided shot edge Calgary enjoyed.  If there was ever a case of shots on goal not telling the story, the opening 40 minutes was it.

The final frame really was meaningless, and with the Canucks sitting back a little bit, the Flames actually generated some scoring opportunities.  Roberto Luongo held his ground when he needed, and the minutes ticked down.  In the dying seconds, Tim Jackman pushed home his sixth of the season, a career high for him.  It came at 19:49 and served as nothing more than a goal to break Luongo's shutout.

One Good Reason...

...why the Flames lost?  They didn't have anything for 40 minutes, and they were down by three heading into the third, plain and simple.  When you only have four quality scoring chances through two periods against a truly excellent opponent, you're not going to have a lot of success.  It's not easy to do, and the Canucks get a ton of credit for doing enough to win the hockey game.  But the fact is, the Flames are not as good as Vancouver, and that was heavily on display tonight.

Red Warrior

I'll go with Mikael Backlund.  I know he's only counted with one even strength scoring chance for, but on a night where the Flames continually shot the puck from the outside, at least the kid tried moving the puck to the scoring areas.  He added an assist on the only Calgary goal, and after being out of NHL action for more than two weeks, he was just fine.  I've been very vocal on Backlund sitting, because I thought it was ludicrous he was sitting for development and hockey reasons, so it was nice to see.

Sum It Up

Not a whole lot to see here.  The Canucks beat the Flames because Vancouver did a nice job of pushing them to the outside.  I'm not necessarily knocking the Calgary effort, because they had nice stretches of possession and got lots of shots on net, but they aren't at the same level.  That was pretty clear on this night.  They've got Detroit on Friday and then a four game eastern swing next week.

1cd23297a0d13720ec2fc6d9740ce395
Pat Steinberg can be heard daily on the Fan960 in Calgary at can be read at the FAN 960. Born and raised in Calgary, Steinberg considers himself a huge fan of all sports including the CFL, MMA and 13 round bare knuckle boxing matches. Follow Steinberg on Twitter at www.twitter.com/Fan960Steinberg.
Avatar
#1 SmellOfVictory
January 05 2011, 11:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
steve wrote:

Flames are a joke. Really Calgary Really? We didn't show up and TILL BEAT YOu!

We still have HOgdson coming! Who do you guys have? Oh wait your GM trades away his picks! lOL

FLAMES SUCK

Nice to see the Nucks fans compensating for their small dicks, as per usual.

Avatar
#2 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 07:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
jr_christ wrote:

I think the Flames issues run deeper than most people think. I don't think it is as simple as "start trading assets and hoping for a good pick". The Oilers adopted that strategy for the past several seasons and have a net operating income of 25 million to show for it (source is from Forbes).

Since the lock-out the Flames are barley breaking even and they NEED to make the second round to bring in decent (5M) in net operating profits.

I guess everyone forgot what happened last April when the Flames were eliminated from the playoff race?! Well, corporate support (i.e. all the newfoundlanders and Saskatchewanites) took a step back and said, "hey, this isn't good. I only started watching this team because of the '04 run anyway. If we can't even make the playoffs I don't want to go to games"

So now, the board of directors are faced with an incredibly daunting task of deciding whom should be pleased - the owners or the fans.

Ownership NEEDs season ticket sales because a no show to the playoffs will ultimately result in net operating losses of 2M or greater (based on past year with incresed salaries). If interest falls, then revenues will start to deciline in the form of consession (including the rip off $8 beers), jerseys and likely TV revenues (which I believe is not just fixed but also based on team performance).

Fans just want to watch hockey that isn't (a) embarassing (enter Edmonton), (b) boring (enter Edmonton) and/or (c) a waste of everyone's time (enter Islanders).

I can tell you this much though. If you wish for a rebuild take a long hard look at what the Edmonton Oilers are going through. The young tallent will be good in 2-3 seasons, however, right now they stink. There is no consistency and the kids are just rushing plays.

It's not even fun making fun of the Oilers anymore because you just KNOW that in 3 seasons we will be embarassed for a while to come once the kids aren't kids anymore.

I disagree with everything you wrote hear and your financial numbers go against everything I've ever heard about the money the Flames organization is currently rolling around in.

Also, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan have no corporations; that anyone cares about anyways.

Avatar
#3 Kent Wilson
January 06 2011, 08:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@jr_christ

Let's avoid calling everyone idiots, please. Debate and argue all you want, but the personal insults aren't going to fly.

Avatar
#4 T&A4Flames
January 06 2011, 10:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Re: comments about moving B. Sutter; I think it may be beneficial to keep him around. I do actually think his system is decent but more importantly, he teaches structure and if we are looking for an influx of youth, that is exactly what youth will need, structure. Hopefully one of the assistant coaches has the entusiasm to go with it; Lowry seems to be ok in that dept.

Avatar
#5 everton fc
January 06 2011, 12:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@negrilcowboy

Fair points about the Knights. But they do win. Guess we can't have the players dad's behind the bench here.

What I am getting at is the need here for a coach who can inspire players, regardless of age or experience. All other points we are on the same page, expect Reggie. He called out Keenan accurately, I believe. He seemed to be saying, "We should have kept Playfair." His comment was that they played structured hockey with Playfair behind the bench, as opposed to Keenan.

True.

Also, Lowry's in charge of the power play, I believe. If he is, this has not improved. But on all other points, we agree. Seems we generally do. The immediate concerns are obvious. As are the glaring deficiencies.

@T&A4Flames

I don't necessarily disagree about your synopsis of Brent. But could it be that he is better suited for the junior game, not the NHL?

Avatar
#6 the forgotten man
January 05 2011, 11:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Maybe this is all just a bad dream...when I wake up tomorrow it'll still be June 1st, 1989...

If not, I think we can safely say that this current roster isn't even remotely capable of "holding the jock straps" of the '89 squad.

Cliff Fletcher and Al MacNeil are both only 75 (which is the new 55!) and I contend we are better off with a freshly dug up/resurrected Badger Bob than the current sad sack crew currently behind the bench.

Back to the future baby, Back to the future.

Avatar
#7 steve
January 05 2011, 11:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Flames are a joke. Really Calgary Really? We didn't show up and TILL BEAT YOu!

We still have HOgdson coming! Who do you guys have? Oh wait your GM trades away his picks! lOL

FLAMES SUCK

Avatar
#8 negrilcowboy
January 05 2011, 11:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Flames now have to play .670 the rest of the way,daunting task.

Avatar
#9 GermanFlame
January 06 2011, 12:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Just another 'WTF' moment by the flames not letting Backlund play and sending him down for just one game?

Tonight (At least in the third period) I thought he was the one of the only players actually making some creative moves and plays off the rush.

Gotta give your heads a shake flames management. Just let the kid play.

I know Jokinen has been scoring lately (Show me a goal thats not on the PP or a lucky tip or deflection of his body) Probably has a couple.. But still, Let the kid, Backlund, play with Iggy and Tanguay and see what happens? Is anything worse going to happen right now? Dont see it.

Just another frustrating night to be a Flames fan...

Avatar
#10 negrilcowboy
January 06 2011, 12:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Jbust

Avatar
#11 robinrussia
January 06 2011, 12:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@SmellOfVictory

That's a Microphallus or you can just state that Canuks fans are suffering from Phallocrypsis. No need to get Censors bent out of shape!

Nice to see the Nucks fans compensating for their microphalluses, as per usual.

Avatar
#12 George.T.
January 06 2011, 12:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm all for losing, the more we lose the more we win in the long run. One top for pick and rebuild coming up!

Avatar
#13 BCFLAME
January 06 2011, 01:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Forget about winning at .700 pace, we got to lose at a .750 pace in order to rouse the Flames ownership out of their deep denial.

We need proven-goal scorers!! We need good, up and coming players with tremendous offensive upside. Right now, only Nemisz and Howse may turn into top 6 forwards in the future (Nemisz has to learn to play with a little more edge, though, but I think he will pan out).

We need to get rid of all our UFA's this year, kick Kotalik back to Europe, and trade Hagman for a third rounder if need be.

Haggy and Glencross will be good for at least third rounders, and maybe evens seconds if teams get desperate at trade deadline. Good place to start racking up some draft picks.

Finally, move at least one of the core members for an upcoming offensive stud like Schenn or van Reimsdyk, as well as higher-end draft picks.

If we finish third or fourth from last, we will land Landeskog, who will surely brighten up the Flames future in the coming years.

In sum, if we can finish close to last, we can get our hands on a budding offensive superstar, in addition to picking up another via trade (maybe even two, if you wanna trade both Kipper and Iggy).

Wouldn;t mind seeing Schenn and Landeskog competing on our first line in a few years, with Backlund and Nemisz backing them up on the second.

Avatar
#14 icedawg_42
January 06 2011, 07:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
SmellOfVictory wrote:

Nice to see the Nucks fans compensating for their small dicks, as per usual.

Haha! You knew the trolls would be out early. THIS is why I hate the Canucks..not because of the team, but because of their beligerent "fans" Anyway, this is just more evidence of the damage Dutter did. (yes im going to slag him even now when he's gone) It actually makes me mad on behalf of the team, that the makeup of the roster is such that strong efforts are going to yeild losses.

Avatar
#15 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 07:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I think the Flames issues run deeper than most people think. I don't think it is as simple as "start trading assets and hoping for a good pick". The Oilers adopted that strategy for the past several seasons and have a net operating income of 25 million to show for it (source is from Forbes).

Since the lock-out the Flames are barley breaking even and they NEED to make the second round to bring in decent (5M) in net operating profits.

I guess everyone forgot what happened last April when the Flames were eliminated from the playoff race?! Well, corporate support (i.e. all the newfoundlanders and Saskatchewanites) took a step back and said, "hey, this isn't good. I only started watching this team because of the '04 run anyway. If we can't even make the playoffs I don't want to go to games"

So now, the board of directors are faced with an incredibly daunting task of deciding whom should be pleased - the owners or the fans.

Ownership NEEDs season ticket sales because a no show to the playoffs will ultimately result in net operating losses of 2M or greater (based on past year with incresed salaries). If interest falls, then revenues will start to deciline in the form of consession (including the rip off $8 beers), jerseys and likely TV revenues (which I believe is not just fixed but also based on team performance).

Fans just want to watch hockey that isn't (a) embarassing (enter Edmonton), (b) boring (enter Edmonton) and/or (c) a waste of everyone's time (enter Islanders).

I can tell you this much though. If you wish for a rebuild take a long hard look at what the Edmonton Oilers are going through. The young tallent will be good in 2-3 seasons, however, right now they stink. There is no consistency and the kids are just rushing plays.

It's not even fun making fun of the Oilers anymore because you just KNOW that in 3 seasons we will be embarassed for a while to come once the kids aren't kids anymore.

Avatar
#16 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 07:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

PS> if you also recall the terrible run from 1997 to 2003 it only took about 2 seasons before talk of selling the team began.

Avatar
#17 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 07:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Well, we're in good hands. The man who refused to even consider trading Lecavalier has stated the same in regards to Iggy and also that lots of teams that have stockpiled draft picks haven't done crap.

So, we're definately in good hands for the future.

More of the same, more of the same. I have to think, though, that this ludicrous philosophy of "win now, be competitive every year" comes directly from ownership.

Risebrough, Coates, Button, Sutter, Feaster - all different styles and varying degrees on incompetence, but every one of them with that same philosophy of refusing to do a proper rebuild.

Once past the first round in 21 years. Pull your heads out Owners.

BTW, anyone watch Flames This Week with Macoun and Patterson? Macoun basically said that Riser was jealous of the young leaders on the Flames and trade Gilmour out of spite for him.

Awesome! No wonder he slagged Dougie so bad in arbitration and Cliff knew exactly who to target when he went to TO.

Chalk up 2 GMs who have screwed this organization over based on their inability to be objective and set aside their personal emotions.

Avatar
#18 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 07:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

That's because ownership only cares about money. Nothing else. They're no different than Harold Ballard or Jeremy Jacobs.

"Just fill the seats baby!"

Avatar
#19 negrilcowboy
January 06 2011, 07:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

That's because ownership only cares about money. Nothing else. They're no different than Harold Ballard or Jeremy Jacobs.

"Just fill the seats baby!"

The leafs west. Stajan, wow what a player. The media builds this team up so much, that they actually believe the hype. outshot the canucks,the Flames were the better team, deserved a better fate. Please,there is enough crap on the ice we dont need more. last nights game was determined quickly by the canucks, they then applied strategy and shut the door. jackman scored with 10 seconds left,Louie didnt need to make big saves they fluttered the puck harmlessly at the net.thats the beauty of stats you can manipulate the masses.

Avatar
#20 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 07:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

I disagree with everything you wrote hear and your financial numbers go against everything I've ever heard about the money the Flames organization is currently rolling around in.

Also, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan have no corporations; that anyone cares about anyways.

First off, dispute everything you want about the numbers. Go to forbes.com and look for yourself on the operating numbers. I don't give a damn if you "disagree"... idiot.

Second, you must be from here. EVERYONE around Canada makes fun of Calgary for two reasons. (1) Everyone is a cowboy, (2) everyone is from NFLD and SASK.

I am glad you disagree because the Flames are going DOWN BIG TIME. It's idiots like you who are supporting the downward spiral.

Thanks for coming out, susan.

Avatar
#21 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 07:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Well, we're in good hands. The man who refused to even consider trading Lecavalier has stated the same in regards to Iggy and also that lots of teams that have stockpiled draft picks haven't done crap.

So, we're definately in good hands for the future.

More of the same, more of the same. I have to think, though, that this ludicrous philosophy of "win now, be competitive every year" comes directly from ownership.

Risebrough, Coates, Button, Sutter, Feaster - all different styles and varying degrees on incompetence, but every one of them with that same philosophy of refusing to do a proper rebuild.

Once past the first round in 21 years. Pull your heads out Owners.

BTW, anyone watch Flames This Week with Macoun and Patterson? Macoun basically said that Riser was jealous of the young leaders on the Flames and trade Gilmour out of spite for him.

Awesome! No wonder he slagged Dougie so bad in arbitration and Cliff knew exactly who to target when he went to TO.

Chalk up 2 GMs who have screwed this organization over based on their inability to be objective and set aside their personal emotions.

Lets do some thinking here before we write retarded comments like this and embarrass yourself. Everyone knows Flames fans are the dumbest in Canada (again, because you are all from SASK and NFLD).

Since the lock out, look at all the teams which have won the cup. With the exception of detroit the teams were ALL stock piled with draft picks. EVERY ONE OF THEM.

The Flames have proven that trading away draft picks has done NOTHING for the organization.

Look at the top 5 teams in the NHL, they rebuilt though the draft (with the exception of Detroit). Please don't try and compare yourself with the Red Wings.

What ever makes you feel better at night you idiot.

Avatar
#22 Gange
January 06 2011, 08:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Well this wasn't unexpected.

I'm not sure why anyone is ranting at this point.

@steve

Nice to see illiterate Canucks fans spewing but don't really understand the game of hockey.

As for the Flames, this team was dismantled half way through last year in a series of moves that had me increasingly, literally, saying "What is going on here???" There was a moment of hope in the summer thinking that maybe I had it all wrong, maybe it was just a year of bad luck for many players. Wishful thinking lasted until game 1.

The good news is that this team does not require a complete rebuild but it needs a heavy makeover. Next year may be better but the year after should be even better with Gabriel Landeskog wearing Flames silks.

:)

Avatar
#23 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 08:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

Let's avoid calling everyone idiots, please. Debate and argue all you want, but the personal insults aren't going to fly.

Sorry everyone

Avatar
#24 Gange
January 06 2011, 08:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@jr_christ

WHOA!

In your world I guess everything is black and white but when you grow up you'll see that nothing really is. Teams with high draft picks have not competed for the cup. But to humor you, yes almost every player was drafted so I guess every team that has won a cup was built through the draft.

If you think that "Flames fans are the dumbest in Canada" and you can't successfully make a point against us what does that say about you?

Go have your temper tantrum somewhere else little child.

Avatar
#25 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 08:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
jr_christ wrote:

First off, dispute everything you want about the numbers. Go to forbes.com and look for yourself on the operating numbers. I don't give a damn if you "disagree"... idiot.

Second, you must be from here. EVERYONE around Canada makes fun of Calgary for two reasons. (1) Everyone is a cowboy, (2) everyone is from NFLD and SASK.

I am glad you disagree because the Flames are going DOWN BIG TIME. It's idiots like you who are supporting the downward spiral.

Thanks for coming out, susan.

You must be looking for the Calgary Puck forum. That's where the 10 year olds hang out.

I'm sorry if my disagreeing with you upsets you so much. Perhaps some anger management courses would be benificial.

Different opinions are why you come onto a forum btw.

I do agree, however, that the Flames are going "DOWN BIG TIME" as you so eloquently put it.

Avatar
#26 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 08:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
jr_christ wrote:

Lets do some thinking here before we write retarded comments like this and embarrass yourself. Everyone knows Flames fans are the dumbest in Canada (again, because you are all from SASK and NFLD).

Since the lock out, look at all the teams which have won the cup. With the exception of detroit the teams were ALL stock piled with draft picks. EVERY ONE OF THEM.

The Flames have proven that trading away draft picks has done NOTHING for the organization.

Look at the top 5 teams in the NHL, they rebuilt though the draft (with the exception of Detroit). Please don't try and compare yourself with the Red Wings.

What ever makes you feel better at night you idiot.

So I make a point that the Flames should rebuild through the draft and you disagree with me by agreeing with me?

Right...............uh, yeah.....OK..........

It really bothers you that I disagreed with your first post, doesn't it?

Oh, well.

Avatar
#27 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 09:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Speaking of the Canucks, anyone see that weird sign about the Olympics/winning the Cup?

Montreal: Olympics - 76, Cup '77

Calgary: Olympics - '88, Cup '89

Vancouver: Olympics - '10, Cup?

Not saying I give it any weight, but if it does happen a 3rd time, kinda eerie.

Avatar
#28 Tach
January 06 2011, 09:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Pat, I think your description of the first goal is far too tame. It should read something like this:

"Jokinen gave the puck away in the neutral zone trying to make a half ass move at the red line, but instead chipped the puck into the defender's shin pad, leaving the Defender joining the rush out of position. As the Canucks broke into the zone, Jokinen scrambles to get into defensive position, succeeding only in falling over backward. This left the other defencemen isolated for an easy 2 on 1 that Kesler finished off."

You could describe the rest of the game pretty much like that.

Good choice on the Red Warrior. Backlund looked like one of the few guys who gave a damn in the early stages of the game in particular.

Avatar
#29 Gange
January 06 2011, 09:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Speaking of the Canucks, anyone see that weird sign about the Olympics/winning the Cup?

Montreal: Olympics - 76, Cup '77

Calgary: Olympics - '88, Cup '89

Vancouver: Olympics - '10, Cup?

Not saying I give it any weight, but if it does happen a 3rd time, kinda eerie.

God help me if the Canucks win. The level of obnoxious will sky rocket.

On the brightside, if they win, all UFA's will get HUGE raises leading to their demise!! Well not really. sigh.

As much as I hate to admit it Gillis has done a really good job at putting this team together. Being a player agent sure hasn't hurt in player contract negotiations.

Avatar
#30 Gange
January 06 2011, 09:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Backlund looked really good last night. There's really no reason to bench him. He's young, he'll make mistakes but he shows promise.

I loved the way he carried the puck into the offensive zone, even if he didn't score.

Avatar
#31 everton fc
January 06 2011, 09:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'll throw this out once again... Perhaps it is ridiculous. In fact, it is... but the concept intrigues me...

Take a look at who runs the London Knights. Dale and Mark Hunter. Basil McRae is part of that organization. To me, these are the types of hard-nose, scrappy fellows we need here. Immediately. Running our organization.

And I also think Lanny would make a good President. Perhaps I'll be flogged for typing this... But he is a decent businessman, knows the game, is loyal to the city... And played with true-grit every shift.

Feaster is a lawyer. Sure, he's won the Calder and Stanley Cups as a GM. But I don't think he's going to revolutionize any organization. He's not progressive enough. Not radical enough.

And how long do we give Brent here? Players need to be inspired. In Colorado, Pittsburgh, Pheonix, there is obvious inspiration. Young coaches with progressive ideas.

To me, the solutions here are as easy to remedy as playing the commodities markets since Oct '07!

Avatar
#32 everton fc
January 06 2011, 09:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

...The Flames need to be in serious evalutaion mode. Clearly, we are not a playoff team. The organization needs to immediately recognize this, and begin the rebuild... without emotion, I might add.

Evalutaion starts from the top down. King. Feaster. Brent. The entire bench. Our power play stinks. Our PK is nothing to brag about. The only bright spot I've seen is the goaltending - Noodles should be retained.

Bourque is not a leader. Nor is Stajan. Hagman is lost here. And so on.

Bouwmeester is a millstone. Move him, as well.

Move these people. I like Sarich, but if he has value, move him. A new regime will send Kotalik down to the minors, unless he shows some sign of life. Staois simply plays the rest of this shot-season, and then he's gone... And so on.

But Ken King needs to go first. Once he goes, and is replaced... then the GM situation can be resolved.

Hextall sounds better every day, hey?!

Avatar
#33 the-wolf
January 06 2011, 10:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
everton fc wrote:

I'll throw this out once again... Perhaps it is ridiculous. In fact, it is... but the concept intrigues me...

Take a look at who runs the London Knights. Dale and Mark Hunter. Basil McRae is part of that organization. To me, these are the types of hard-nose, scrappy fellows we need here. Immediately. Running our organization.

And I also think Lanny would make a good President. Perhaps I'll be flogged for typing this... But he is a decent businessman, knows the game, is loyal to the city... And played with true-grit every shift.

Feaster is a lawyer. Sure, he's won the Calder and Stanley Cups as a GM. But I don't think he's going to revolutionize any organization. He's not progressive enough. Not radical enough.

And how long do we give Brent here? Players need to be inspired. In Colorado, Pittsburgh, Pheonix, there is obvious inspiration. Young coaches with progressive ideas.

To me, the solutions here are as easy to remedy as playing the commodities markets since Oct '07!

Agree with all you say here.

And I would love Lanny to be Prez here. Bring some class back into the organization that hasn't been seen since the Cliff Fletcher, Al MacNeil days.

Avatar
#34 negrilcowboy
January 06 2011, 10:18AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@everton fc

Stajan is flat out a bust, Bourque maybe on the downside of his career, I hear the yelling already. Look at the stats,only one did he hit the 20 goal mark prior to his arrival in Calgary, he wasn't in the Hawks plans. Secondly last year was a career high in goals and points at age 28. 28 not 21 where a player still has time to peak, but at the age where most nhl careers are ending.At the beginning of the season i pencilled Rene in for 24 goals. Check seasons game sheets, and Rene disappeared in December and January, the heart of the season.As for Hagman his body language screams i dont care anymore,play out the contract and go back to Finland.As for Jbo, beautiful skater who can disguise his weakness, that being no heart. Strip him of the assistant captaincy. Give the A to a team guy like GIO.As for Reggie the company man ship him out, he sides with management ie king on every decision. Reggie is a coach killer.Playfair,Keenan ..... ever notice he is quick to respond to a coaching change.

Avatar
#35 negrilcowboy
January 06 2011, 10:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@everton fc

The London Knights recruit key players, and Phil really wasn't key by rewarding their fathers with positions in the organization. See Dave Gagner, etc. The coaching staff consists primarily of Dale and a group of fathers that are ever changing.Speaking of the London Knights is Tinkerbell still the trainer, any former Soo Greyhound would know who i am talking about. lol . As for Patti Kane a very nice compensation package to play.

Avatar
#36 jr_christ
January 06 2011, 10:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

You must be looking for the Calgary Puck forum. That's where the 10 year olds hang out.

I'm sorry if my disagreeing with you upsets you so much. Perhaps some anger management courses would be benificial.

Different opinions are why you come onto a forum btw.

I do agree, however, that the Flames are going "DOWN BIG TIME" as you so eloquently put it.

I am actually 14...

Avatar
#37 negrilcowboy
January 06 2011, 10:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
jr_christ wrote:

I am actually 14...

You should be in school furthering your education. have a good day at school Teddy Mancuso.

Avatar
#38 Nolan Moore
January 06 2011, 11:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
negrilcowboy wrote:

Flames now have to play .670 the rest of the way,daunting task.

Is anyone playing that right now? I think its just the top teams and thats it, nothing higher. Pitt is at .670. Van is at .730 but those are really good teams. We talk about the "system" Brent brought in. When will everyone wake up and realize, it doesnt work? Brent isnt a good NHL coach. He did well in the WHL, fair in NJ (with the team, who couldnt, but out in first round). He took a good team which only fell off because of injuries and his brothers lack of cap management, then fired a coach that was appearing to get the team rolling (how Brent got here without anyone putting up a fuss, i'm surprised the NHL didnt investigate that he "happened" to want to leave and Calgary "happened" to have an opening). Brent took that team and made it worse, trying to fit a sqare peg in a round hole. Remember good coaches motivate. Good coaches help their players reach their potential. Good coaches get more out of their players. And good coaches coach to the teams strengths and abilities. So far in the past year and a half Brent has failed to do any.

Avatar
#39 ACasualFan
January 06 2011, 11:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I love the Flames and will never stop cheering for them, but I have a feeling it's going to be a tough road for a long while.

To those saying Brent would be a good choice for leading the obviously necessary rebuild due to his focus on structure and responsibility, my question is which is more important in a rebuild, structure or development?

The Flames don't seem to have any players becoming better than they were prior to being with the organization, or prior to this season in any event. In fact, I feel the story of this team really is the staggering number of players that we hoped would put up similar numbers to what they had put up before, or better yet improve on those numbers, where seemingly without exception all these players are actually in decline.

When you trade prospects for reclamation projects, and you fail to develop said players in a positive direction, you're going to struggle. When you dump money into players thinking they will maintain or improve and they fall off (*cough* J-Bust *cough*) you will eventually find yourself among the worst teams in the league.

Avatar
#40 A18
January 06 2011, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I read an article today in which B Sutter called out Kipper's play last night. This in my opinion is unwarranted and unproductive. Kipper is probably the only reason we aren't in last place. Give the guy a break he had one semi off game. Focus on bigger issues like the players that have been playing consistently bad.

The biggest problem, this team has no identity.

Avatar
#41 thymebalm
January 06 2011, 12:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I was at the game last night:

Kipper was weak. and we had no killer instinct to finish off plays. I watched pucks bounce off the posts, and all around the blue paint. I watched the Flames stay in control for most of the contest.

Turnovers costs the Flames goals. Turnovers cost the Canucks nothing.

We lack a strong offensive system. We were putting pucks to the net all night, but I didn't see Lou scramble at all. He was jumpy in the first, but he didn't need to make any killer saves. He wasn't forced to go post to post once.

If every forward went to the net like Tim Jackman. Then our plan of peppering shots from the perimeter and picking up rebounds would have resulted in a win tonight. I watched the puck constantly in the Lou's crease without a Flame near by to tap them back into the contest.

People who say we need proven goal scorers are wrong. We have 10 guys at least who have scored 20 goals before. I've been blaming Brent for a long time. This game summed it up for me. Great plays, ability to control the play at times. But not a smart enough attack to cash in on plays in the offensive zone. We need a coach who is going to stick three players in the crease if those are the types of shots we are taking...

I don't know. I wasn't really disappointed by what I saw. Just upset that management couldn't make a better decision and fire Brent along with his brother, or have kept D. Sutter and canned Brent in favor of someone who knows offense. I guess low goal scoring has been bleeding through this franchise since the lockout... but it's affecting all levels of the club now, and needs to be cured ASAP.

Nice tix. Low bowl behind Lou. I got to watch him pull a HUGE soccer dive. All fans of hockey, Canucks and otherwise, were totally embarrassed by it. He went from "writhing in pain" to "ready for pro sports" in a single instant. It was one of the few moments where the Flames and the Nucks' fans were on the same page. That and the big collective sigh from losing the WJC that seemed to zap the life out of the building for the whole game.

Avatar
#42 Danny Lawson
January 06 2011, 02:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I genuinely feel sorry for Feaster or whoever assumes the official GM mantle. The Flames current mess began surprisingly, the year the Flames made their cup run in 2004. The Flames failure to select or develop productive draftee’s began that year and has continued since. Without the ability to develop or sustain skill from within, organizations don’t succeed. The cupboard is pretty bare and rather than investing in superior scouting, the Flames decided to invest in free agents. Expensive ones that are of poor value. It will be another three years before this disaster turns around. I hope fans understand humility and patience.

Avatar
#43 Subversive
January 06 2011, 02:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Well, we're in good hands. The man who refused to even consider trading Lecavalier has stated the same in regards to Iggy and also that lots of teams that have stockpiled draft picks haven't done crap.

So, we're definately in good hands for the future.

More of the same, more of the same. I have to think, though, that this ludicrous philosophy of "win now, be competitive every year" comes directly from ownership.

Risebrough, Coates, Button, Sutter, Feaster - all different styles and varying degrees on incompetence, but every one of them with that same philosophy of refusing to do a proper rebuild.

Once past the first round in 21 years. Pull your heads out Owners.

BTW, anyone watch Flames This Week with Macoun and Patterson? Macoun basically said that Riser was jealous of the young leaders on the Flames and trade Gilmour out of spite for him.

Awesome! No wonder he slagged Dougie so bad in arbitration and Cliff knew exactly who to target when he went to TO.

Chalk up 2 GMs who have screwed this organization over based on their inability to be objective and set aside their personal emotions.

I heard a rumour that Gilmour was traded because there was a young lady ready to cry rape unless he was shipped out of town. Just a rumour, but it would explain why they got such a terrible return for him.

Avatar
#44 T&A4Flames
January 06 2011, 02:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Subversive wrote:

I heard a rumour that Gilmour was traded because there was a young lady ready to cry rape unless he was shipped out of town. Just a rumour, but it would explain why they got such a terrible return for him.

Rumor was that is how we got Gilmour from St. Louis in the 1st place. It was a long time ago but I do remember hearing it. I did not hear that about his trade from Calgary, though.

Avatar
#45 Subversive
January 06 2011, 03:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

Rumor was that is how we got Gilmour from St. Louis in the 1st place. It was a long time ago but I do remember hearing it. I did not hear that about his trade from Calgary, though.

Oh, I could be remembering wrong too, or I heard it all jumbled.

Avatar
#46 dotfras
January 06 2011, 03:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I think our inability to hold on to players with great potential (Giguere, Bure, Cammalleri, Drury, Huselius, Lombardi, Savard, St. Louis), our horrible drafting & "one player away from a cup" all go hand in hand.

There needs to be a change in the culture, for as long as I can remember management has had a band aid mentality, going about trying to fix this mess the wrong way.

Feaster needs to recognize that drafting & devoloping have to be given WAY more focus.

Not only will it give us a better team in the long run, it'll also create more excitement amongst the fan base. Sick of the constant infusion of old "has beens" (some of them don't even deserve that title) into the team. We need youth, we need draft picks, we need to rid ourself of many of the old dudes that are currently on the roster.

Avatar
#47 Monaertchi Gaudnett
January 06 2011, 03:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
dotfras wrote:

I think our inability to hold on to players with great potential (Giguere, Bure, Cammalleri, Drury, Huselius, Lombardi, Savard, St. Louis), our horrible drafting & "one player away from a cup" all go hand in hand.

There needs to be a change in the culture, for as long as I can remember management has had a band aid mentality, going about trying to fix this mess the wrong way.

Feaster needs to recognize that drafting & devoloping have to be given WAY more focus.

Not only will it give us a better team in the long run, it'll also create more excitement amongst the fan base. Sick of the constant infusion of old "has beens" (some of them don't even deserve that title) into the team. We need youth, we need draft picks, we need to rid ourself of many of the old dudes that are currently on the roster.

Well, unless Darryl quickly becomes GM of a team with lots of draft picks, and starts trading them to Feaster for Joker, Stajan, Kotalik, Bouwmeester, and Iggy, I don't see how the flames will be able to get significantly younger in less than 3 years.

Avatar
#48 dotfras
January 06 2011, 03:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Monaertchi Gaudnett

Well unfortunately I know it's not a get-young-quick strategy, Owners need to figure it out though. Maybe we've gotten so low that reality kicks in.

We could make some progress this year by even making 1 or 2 aging player for ANY pick/prospect trade. There's also other options, finding guys in college or Europe who went undrafted to pick up.

This all needs to start with getting rid of some contracts though.

Avatar
#49 Nolan Moore
January 06 2011, 04:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
dotfras wrote:

I think our inability to hold on to players with great potential (Giguere, Bure, Cammalleri, Drury, Huselius, Lombardi, Savard, St. Louis), our horrible drafting & "one player away from a cup" all go hand in hand.

There needs to be a change in the culture, for as long as I can remember management has had a band aid mentality, going about trying to fix this mess the wrong way.

Feaster needs to recognize that drafting & devoloping have to be given WAY more focus.

Not only will it give us a better team in the long run, it'll also create more excitement amongst the fan base. Sick of the constant infusion of old "has beens" (some of them don't even deserve that title) into the team. We need youth, we need draft picks, we need to rid ourself of many of the old dudes that are currently on the roster.

One of the problems is the scouting system. Now i've heard that Darryl made the final decisions, but Todd Button has been there forever and is terrible, he should be gone. What i've always said is a rebuilding team needs to have the best Amateur and minor-pro scouts and a top end team should have the best pro-scouts. Calgary doesnt have either. Clear out the scouting system and rebuild and invest heavily in that. There is no rule that you cant have 20 minor scouts.

Avatar
#50 KingJafi
January 06 2011, 04:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Yeah...the Flames aren't a very good team. Sigh.

Comments are closed for this article.