Five things: Jay Feaster and the Terrible, Horrible, No-Good Very Bad Week

Ryan Lambert
July 04 2013 08:16AM

 

 

(Author's note: If you are one of those people who thinks I am too negative about the way the Flames are run, I advise you skip this column for reasons which the headline should make obvious. There's nothing here for you.)

1. Let's get the good thing out of the way

It has not under any circumstances been a good week for Jay Feaster, and while I guess, "Jay Feaster screwed up again," can't technically qualify as news in July 2013, it's at least important to note that he isn't totally terrible at his job.

Early this week he successfully acquired winger TJ Galiardi from the San Jose Sharks for the low, low price of a fourth-round pick two drafts from now. This is good business, as is signing him to a one-year deal for next to nothing. Getting even a warm body to fill out the NHL roster for almost no cost at all, in terms of assets or money, is a very good thing.

There are concerns there, of course. That Galiardi won't even come close to replicating what he did in his rookie year, which was no especially great shakes itself, is obviously front and center, because he couldn't even succeed in terms of production when he was inexplicably slotted onto San Jose's top line.

But again, it's a low-cost deal with no risk beyond this season if it doesn't work out, and you'd rather they give that kind of deal to a 25-year-old than a 34-year-old just for the sake of getting Experience In The Room or whatever nonsense they could cook up. That's because, if he succeeds, you don't have to have any qualms about giving him another three years without expecting everything to flatline at some point during the deal.

Now, with that praise having been doled out, it's time to get into the far larger number of things Feaster screwed up since last we spoke. You've been warned. Twice.

2. The first bad thing

Not long after 5T was published last week came news that the Flames had traded Alex Tanguay and Cory Sarich for David Jones and Shane O'Brien, which is a trade I don't really understand at all.

On the surface, it's the team moving its famous "post-apex" players for those that are decidedly "pre-apex," though taking on an addition $500,000 in salary to do so. That's an extremely negligible amount of money, but it grows to an additional $2.5 million against the cap in 2014-15 because O'Brien is signed for an additional year beyond what Sarich was.

So what's the problem with this trade: It's what it represents. The words people used in talking about this deal are the ones Feaster has been parrotting needlessly since everyone in the front office realized how bad the team was late last season. "Bigger," "harder to play against," the ideals of an era long gone. O'Brien is an obvious upgrade over Sarich, because just about anybody would be (Sarich really only succeeded by even meager terms because his competition was garbage, though it should be noted O'Brien's better performance in terms of corsi relative was also against relatively low-quality opponents).

Jones, meanwhile, may be younger than Tanguay but he's also appreciably worse, signed for the same amount of time, and for more money. He was good a few years ago, and the theory is that the Change of Scenery will do him good, but I'd really like to see it before I start believing it.

This was a deal made with a good idea in mind, so credit there, but the execution was certainly lacking.

3. Another mistake

That, I suppose, brings us to the two other obvious screw-ups, both of which were made at the draft. I'm not hugely in favor of taking Sean Monahan over Valeri Nichushkin (Monahan being the one guy in the consensus top-6 I wasn't totally sold on, based on the information available to me), but it's probably the safer pick, so I can't really begrudge it. 

However, when it comes to Emile Poirier, though, I thought that pick was outrageous. Not specifically because I don't think the player can turn into an NHLer, per se — though I'm always dubious of a highlight reel that's nothing but him blowing the doors off some poor-skating CHL defenseman to the outside, and of first-round QMJHL wingers in general — but because few had him going at No. 22. Judging by his reaction when his name was called, that included Poirier himself. This was made more troubling by the fact that Hunter Shinkaruk was just sitting there, waiting to be chosen several picks after everyone assumed he'd be taken.

Of course, Feaster assures everyone that Poirier was safely inside Calgary's top 10 draft-eligible prospects, which seems odd for a guy for whom the buzz was that he "might" go in the first round. Kent called it a "no brainer" when Shinkaruk was there at 22, and yet here we are with that player as Canucks property and Poirier already talking about making the team. Woof.

This goes back to Calgary's supreme confidence in its scouting, because even a decent pick at No. 28 like Morgan Klimchuk, whom they swear they had at No. 13, shows that if they have a plan, they don't deviate. Meaning that a team which hasn't drafted particularly well in forever is putting all its faith in internal scouting, and not deviating from its plans no matter what.

Is Poirier going to be a better NHLer than Shinkaruk? I don't know. But I know that every other hockey person on earth didn't think so on Sunday afternoon. I can't go around putting a lot of faith in the thinking that led to an off-the-board-of-picks-that-were-off-the-board pick like Mark Jankowski. As it was put to me at the conclusion of the first round: The fact that we're using "It could have been worse" as praise for the team's drafting at this point tells you everything you need to know. Especially when you're talking about The Most Important Draft In The History Of The Calgary Flames. 

The other guy who they shouldn't have drafted is Keegan Kanzig, who objectively sucks at hockey, and was selected when a number of more enticing prospects including Jordan Subban were still available.

You just really can't trust the Flames to not screw things up at draft time. That's the lesson here.

4. Comments on Lecavalier

And you can say the same thing about the lip service paid to the rebuild. The second an over-30 player in which the Flames had any interest came on the market (Vinny Lecavalier), all pretense of pursuing only "pre-apex" players went directly out the window.

Jay Feaster practically performed an interpretive dance routine in talking about how badly he would like Lecavalier in Calgary, all but screaming that when it comes to players of his ilk (assumedly, this means 33-year-old second-line centers who had just been bought out and whom Feaster had previously managed) "transcend post-apex." That, for those scoring at home, is shorthand for "All that stuff I've been saying is BS." This is the guy being trusted to rebuild the Flames. It's insanity.

The only reason that we're not talking about Lecavalier being on the team as a result of the team having been so thoroughly mismanaged to this point that it's no longer a prime free agent destination, if it ever was one, which is debatable. Thankfully, the Flyers, too, are in the business of giving out questionable free agent contracts, and they at least present the illusion of success.

5. Brodie's fixing to be offer-sheeted

Just prior to my writing this, it was revealed that Jay Feaster has yet to even open negotiations with TJ Brodie about a new contract, since he is about to become a restricted free agent starting tomorrow.

We've been told that this is fairly common practice: GMs and player agents alike are fairly happy to wait around, let UFAs set the market, and then negotiate a deal toward the end of summer. Okay, fine.

But there's a problem for Feaster specifically, and something that should give people pause overall. Feaster is the most recent general manager to do the worst thing a person in his job can do: He offer sheeted another team's player. This makes him and the Flames' RFAs, of which there are several, targets. And of those targets, only a small number would actually be worth the trouble. At the very tipppy-top of that list is Brodie, who teams in the market for defensemen — say, I don't know, Colorado — would likely do very well to add.

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see someone pay Brodie a little more than market value on an offer sheet just to twist the knife with the Flames' rebuild plans. And maybe that GM will actually have the benefit of understanding how NHL waivers work.

6. B-B-B-BONUS-S-S-S-S THING

There is, of course, a way for Feaster to redeem himself. Yesterday, for seemingly no good reasons, the Wild and Sabres bought out two players that Calgary should be targeting hard. Tom Gilbert, a 30-year-old former Oiler though he is, could provide help in the near-term and maybe create some flexibility to trade someone with actual value (Giordano) while they still have it.

Gerbe, meanwhile, is just 25 and was completely misused by Lindy Ruff in each of the last two seasons — largely in a checking role — and is certainly worth a shot with another club that, say, has plenty of minutes to go around in its top six and needs warm bodies. He's being bought out, by the way, on a deal that pays him just $1.45 million against the cap for next season only. Someone would be wise to at least give him another chance, because he's just two seasons removed from scoring 16 goals in 64 games.

Get either one of these guys, and that's a step back in the right direction.

686dfac3780611cb7acad6ce5166c6c1
Yer ol' buddy Lambert is handsome and great and everyone loves him. Also you can visit his regular blog at The Two-Line Pass or follow him on Twitter. Lucky you!
Avatar
#1 Danger
July 04 2013, 09:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props

Warning: This post is largely about writing style, not hockey. Feel free to skip it if you're not interested in that. Also, it's a long one. Like RexLibris long.

I usually refrain from commenting on tone or writing style on FN - it's a hockey blog, not a literary magazine, after all - but today I'm making an exception because of all the bile that has been directed at Lambert's writings as of late.

I enjoyed this week's 5T (as I often do), but I especially liked the fact that in spite of extra warnings about pessimism, this was actually a pretty balanced take with several (mildly) positive comments. Given the kind of week it's been, I don't think you could honestly have said any nicer things about the Flames' moves.

Obviously, the tone was still a bit snarky, but that's just Lambert's writing style. Personally, I enjoy a bit of snark so I really don't see it as a problem. I have no idea if I am in the majority or the minority on this matter, but certainly the people who don't like the acerbic stylings of Mr. Lambert are very vocal about it. I therefore think it's only fair that I should speak up and express my appreciation of this kind of writing.

I'm not saying that those who dislike this kind of writing are wrong, just reminding them that taste is subjective. Plus, it's not like Lambert is making up all the questionable things Feaster has done. For whatever reason, our GM seems determined to make one questionable or just bad move for every decent or good move he makes. He does make some good moves, to be sure, but that makes it all the more mystifying and frustrating when he goes out the very next day and makes boneheaded mistakes.

Avatar
#2 Veggie Dog
July 04 2013, 09:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Tanguay was a butter-soft ageing malcontent since Iginla left, and Sarich, as much as I love the guy, was mostly destined to occupy a press box seat.

Jones and O'Brien are younger if nothing else, and haven't checked out because their best pal left town. We have seen Tanguay turtle and pout until he was traded in Montreal and TB too. Galiardi is excited to be a Flame, so welcome aboard.

With all of the new guys, they are obviously not top tier talent, but we aren't supposed to win next year and need to ice a team of competitive useful bodies while the younger people develop. So what's the problem? 1 extra year for O'Brien and 500k more for Tanguay? Big deal.

Poirier was apparently not as out of left field as some thought, and many people seem to have soured on Shinkaruk.

Kanzig is a puzzle, but pretty minor imo.

As for Brodie, who knows what is going on inside the organization. Maybe he wants the moon? Maybe he wants to play for a winner? Or maybe Feaster has been busy with other things. Remember they didn't make qualifying offers until the last minute either. So I wouldn't worry yet. It is also not out of the realm of possibility that Brodie's agent is asking for the moon.

Avatar
#3 Baalzamon
July 04 2013, 09:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

It absolutely floors me that the Flames are the ONLY team that gets mocked for passing on Shinkaruk. The only one. No less than ten other teams did the same, including (but not limited to):

-The vaunted Detroit Red Wings' scouting staff

-Columbus--twice

-Washington, who picked after Calgary and chose the skilled but statistically unimpressive Andre Burakovsky

-And, the team that ended up with Shinkaruk after all, Vancouver, who reached at #9 for Bo Horvat (I like Horvat, but there's no denying he was a reach in the top 10).

Reaching for puzzling reasons was in fact extremely common in last weekend's draft, and Poirier probably made the most sense out of the lot of them. Puzzling (if not outright baffling) reaches include (but aren't limited to):

-Morin at 11

-Remi Elie 40th overall--in the 2nd round (he probably shouldn't have been drafted at all)

-Tyler Bertuzzi at 58th

-Zach Sanford 61st overall (a guy who managed to be 4th on team scoring in the EJHL).

Kanzig was a horrible pick, but an extremely reasonable argument can be made that Elie, considering draft position, was even worse.

No one should be worried about an offer sheet for Brodie. The only one the Flames wouldn't match would be an offer another team shouldn't make. It is, quite literally, a no lose situation. (it is, though, concerning that they haven't started negotiations yet. I mean, really?)

Avatar
#4 KetchupKid
July 04 2013, 10:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Danger wrote:

Warning: This post is largely about writing style, not hockey. Feel free to skip it if you're not interested in that. Also, it's a long one. Like RexLibris long.

I usually refrain from commenting on tone or writing style on FN - it's a hockey blog, not a literary magazine, after all - but today I'm making an exception because of all the bile that has been directed at Lambert's writings as of late.

I enjoyed this week's 5T (as I often do), but I especially liked the fact that in spite of extra warnings about pessimism, this was actually a pretty balanced take with several (mildly) positive comments. Given the kind of week it's been, I don't think you could honestly have said any nicer things about the Flames' moves.

Obviously, the tone was still a bit snarky, but that's just Lambert's writing style. Personally, I enjoy a bit of snark so I really don't see it as a problem. I have no idea if I am in the majority or the minority on this matter, but certainly the people who don't like the acerbic stylings of Mr. Lambert are very vocal about it. I therefore think it's only fair that I should speak up and express my appreciation of this kind of writing.

I'm not saying that those who dislike this kind of writing are wrong, just reminding them that taste is subjective. Plus, it's not like Lambert is making up all the questionable things Feaster has done. For whatever reason, our GM seems determined to make one questionable or just bad move for every decent or good move he makes. He does make some good moves, to be sure, but that makes it all the more mystifying and frustrating when he goes out the very next day and makes boneheaded mistakes.

I agree 100%, EXCEPT for that this is about the length of a parenthetical or subtitle in one of RexLibris' enormous musings. I didn't even have to scroll down mid-post.

@RL-- A great read as always Ryan-- I'm glad you came out swinging after the grouchery you've been subjected to lately.

Avatar
#5 Kurt
July 04 2013, 10:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

If you follow the rabbit trail Feaster traded Jay Bo for Emile Poirier.

Yikes, that is a frightening amount of expectations for the kid to live up to for that trade to make ANY sense whatsoever. Ya I know about the other 'prospects' from the trade, but... Well we will see.

My favourite part about Lambert articles are the comments because everyone gets their panties in a twist denying how bad things are with the team. I find these articles refreshing after the drivel we hear from the team about how peachy everything is and how smart mgmt is.

Avatar
#6 Kurt
July 04 2013, 02:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
McRib wrote:

Corey Perry was drafted 28th overall in a very deep draft much like this season!!!!! At the time of the 2003 Draft most in the Hockey World looked at Anaheim selecting him as reaching, because many felt he should have gone in the second round. They both put up eerily similar numbers their draft years and play an identical up-tempo forecheck high pressure game, thanks to a much sought after plus Size/Skating combination.

Obviously Corey Perry is best case scenario, but in deep draft years certain players tend to fly under the radar and like Corey Perry I think and so do most out east, Emile Porier is one of them.

For you to say that someone great should go third overall because they are currently a great NHLer, clearly shows how clueless you are to the Drafting Process!! One of the best players in the NHL Pavel Datsyuk went 171st in the Draft!! Not too mention countless others that you would consider "Steals" something that Poirier is looking like to me.

I'm not debating its possible. Its just highly unlikely. For every Datsyuk there are about 20,000 fails. Shae Weber went in the 2nd round. Duncan Keith the 3rd (I think). You also could win Lotto 649 because that happens for someone. But anyone who counts on winning the lotto as their retirement plan is an idiot.

I'm just saying don't put so much pressure on these kids. Slotting them in as pillars of a rebuild is crazy talk.

I found it ironic that you say Shinkaruk will probably only turn into Sam Gagner like thats some kind of fail. Realistically that would be considered a home run for any late 1st rounder. Gagner would have led our team in scoring last year quite easily. If any late first rounder turns into a 60pt guy you should do back flips. Also I'm no Coiler expert but I don't think Gagner even played on the PP very much. For sure not 1st PP. I think I'd be pretty jacked if Porier got anywhere near to Sam Gagner numbers. That would be considered a home run at the end of the 1st round. Perry late 1st is like a once in a lifetime NHL anomaly (like Datsyuk).

Avatar
#7 piscera.infada
July 04 2013, 02:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Flames Nation Who?

The door's at the top right, bro.

Avatar
#8 BJ
July 04 2013, 02:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Lambert

You are way off on a couple things.

The first is you are making a deal out of the Lecavalier thing. Feaster was asked a direct question by the mdia as to whetherhe considered Lecavalier postapex. He is not going to publicly cut down Le avalier the day he is bought out. Did he talk to Lecavalier sure... why not. If we could have signed him to a three year deal... why not. He would defintely be worth something a couple trade deadlines from now.

Monahan is a problem for you really? A guy who played against the toughest comp in the league and who carried hi team most nights. You rather us draft the next Zherdev?

Poirier looks like a pretty good pick all things considered. From what I saw most GMs arent convinced Shinkaruks skills will translate to the NHL. Eveb Mantha who is just a good shot went ahead of him. His low ranking is more due to his rookie season and has nothing to do with how he projects. You have to trust your scouts and pick from the list regardless what TSN and the media have to say.

I enjoy your blogs but you are way off here and this blog is an example of exactly what is wrong with sports media in this country.

Avatar
#9 If Only HIs Name Was Olli Postandin
July 04 2013, 02:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

"Meaning that a team which hasn't drafted particularly well in forever is putting all its faith in internal scouting, and not deviating from its plans no matter what."

As opposed to putting their faith in bloggers and independent drafting agencies?

They pay their scouts for a reason, bud.

Avatar
#10 If Only HIs Name Was Olli Postandin
July 04 2013, 04:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
BurningSensation wrote:

To think it was only a week ago that Lambert had a column that didn't give me a hematoma. Back to normal I guess.

1. Gagliardi was such a good signing even Lambert can't crap on it. Moving on.

2. Jones and SOB for Tanguay and Sarich is pure win. Not surprised that Lambert would prefer an over the hill winger with attitude problems and terrible underlying numbers over a younger power winger with 20 goal upside who can play anywhere in the top 9 AND a depth defenseman who can drop the gloves. I guarantee that if Calgary had flipped a youngish forward in his late 20's and a solid #6 D-man for a breaking down skill winger he would have vommitted all over it. It's only because Feaster is involved that he has to go though these contortions of logic, time and space to see it as a bad deal.

3. 20+ teams passes on Shinkaruk, Calgary and Columbus did so twice. Gosh but the consensus by outsiders was that he should be higher, so Feaster (and the other 20 plus scouting departments) must be wrong! Poirier is bigger, faster, didn't decline in production year over year, and he was within a handful of goals of Shinkaruk's total. We couldn't trade down and be guaranteed to get him because Montreal had him as their target.

Likewise, if Feaster had actually drafted a Russian winger with a small sample size for offence that occurred over a few under-scouted leagues over a Canadian born pivot with size and two-way ability his column exorciating Feaster would have written itself. As it is, he is now in the position of suggesting that Feaster made a mistake going with the consensus #6 overall pick who fits our needs over a player who fell to the bottom of the top 10. So to recap this, he dumps on Feaster for not going with the consensus pick at #22, and dumps on Feaster for taking the consensus pick #6. Stay classy Lambert.

4. The comments on Lecavalier are easily explained. Feaster was never going to get Lecavalier to come to Calgary, but it wasn't going to hurt to try. If Feaster hadn't interviewed him he wouldn't be doing his job. So of course, the fact that Feaster did interview him means to Lambert that Feaster did something wrong. It's hockey in Bizzarro world. Nor is Feaster going to come out and publicly declare that a guy he has a relationship with is 'post-apex' at the very time that player is trying to get a new deal. I'm sure that is how Lambert would treat his friends, but then, I have trouble seeing him actually having any.

5. Brodie being offer-sheeted would be the best possible result. Any offer sheet we wouldn't immediately match would bring back a return well in excess of Brodie's value. Would I take a 1st and a 3rd for Brodie? Yup.

6. I guess it shouldn't be shocking that Lambert would target a 30 year old D-man who is soft, and who couldn't cut it in either Edmonton or Minnesota. That's how he rolls.

That all said, Gerbe has been misused by the Sabers, and might make an interesting energy line pick-up. So he did get one thing correct.

LOL, point 3 is just f'ing awesome.

Avatar
#11 chillout
July 04 2013, 05:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

All I could picture was Lambert watching the draft screaming "Outrageous!!Outrageous!!" in a high squeaky voice every time Shinkaruk got passed over by another team.

Another thing for me was him complaining about Poirier's highlight reel and how he only has one move, but isn't Nichushkin's reel pretty much the same thing as well??(I haven't seen either reel). Just sounds a little hypocritical to me.

Oh and you really think Brodie is going to get an offer sheet this early? P.K. didn't get one last year and how long did it take him to sign? Really not something we're going to have to worry about either way.

The whole Vinny thing was pretty stupid too. I mean really if you can get a player like that for the right price you'd be idiotic not to get it done.

Basically makes me wonder why Lambert writes about the flames so much when he has such a hate on for everything they do. Surprised he didn't complain about the million bucks they donated to flood relief and how it should have gone to such and such charity.

Oh and for the other people quit complaining about the draft picks in rd's 6 and 7, you sound like idiots whining over those picks. Teams are supposed to go off the board there and find the guys that other teams missed. Besides pretty much all of those picks never play anyway.

Avatar
#12 Flames Nation Who?
July 04 2013, 06:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Lambert better keep an eye on these comments and take into account how to write his next pose, or else he might lose his job very soon

Avatar
#13 Captain Ron
July 04 2013, 07:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
chillout wrote:

All I could picture was Lambert watching the draft screaming "Outrageous!!Outrageous!!" in a high squeaky voice every time Shinkaruk got passed over by another team.

Another thing for me was him complaining about Poirier's highlight reel and how he only has one move, but isn't Nichushkin's reel pretty much the same thing as well??(I haven't seen either reel). Just sounds a little hypocritical to me.

Oh and you really think Brodie is going to get an offer sheet this early? P.K. didn't get one last year and how long did it take him to sign? Really not something we're going to have to worry about either way.

The whole Vinny thing was pretty stupid too. I mean really if you can get a player like that for the right price you'd be idiotic not to get it done.

Basically makes me wonder why Lambert writes about the flames so much when he has such a hate on for everything they do. Surprised he didn't complain about the million bucks they donated to flood relief and how it should have gone to such and such charity.

Oh and for the other people quit complaining about the draft picks in rd's 6 and 7, you sound like idiots whining over those picks. Teams are supposed to go off the board there and find the guys that other teams missed. Besides pretty much all of those picks never play anyway.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes again...your exactly right.

Avatar
#14 BJ
July 04 2013, 07:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Its starting to become obvious that Lambert's personal bias against Feaster is clouding his judgement to the point where he makes irrational claims like drafting Sean Monahan was a mistake.

If Sean Monahan develops into a top Center for the flames this post will look even more ridiculous than it already does.

Avatar
#15 Jeff In Lethbridge
July 04 2013, 11:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

this place is getting weird..

I had to go back and look at the door to make sure i hadn't stumbled into 'nucks or oiler nations...

Avatar
#16 KetchupKid
July 05 2013, 02:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

You people are toxic.

Avatar
#17 Robb
July 05 2013, 02:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Lambert: "Is Poirier going to be a better NHLer than Shinkaruk? I don't know. But I know that every other hockey person on earth didn't think so on Sunday afternoon."

Sure seems like a lot of teams thought that quite a few players were a hell of a lot better than Shinkaruk on Sunday afternoon. The Flames were not the only team to pass this guy up. Whether that's because of his attitude, his interviews, what coaches and trainers said about him, who knows. I'm just tired of people ripping the Flames apart for passing on him when A DOZEN teams did. Seems totally ridiculous to me.

Ripping the Flames for trying to get Lecavalier also seems pretty stupid to me. The Oilers' rebuild has been ongoing for 6-7 years (and counting) now and one of the biggest complaints fans have is the lack of leadership and veterans. Their team has some of the fastest, most talented players in the NHL and they STILL SUCK. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I'm just shocked that your ideal rebuild would look similar to Edmonton's. I don't want to wait 7, 8, 9, 10 years without playoff hockey.

I want my team to draft properly, regardless of where we finish each season in the standings and I want them to turn it around as fast as they can while doing it properly. Does this mean I want them to do it wrong? No. I'm patient and willing to wait as long as it takes TO DO IT PROPERLY.

Brodie is not going to get offer-sheeted and even if management was worried he would be, that's no reason to overpay him now. If it happens, it happens. If it's a good offer sheet, we match it. If it isn't, we let him walk and take the picks. As much as I like Brodie, he's an asset like any other player. Personally, I would love to see the team sign him to a 5-6 year deal for 2.75 mill each year. Similar to a Roman Josi contract with a high reward, fairly low risk.

I think what frustrates me most about your negativity Lambert is that you aren't willing to give the team any benefit of the doubt when it comes to the draft, which, frankly, they've done quite well at the last couple years. Despite having 3 pretty solid 1st rounders, albeit 1 that you didn't agree with, you bashed their draft without even giving the kids a chance to play and (like most of us) without even watching the majority of the picks play a significant amount of time.

Anyways, long story short, this will be the last "5 Things" that I read until the negativity is a little more...'fair'? I have enough negativity in my life right now with my grandmother suffering from terminal cancer and a newly acquired heart infection called myocarditis which basically makes my heart hurt like hell and makes me easily exhausted. I don't need to read negative report after negative report about one of my favourite things in life, my hockey team. There were a lot of happy Flames fans excited about these draft picks and the new direction of the team, which so many of us have been WAITING for. I'm sure there are teams that drafted better than the Flames this year and I'm sure there are teams that drafted worse but this negativity is ridiculous.

GFG.

Avatar
#18 Trianglereverie
July 05 2013, 05:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
McRib wrote:

Emile Porier can skate like the wind (youtube) with great size, he plays with a chip on his sholder (101 PIMs) and took his game to another level offensively despite weak club when it mattered most willing team to upset of Rimouski in the first round (26 pts in final 20 games). You can write him off as a first liner, but he has Corey Perry written all over him for me. Hunter Shinkaruk is a Sam Gagner second line PP scorer for me. 6'2" Forwards that can skate like the wind are hard to come by.

As a Kinesiologist. What's more intriguing to me is not just that Poirier can skate like the wind. It's how quickly he accelerates in 1 or 2 strides to top speed. That's a natural talent that is under valued in the NHL. And few people in the NHL Can do that. Most of the guys need 4 or 5 strides to hit top speed.

That's something in it self.

Avatar
#19 jeremywilhelm
July 04 2013, 08:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Agreed. The only thing that doesn't bother me is the Poirier pick. Other than that, spot on.

Avatar
#20 Gange
July 04 2013, 08:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Tanguay CLEARLY did not want to be here. Did we get an adequate replacement? No, but what did you expect? Sarich is out, good move!

I'm going to wait to see Poirier's underlying numbers before I throw Feaster under the bus on that pick. I'm not sold on Shinkaruk because clearly other teams had the same reservations as he dropped significantly from his ranking.

We can't make any determination, good or bad, on Jankowski at this time.

I have no idea why Keenan Kanzig was drafted. Seems like a throw away TBH.

I'm not sure how committed Feaster was to LeCavalier. I'm glad they talked but I'm equally glad they didn't come to agreement. I believe it was more about doing your due diligence as his former GM. What did you expect him to say about Vinny anyway? "He was good a few years ago, really dropped off, maybe he'll be cheap..."?

I don't see GM's offer sheeting just to "get back" at someone. The ROR offer sheet was a poorly executed plan but it was sincere in it's execution. The ONLY troubling thing that came from that is their clear lack of understanding of the CBA terms. That was worrisome.

Was this supposed to be a two minute hate??

Avatar
#21 Michael
July 04 2013, 08:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

TJ Galiardi and David Jones TJ is a decent pickup, low cost, one year contract at a reasonable amount, no problem with this one I like the addition of Jones, but we moved a top six forward to add a bottom six forward. Seems to be a theme in Feaster trades, we typically trade the best player in the deal

Poirier Nothing against the player but an absolute puzzle as the 22nd pick. The Flames draft list seems to have included only players they thought would be available at their pick, and excluded everyone else. You have the feeling that if a Barkov or Jones had fallen to six, the Flames would have still picked Monahan. The Flames come across as so micro managed from the top that they have lost all flexibility and the ability to think on their feet.

Lecavalier Another typical Feaster move, he loves chasing (with little success) the big names like Richards and Lecavalier. Now, Lecavalier on a two or three year deal might have make sense, but why would he want to sign here.

Brodie I know it’s typical to wait until the last minute to try and sign players, I just don’t understand why. Get them signed, or at least find out where they are at. Erixson is a perfect example, had the Flames been talking to the player they would have realized much sooner that he wouldn’t sign in Calgary, and they would have avoided a panic trade. I expect Calgary will sign him, but why on earth delay and risk losing him to a large offer sheet.

Avatar
#22 Veggie Dog
July 04 2013, 09:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Michael wrote:

TJ Galiardi and David Jones TJ is a decent pickup, low cost, one year contract at a reasonable amount, no problem with this one I like the addition of Jones, but we moved a top six forward to add a bottom six forward. Seems to be a theme in Feaster trades, we typically trade the best player in the deal

Poirier Nothing against the player but an absolute puzzle as the 22nd pick. The Flames draft list seems to have included only players they thought would be available at their pick, and excluded everyone else. You have the feeling that if a Barkov or Jones had fallen to six, the Flames would have still picked Monahan. The Flames come across as so micro managed from the top that they have lost all flexibility and the ability to think on their feet.

Lecavalier Another typical Feaster move, he loves chasing (with little success) the big names like Richards and Lecavalier. Now, Lecavalier on a two or three year deal might have make sense, but why would he want to sign here.

Brodie I know it’s typical to wait until the last minute to try and sign players, I just don’t understand why. Get them signed, or at least find out where they are at. Erixson is a perfect example, had the Flames been talking to the player they would have realized much sooner that he wouldn’t sign in Calgary, and they would have avoided a panic trade. I expect Calgary will sign him, but why on earth delay and risk losing him to a large offer sheet.

If the offer sheet was from a terrible team, and the compensation was a high 1st and 3rd it might not be such a bad thing. That said, we have oodles of cap room, and will just match anything offered that isn't outrageous.

As for Lecavalier etc, it is Feaster's job to be in on everything. He should at least evaluate, and hopefully talk to anyone who meets a team need. Talented centres being the most high on that list of needs. Maybe it is true that his money and term are too high, but after all, our bid failed, so maybe it was shorter or less money. (or we are terrible and he didn't want to come) In any case, no harm done in talking and making an offer.

Avatar
#23 Derzie
July 04 2013, 09:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

You had me until you brought up Tom Gilbert. A terrible post-apex post-Oiler. No freaking thanks. Other than that, I agree with your points. The roses and sunshine crowd will be up in arms but the truth hurts. Our GM is a poor performer. One small quibble is the dis of the Monahan pick. I'm in the Don Cherry camp on this one. All things being equal, take the Canadian player.

Avatar
#24 Gange
July 04 2013, 09:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Danger wrote:

Warning: This post is largely about writing style, not hockey. Feel free to skip it if you're not interested in that. Also, it's a long one. Like RexLibris long.

I usually refrain from commenting on tone or writing style on FN - it's a hockey blog, not a literary magazine, after all - but today I'm making an exception because of all the bile that has been directed at Lambert's writings as of late.

I enjoyed this week's 5T (as I often do), but I especially liked the fact that in spite of extra warnings about pessimism, this was actually a pretty balanced take with several (mildly) positive comments. Given the kind of week it's been, I don't think you could honestly have said any nicer things about the Flames' moves.

Obviously, the tone was still a bit snarky, but that's just Lambert's writing style. Personally, I enjoy a bit of snark so I really don't see it as a problem. I have no idea if I am in the majority or the minority on this matter, but certainly the people who don't like the acerbic stylings of Mr. Lambert are very vocal about it. I therefore think it's only fair that I should speak up and express my appreciation of this kind of writing.

I'm not saying that those who dislike this kind of writing are wrong, just reminding them that taste is subjective. Plus, it's not like Lambert is making up all the questionable things Feaster has done. For whatever reason, our GM seems determined to make one questionable or just bad move for every decent or good move he makes. He does make some good moves, to be sure, but that makes it all the more mystifying and frustrating when he goes out the very next day and makes boneheaded mistakes.

Please don't misunderstand. His tone is fine. I just don't agree with his evaluation for the most part.

Avatar
#25 Benny12
July 04 2013, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Veggie Dog

I agree completely.

Avatar
#26 Danger
July 04 2013, 09:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Gange wrote:

Please don't misunderstand. His tone is fine. I just don't agree with his evaluation for the most part.

Fair enough - and my little rant there wasn't directed at you per se, more the frequent mentions of Lambert's pessimism that have been cropping up in other threads lately.

FWIW, I certainly don't agree with Lambert on everything either. The Tanguay trade wasn't great, but it was better than buying those two out, which seemed to be the alternative from my perspective.

Avatar
#27 piscera.infada
July 04 2013, 09:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Michael

First, I'd just like to say I wont address the Poirier-Shinkaruk business as I'm fairly happy we didn't take Shinkaruk. This issue is too highly contestable to have any meaningful debate on.

- I'm not so distraught about the Avs trade. I was sick and tired of Tangs and Sarich, and we got two players that are willing and excited to be here (something we probably can't say about many players in the NHL - except maybe Galiardi). I think this is a good thing during our rebuild. Would I have liked a first and Duchene? Hell yeah. But there's no way that either was available. We have to understand, our assets are horrible - this isn't entirely Feaster's fault, as much as we might like to think so. I can't think of any team looking to part with much more for Tangs and Sarich - they didn't want to be here, good riddance.

- To reiterate what was said by Gange; I'm not too sure how much desire Feaster actually had for Lecavalier. 2-3 year deal? Yeah maybe. I'm assuming he was out the second Lecavalier's agent came out with a 5 year deal. Maybe not, but you know no better than I do what was actually discussed in that meeting.

- As far as Brodie goes, I have to believe we get him signed. No one wants to play 'offer-sheet twister' with a team with oodles of cap-space. But let's set up a little scenario for you: Colorado (or another likely lottery team next year) comes along, thinking their "going to get us back for ROR" and offer sheets Brodie for 5 years at 4-5 million (inflated price, I know). How do you not look at just taking their 1st and 3rd rounder at next year's draft and just saying "thanks". Maybe we end up with two picks in the top 5 next year? Maybe Brodie had an outlier season (I don't think he did). All I'm saying is getting worked up about an imaginary huge offer sheet is ridiculous. If a team really wants to play hard-ball with us on that, we have tons of cap space as well as a need for draft picks.

Avatar
#28 icedawg_42
July 04 2013, 09:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Danger

Agreed. Nothing in here that should really get anyone's hairs up. Im taking a 'wait and see' on Poirier. Feaster wasn't the first or only GM to pass on Shinkurak, and we've all heard the 'rumors' about his attitude, so apparently the Flames staff had their reasons. If it was a matter of not expecting him to be available, and simply not being able to think on the fly - that's a different story. Totally agree on the coke machine pick. What a waste. Again - baffling...Almost as baffling as TJ Brodie signing not being TOPS on the to-do list. WTF is going on there. As far as the Monahan pick...my gut feeling is that the Flames really wanted Lindholm and really thought they were going to get him. To me Monahan is still the next best thing. All in all, we'll have to reserve judgement until all the dust settles.

I'm a fan of TJ Galiardi, and the trade altogether. I think it's all positive, given the money and term. The problem here is that the Flames have assembled plenty of 'supporting cast', and their 2 best assets/players have yet to be signed in Brodie and Backlund. Ok - we get it, depth. Good job on depth...now get to work on some top end stuff. THANK GOD Lecavalier went somewhere else. Now if we can just avoid the grenade and pass on Bozak.

Avatar
#29 internuncial
July 04 2013, 09:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Yo, Lambert,

Let's get one thing straight: There is a WORLD of difference between the information that the organization has and what we on the outside run with. There are a thousand things about personalities, chemistry, injuries, team plans, directions, salary expectations, etc that the team knows and we never will. That's data that they have and we don't have and it's no small thing.

Anyone on the outside who makes absolute statements like the ones you regularly do in this column without qualifying it implicitly or explicitly as an opinion that was formed with WAY LESS information than the team has is being wildly disingenuous. Like, aren't you the guys who are all sanctimonious about data-based decision making?

I'm no fan of Feaster. I'm just way less a fan of crap logic and hypocrisy.

That being said, the Kanzig pick is insanity.

Avatar
#30 CDB
July 04 2013, 09:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

It scares me to say this but I agree with 90% of this article. Galiardi was a smart pickup. Cheap, young, some more size and speed up front. Can be useful, and if he isn't, nothing lost.

The Colorado trade for me is pretty whatever. I may be just so overjoyed that Sarich is gone. O'Brien is awful too, but as noted, he is better than Sarich (bar is pretty low there). And I like the fact we get bigger up front. We’re not trying to reinvent the Broadstreet bullies here, but having the oldest, smallest team in the league is not a recipe for winning. Tanguay was overpaid, declining quickly, and has all the heart of the tin man. Stats gurus may hate the use of an intangible there, but trust me, actually working hard, skating, and trying to win a hockey game actually does make a difference in, you know, winning a hockey game. You can say Jones is worse than Tanguay, but he’s coming off a lost lockout year which I practically don’t count. Worth a shot that he bounces back in a new place, with a full season. And Tanguay is old, frail, and rapidly declining. Jones should have a decent shot at reclaiming 20 goal status, and long term providing the better value for which admittedly are two bad contracts. I get we'll be eating some extra cap, but 2.5MM in a rebuild when you wont (or at least have no business spending to the cap, STOP JAY, JUST STOP), should not matter. Plus, think of all the hair we wont have to rip out now that we won’t watch Tanguay, with an open net try and feather a backhand saucer pass, no look, between his legs, through 6 bodies, only to have the puck go back up ice as he slowly coasts around. That is my opinion, but alas I can see where Mr. Lambert is coming from.

I liked the Monahan and Klimchuk picks. Poirier infuriated me initially, though I have softened my stance a bit. Still don’t like how off the board they went, though there are rumours Montreal was going to pick him at 25 (who knows if that is true or not). I do think we are all putting far too much stock in young Hunter. The kid was in a free fall in the draft, and probably with good reason. If he had been from somewhere, other than the good old CGY, would we have cared as much? I have seen him play, admittedly not much. I won’t try and say how he’s going to turn out, or who will be the better player. Basically, if you have a problem with them going off the board, that’s fine, I did too. But if it’s because they didn’t draft a hometown hero, give your head a shake. And if shaking your noggin doesn’t work, look up the careers of Brent Krahn and Wade Davis, the last time the Flames tried to appeal to their fans with draft picks. I don’t care if the guy is from Calgary or Dubai, draft who is going to be the best player. Risky pick, time will tell

The rest of the draft (aside from Roy) and the Vinny talks are an unmitigated nightmare. I would delve into it, but I have rambled on long enough and my therapist has told me it is best to let my anger subside before I delve into how I feel about that horrific display of management.

Great points on Gilbert and Gerbe, agree wholeheartedlty.

Avatar
#31 Michael
July 04 2013, 09:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I like Lamberts posts, but then again I generally agree with what he has to say.

One of the con’s mentioned in analyzing any potential trade for Seguin was that his age and contract didn’t fit the rebuild. The thought being that his current contract expires at age 27 (at which point he would become an UFA) and that the Flames wouldn’t be able to ‘build enough assets around him’ to be successful in that time frame. (the assumption being they couldn’t resign him). Could the Flames be having similar thoughts about Brodie? Maybe an offer sheet would suit their purposes in capturing several more first round picks? (I’m in the we should resign Brodie camp)

Avatar
#32 clyde
July 04 2013, 09:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Gange wrote:

Tanguay CLEARLY did not want to be here. Did we get an adequate replacement? No, but what did you expect? Sarich is out, good move!

I'm going to wait to see Poirier's underlying numbers before I throw Feaster under the bus on that pick. I'm not sold on Shinkaruk because clearly other teams had the same reservations as he dropped significantly from his ranking.

We can't make any determination, good or bad, on Jankowski at this time.

I have no idea why Keenan Kanzig was drafted. Seems like a throw away TBH.

I'm not sure how committed Feaster was to LeCavalier. I'm glad they talked but I'm equally glad they didn't come to agreement. I believe it was more about doing your due diligence as his former GM. What did you expect him to say about Vinny anyway? "He was good a few years ago, really dropped off, maybe he'll be cheap..."?

I don't see GM's offer sheeting just to "get back" at someone. The ROR offer sheet was a poorly executed plan but it was sincere in it's execution. The ONLY troubling thing that came from that is their clear lack of understanding of the CBA terms. That was worrisome.

Was this supposed to be a two minute hate??

Instead of waiting to see Poirier's underlying numbers before judging the pick, why not watch him compete at camp and at the Canada Junior camp? Perhaps even watch how he develops?

Avatar
#33 icedawg_42
July 04 2013, 09:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Michael

Only saw a few live games this year, but after seeing them live, Backlund and Brodie were MILES ahead of the rest of the Flames roster, so - my answer to letting him go to an offersheet in exchange for picks is - PLEASE NO!!! He's a legit building block and stability on a very weak backend. IMO, as I said before, he should get top priority.

Avatar
#34 Veggie Dog
July 04 2013, 10:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

Only saw a few live games this year, but after seeing them live, Backlund and Brodie were MILES ahead of the rest of the Flames roster, so - my answer to letting him go to an offersheet in exchange for picks is - PLEASE NO!!! He's a legit building block and stability on a very weak backend. IMO, as I said before, he should get top priority.

I think everyone would like to keep Brodie, but if someone loses their marbles and offers him the moon, and they also happen to be a terrible team, then that's not such a terrible worst-case scenario.

Avatar
#35 piscera.infada
July 04 2013, 10:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@icedawg_42

No one's saying they should let him walk for peanuts. The issue people seem to belabour is this ridiculous notion that someone's going to offer sheet him to something ridiculous just for the sake of doing it. If he's not worth the offer-sheet amount, you (likely) get a good to great return for a guy who had a good half-year.

Don't get me wrong, I agree he's a great building block on the back-end, and I hope something gets worked out soon. But a potential offer sheet is nothing to get worked up about.

Avatar
#36 vowswithin
July 04 2013, 10:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

GRABO was bought out

Avatar
#37 negrilcowboy
July 04 2013, 10:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

leafs to buy out grabovski. perhaps grabo signed on the cheap helps the flames for a couple of years.

Avatar
#38 Gange
July 04 2013, 10:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@clyde

Agreed. This talk of draft failure is WAY too premature.

Since Sutter left they've drafted Baertschi, Goudreau, Gillies, and Brossoit. I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt for now.

Avatar
#39 negrilcowboy
July 04 2013, 10:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

hey feasta, sign scuderi or ference. stabilize the backend.

Avatar
#40 BurningSensation
July 04 2013, 10:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

To think it was only a week ago that Lambert had a column that didn't give me a hematoma. Back to normal I guess.

1. Gagliardi was such a good signing even Lambert can't crap on it. Moving on.

2. Jones and SOB for Tanguay and Sarich is pure win. Not surprised that Lambert would prefer an over the hill winger with attitude problems and terrible underlying numbers over a younger power winger with 20 goal upside who can play anywhere in the top 9 AND a depth defenseman who can drop the gloves. I guarantee that if Calgary had flipped a youngish forward in his late 20's and a solid #6 D-man for a breaking down skill winger he would have vommitted all over it. It's only because Feaster is involved that he has to go though these contortions of logic, time and space to see it as a bad deal.

3. 20+ teams passes on Shinkaruk, Calgary and Columbus did so twice. Gosh but the consensus by outsiders was that he should be higher, so Feaster (and the other 20 plus scouting departments) must be wrong! Poirier is bigger, faster, didn't decline in production year over year, and he was within a handful of goals of Shinkaruk's total. We couldn't trade down and be guaranteed to get him because Montreal had him as their target.

Likewise, if Feaster had actually drafted a Russian winger with a small sample size for offence that occurred over a few under-scouted leagues over a Canadian born pivot with size and two-way ability his column exorciating Feaster would have written itself. As it is, he is now in the position of suggesting that Feaster made a mistake going with the consensus #6 overall pick who fits our needs over a player who fell to the bottom of the top 10. So to recap this, he dumps on Feaster for not going with the consensus pick at #22, and dumps on Feaster for taking the consensus pick #6. Stay classy Lambert.

4. The comments on Lecavalier are easily explained. Feaster was never going to get Lecavalier to come to Calgary, but it wasn't going to hurt to try. If Feaster hadn't interviewed him he wouldn't be doing his job. So of course, the fact that Feaster did interview him means to Lambert that Feaster did something wrong. It's hockey in Bizzarro world. Nor is Feaster going to come out and publicly declare that a guy he has a relationship with is 'post-apex' at the very time that player is trying to get a new deal. I'm sure that is how Lambert would treat his friends, but then, I have trouble seeing him actually having any.

5. Brodie being offer-sheeted would be the best possible result. Any offer sheet we wouldn't immediately match would bring back a return well in excess of Brodie's value. Would I take a 1st and a 3rd for Brodie? Yup.

6. I guess it shouldn't be shocking that Lambert would target a 30 year old D-man who is soft, and who couldn't cut it in either Edmonton or Minnesota. That's how he rolls.

That all said, Gerbe has been misused by the Sabers, and might make an interesting energy line pick-up. So he did get one thing correct.

Avatar
#41 Baalzamon
July 04 2013, 10:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

FINALLY a center I would actually support pursuing in free agency (Grabovsky).

Avatar
#42 vowswithin
July 04 2013, 10:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Baalzamon wrote:

FINALLY a center I would actually support pursuing in free agency (Grabovsky).

How about 3.5 x 3? Sounds like something I could live with.

Avatar
#43 Gange
July 04 2013, 10:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Kurt wrote:

If you follow the rabbit trail Feaster traded Jay Bo for Emile Poirier.

Yikes, that is a frightening amount of expectations for the kid to live up to for that trade to make ANY sense whatsoever. Ya I know about the other 'prospects' from the trade, but... Well we will see.

My favourite part about Lambert articles are the comments because everyone gets their panties in a twist denying how bad things are with the team. I find these articles refreshing after the drivel we hear from the team about how peachy everything is and how smart mgmt is.

My least favourite part is watching people get worked up over player selections when they haven't seen or had any substantive information about the player discussed.

As noted before Goudreau, Baertschi, Gillies, Brossoit are enough to allow for some leeway.

What's going to happen to all the doomsday people if Poirier and Jankowski become productive everyday players? I guess you'll always have the ROR offer sheet to criticize.

Just be analytic without getting all emotional.

Avatar
#44 BurningSensation
July 04 2013, 11:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Kurt wrote:

If you follow the rabbit trail Feaster traded Jay Bo for Emile Poirier.

Yikes, that is a frightening amount of expectations for the kid to live up to for that trade to make ANY sense whatsoever. Ya I know about the other 'prospects' from the trade, but... Well we will see.

My favourite part about Lambert articles are the comments because everyone gets their panties in a twist denying how bad things are with the team. I find these articles refreshing after the drivel we hear from the team about how peachy everything is and how smart mgmt is.

You mean if you follow the rabbit trail we traded JBo for;

Rito Bera (lilely backup next year) Mark Cundari (likely a top 6 D-man for us next year) and Emile Poirier (a probable future 2nd or 1st line winger)

Looks OK to me for a $6M+ a year defenseman who can't score.

For comparisons sake, lets see what the Leafs get for Phaneuf.

Avatar
#45 Jeff Lebowski
July 04 2013, 11:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
internuncial wrote:

Yo, Lambert,

Let's get one thing straight: There is a WORLD of difference between the information that the organization has and what we on the outside run with. There are a thousand things about personalities, chemistry, injuries, team plans, directions, salary expectations, etc that the team knows and we never will. That's data that they have and we don't have and it's no small thing.

Anyone on the outside who makes absolute statements like the ones you regularly do in this column without qualifying it implicitly or explicitly as an opinion that was formed with WAY LESS information than the team has is being wildly disingenuous. Like, aren't you the guys who are all sanctimonious about data-based decision making?

I'm no fan of Feaster. I'm just way less a fan of crap logic and hypocrisy.

That being said, the Kanzig pick is insanity.

Totally agree about the info point. Don't really hold it against any writer or FN per se. How else are they supposed to generate content?

Avatar
#46 Theg69
July 04 2013, 11:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I find it hilarious how people go off their rocker with "off the board" picks. I mean seriously, are you guys professional scouts?

I am taking a wait and see approach to see how the draft picks pan out. Couple of key points already mentioned. Shinkaruk was not only passed by the Flames but numerous other teams. For all the people lamenting that we didn't pick him, how many have actually seen him play? Hey, remember when Flames fans imploded because we passed on Kirill Kabanov in 2010? Have you seen how much he has done lately? We picked Max Reinhart instead, now who would you rather have at this point.

I mean hindsight is 20/20 but to completely rail on management for not taking another player is retarded. I mean Alexander Daigle was a CONSENSUS number 1 pick that year - and we saw how accurate these so called experts were.

Lastly, you lost me on the Gilbert and Gerbe train. I live in Edmonton, and although they sang his praises with his 45 point season, they soured on him pretty fast. He was ridiculously bad in his own end and it doesn't look like he learned how to play defense in Minnesota (while having his offense regress). If he couldn't cut it on the Oilers defense, he would be awful on the Flames. It is like Butler 2.0 with maybe a little more offense. Gerbe is just an upgrade on Byron - we have enough small forwards, they are just going to get killed in the division we are in. There is a reason why he was bought out; his production dried up and with a small guy like him, he becomes useless.

I am done my rant, seriously, I am not completely enthralled with Feaster's work, but the draft is probably the last thing I would be complaining about at this time.

Avatar
#47 Trianglereverie
July 04 2013, 11:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Some may not agree but I'll tell you why I like the Poirier pick over Shinkaruk.

In the past the Flames have been known for going for the safe WHL pick over more risky (but potentially better payoff) foreign or QMJHL/OHL picks. Now I've watched Shinkaruk play a few times over the last 2 years and my cousin has had the benefit of playing against him in the Midget league and in WHL camps. Shinkaruk is the product example of all that is broken within in Calgary's hockey development and the WHL. The WHL treats the major midget leagues as a meat market. Shinkaruk is a relatively talented but he's not very dynamic. He's a decent skater, has a good shot but that really is all he is. He has affluent parents who had the connection to get his name out there in the right circles and that's why he was ranked so high on ISS and TSN's rankings (not because of his actual abilities). So just because consensus has him ranked high doesn't mean he's the best available at 22.

In regards to Poirier we were not the only team to have eyes on him for a mid 20's pick. Montreal was apparently very keen on him and the comment that all the consensus didn't have him ranked in the 20's isn't true either. Who is Ryan to know what teams had him ranked on their lists? Nevertheless Redline Scouting and I've since heard other scoutings services have had him ranked to go in the first round. Montreal being the most likely destination given their love of french canadian boys. Also consider Montreal's prospect situation they probably can afford to take a bigger risk in their first round because the payoff is much greater and they have safety in numbers in the cupboard. So I think it's a reasonable deduction to say that Poirier has something there behind the great wheels that is worth taking a risk on. The fact that drafting a player like him strays from the usual norm of the Flames past is something to at least be positive about because let's face it. Taking the WHL/OHL "sure thing" prospects hasn't worked out that well for us #coughDIONcough #coughNEMISZcough Think about the home run picks we have done well on Baertschi ( a swiss kid who was playing in the W) Backlund (A swede from the swedish league) TJ (2nd round) GIO (undrafted) sort of off the board unexpecteds who have turned out to be better than expected.

So to be honest I'm all for going off the board and not going with consensus.

Avatar
#48 TheRealPoc
July 04 2013, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Love the subtle CHL digs and NCAA endorsements he never fails to leave out.

Not impressed with Poirier blowing the doors off of "poor skating" CHL defencemen, but pines for the Flames to pick up Gerbe and magically relive his halcyon days of blowing past Charmin-soft DI defencemen at Boston College.

More A+ work from FN.ca's resident troll.

Avatar
#49 loudogYYC
July 04 2013, 12:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I've come around on the Poirier pick since I've found out more about his skill set and that apparently MTL wanted him at 25. I'm also ok with Shinkaruk going to Vancouver as he seems to be another entitled rich kid, so a perfect fit with the Vancouver Canucks really.

The Kanzig pick was a Hail Mary at best, and I don't like those in the top 100. This to me was the Feaster mistake of the 2013 draft. Why not trade down and pick up something extra?

Regarding the negative feedback Lambert gets here, I say puck them. Lambert is not Kent or Azevedo or BoL, he's Lambert. He's got his own style and his own views and like it or not, he knows hockey and he knows how to produce content on the subject. I come to FN daily and there's always something to read that's sincere and worth my time.

Appreciate.

Avatar
#50 the-wolf
July 04 2013, 12:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I pretty much echo the other comments: Love Monahan, was never a fan of Shinkuruk (though I don't get the personal attacks), Poirier makes me more excited by the day, liked Klimchuk a lot and was on my hopeful list along with Monahan, Kanzig was the worst draft pick in team history, Roy was acceptable, the rest was terrible, but it's the 1st round that turly mattered, Tanguay and Sarich - good riddance, the team is going to suck anyways, but if they they can compete and show heart, I'll take that as the acceptable influence for the younger guys over a 33 year old "2nd line" LW, Galiardi will probably be 'meh,' but who cares for 1 year and no risk?, Lecavalier - really, really who cares?, and Brodie rules and needs to be re-signed and I'd rather have him than draft picks though it would depend on how high of a 1st, but in general I'll keep the already developed 23 yeard old D who likes he can be a top pairing defender.

Comments are closed for this article.