BurnEmUp
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2009
- 1,616
- 143
I dunno.
Since getting the starting job he's posted a sub .900 sv%
That's pretty terrible
Confirmed with Link: Mike Smith (25% retained) for Hickey, Johnson and conditional 3rd
- Thread starter Lunatik
- Start date
I dunno.
Since getting the starting job he's posted a sub .900 sv%
That's pretty terrible
Eh, Flames need to be conscious of their cap allocation moving forward. Some big names needing contracts over the next few years (Backlund, Tkachuk, Ferland/Bennett [post bridge deals] & Brodie).
Losing Brouwer helps but if they lose Stajan instead and then use that cap space on backup goalies and bottom pairing defencemen, they're just making things unnecessarily difficult when it comes to keeping their actual good players.
Losing Brouwer helps but if they lose Stajan instead and then use that cap space on backup goalies and bottom pairing defencemen, they're just making things unnecessarily difficult when it comes to keeping their actual good players.
Picks are nice for the fans because of the hypes.
In reality, if you look at the Flames record, only lottery players really made any difference with some small exceptions....
It's nice to brag how Wotherspoon, Seiloff, Hickey, Kulak, etc...are going to be allstars though
That's because Flames had horrid drafting under a different regime, even then they got some pretty useful players like Brodie, Gaudreau, Ferland. Picks aren't free candy that you give away for stopgaps after giving away more, you get more chance of a hit. We don't have guys like Andersson, Kylington, Parsons in our pool otherwise, who I'd easily say is more valuable than Smith.
Negative. He was a starter last year and actually did great on an awful d team that gave a lot of hdc. This year he was .901 on an even worse d team. I'd actually gamble on a young goalie that had a history of being projected great and had a amazing season, even with one bad season.
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
Picks are nice for the fans because of the hypes.
In reality, if you look at the Flames record, only lottery players really made any difference with some small exceptions....
It's nice to brag how Wotherspoon, Seiloff, Hickey, Kulak, etc...are going to be allstars though
TJ Brodie was a 4th round Flames pick. Mikael Backlund was picked 24th overall. Micheal Ferland was a 5th round pick. Johnny Gaudreau was a 4th round pick. How do you consider those "small exceptions"? That's a huge chunk of the core of this team.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,245
- 8,380
I think he means those picks rarely pan out. And he's right, we may have gotten lucky with Gaudreau and Brodie, for every one of them there are dozens that didn't pan out. Most picks beyond the first round don't really work out the way we would like.
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Corsica.hockey is down, but I managed to get the stats for 5 on 5 and all situations of goalies who played at least 1,000 minutes in both.
Smith has faced 118 rebound shots overall 5 on 5, leading to a RBA/60 of 2.79. 3rd worst out of 49 goalies who played at least 1,000 minutes, 2nd worst out of 28 goalies who played at least 2,000 minutes. Some of it has to do with the team I bet, but some has to do with Smith himself IMHO. Dubnyk faced the least amount of RBA/60 with only 1.23, but watching Wild games I point that more towards the Wild's defense than him because during the Edmonton days Dubnyk had dreadful rebound control.
Smith faced 112 rush shots overall 5 on 5, leading to a RSA/60 of 2.65, which is middle of the pack for both 1,000 minutes and 2,000 minutes minimum played goalies. Domingue faced even less RSA/60. In fact Johnson faced 19th most out of 49 goalies who played at least 1,000 minutes, with a RSA/60 of 3.10. Allen faced the least RSA/60 with only 1.85. What's funny is that Price actually faced the most RSA/60 out of every goalies in the league facing 4.34, so much for "Montreal's stellar defense". Elliott faced 2.68 RSA/60, a little more than Smith.
Smith has faced 118 rebound shots overall 5 on 5, leading to a RBA/60 of 2.79. 3rd worst out of 49 goalies who played at least 1,000 minutes, 2nd worst out of 28 goalies who played at least 2,000 minutes. Some of it has to do with the team I bet, but some has to do with Smith himself IMHO. Dubnyk faced the least amount of RBA/60 with only 1.23, but watching Wild games I point that more towards the Wild's defense than him because during the Edmonton days Dubnyk had dreadful rebound control.
Smith faced 112 rush shots overall 5 on 5, leading to a RSA/60 of 2.65, which is middle of the pack for both 1,000 minutes and 2,000 minutes minimum played goalies. Domingue faced even less RSA/60. In fact Johnson faced 19th most out of 49 goalies who played at least 1,000 minutes, with a RSA/60 of 3.10. Allen faced the least RSA/60 with only 1.85. What's funny is that Price actually faced the most RSA/60 out of every goalies in the league facing 4.34, so much for "Montreal's stellar defense". Elliott faced 2.68 RSA/60, a little more than Smith.
Last edited:
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
That's true, and it highlights the importance of having a decent number of picks. Because the draft is a crapshoot to a significant degree, you need to boost the odds by holding onto picks sometimes.
Good players at good cap hits, by and large, come from the draft. A team can get lucky and sign undrafted free agents, or trade for guys who are undervalued by their team sometimes, but the draft really is where a team normally needs to be built. I'm just talking in general (I honestly didn't even read the entire debate), but I don't think the importance of picks is overstated.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,245
- 8,380
I can't see 90% of the debate, so I haven't read it either. I just noticed what you quoted and replied. But you are right, drafting is indeed important, but I think the picks that matter are the ones in the 1st round. But I think some people (not saying you do) take drafting too serious too, meaning they forget that trades and free agency are just as important to building a contender.
Flames Fanatic
Mediocre
Hard to shift from the rebuilding mentality sometimes
That being said, for me it's more that our best trade currency that aren't 1st round picks are gone already for this year and next realistically. I know you aren't a fan of the Lazar trade and even I think it was a high price to pay (would have preferred a 3rd and a prospect we don't need), but we aren't the only organization making moves like that (see the Mueller trade).
But we moved a 2nd last year (for Elliot on a good risk imo), 2nd this year (Lazar) and probably a 2nd next year (Smith), plus our 3rd this year and possibly a 5th. Just a lot of trade currency used.
I think we've picked decently well in the past few years. Now it's up to the development system to turn them into something.
Plus, it irks me to see Brad talk about valuing picks and how we always need more of them and then trade so many in a short period too.
Slush
Registered User
I like this move. Definitely an upgrade on Elliott. I think Smith is going to prove a lot of people wrong this coming season. Glad he's a Flame.
In what way?
His career numbers are worse.
His numbers last year are the same/slightly worse.
"Mr Starters Workload" only started 6 more games this season and missed significant time to injury the season before and is older.
And to top it of, all Flames fans wanted was a consistent goalie yet the biggest complaint that Coyotes fans have is that Smith was so wildly inconsistent.
Last edited:
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,658
- 6,766
Hard to shift from the rebuilding mentality sometimes
That being said, for me it's more that our best trade currency that aren't 1st round picks are gone already for this year and next realistically. I know you aren't a fan of the Lazar trade and even I think it was a high price to pay (would have preferred a 3rd and a prospect we don't need), but we aren't the only organization making moves like that (see the Mueller trade).
But we moved a 2nd last year (for Elliot on a good risk imo), 2nd this year (Lazar) and probably a 2nd next year (Smith), plus our 3rd this year and possibly a 5th. Just a lot of trade currency used.
I think we've picked decently well in the past few years. Now it's up to the development system to turn them into something.
Plus, it irks me to see Brad talk about valuing picks and how we always need more of them and then trade so many in a short period too.
Brad is a smart guy though. He realizes that this team has a chance to do some damage. However, without high end goaltending and a #4 D, this team is going no where. Here's why I still think we are in good position:
1) our prospect pool is deep. Most teams only have 4/5 good prospects (yes there are exceptions Minnesota, Ottawa, Tampa, Calgary, Arizona). But I feel like we have around 10 strong prospects. Jankowski, Dube, Mangiapane, Hathaway, Kulak, Kylington, Fox, Andersson, Gillies, Parsons is a pretty good pool. And that's mostly cause we are good in the 2nd/3rd/4th rounds.
2) the prospects we do have. Get a little more rope now before they are pushed out by the next shiny new toy. Nothing wrong with giving the guys an extra year hoping they take a jump. Look at Poirier, could be written off but maybe he just needs a few more years to get his personal life in order.
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Nashville has a better prospect pool than us and I don't consider them amazing by any means.
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,432
- 11,107
They're both similar. I wouldn't put one too far ahead of the other.
Calgary's biggest problem is their first rounders have gone straight to the NHL; it really hurts the prospect pool.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
If Arizona wasn't a toilet-calibre team for the last few years, then his numbers would have more meaning. And inconsistency is a hallmark of Brian Elliott, too.
At the end of the day, I don't think it's possible to prove he's an upgrade until we get to see him play, but I do think his top level is above Elliott's top level. And I think Smith has shown an ability to sustain that level more than Elliott.
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,658
- 6,766
Nashville? I like Kamenev, but who is there after that? Fabbro is horribly overrated, I think Kylington, Andersson, and Fox are much better. Aberg, Fiala aren't prospects in my view. Girard is basically their Adam Fox.
The Flames have a good pool. As evidenced by our young successful AHL team. That's what happens when you rebuild and stockpile prospects, why is that so hard for people to understand?
Don't let other franchises hype fool you. The Flames have wiped the floor with the superhuman Jets prospects three years in a row. The Jets actually have a terrible pool outside their top guys and it's just a classic example of the disinformation that exists on the internet (I remember just last year people were calling me a psycho because I said the key to Michigan was Zach Werenski and not Kyle Connor, watch the games people
)We have 3 strong prospects. Parsons, Jankowski and Andersson.
All of the rest are a dime a dozen, potential players with big question marks. (Gillies is close to a blue chip but not quite).
Our prospect pool is meh but our u-24 pool is stacked. Much better reflection on how the team has been drafting and developing.
All of the rest are a dime a dozen, potential players with big question marks. (Gillies is close to a blue chip but not quite).
Our prospect pool is meh but our u-24 pool is stacked. Much better reflection on how the team has been drafting and developing.
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Nashville? I like Kamenev, but who is there after that? Fabbro is horribly overrated, I think Kylington, Andersson, and Fox are much better. Aberg, Fiala aren't prospects in my view. Girard is basically their Adam Fox.
The Flames have a good pool. As evidenced by our young successful AHL team. That's what happens when you rebuild and stockpile prospects, why is that so hard for people to understand?
Don't let other franchises hype fool you. The Flames have wiped the floor with the superhuman Jets prospects three years in a row. The Jets actually have a terrible pool outside their top guys and it's just a classic example of the disinformation that exists on the internet (I remember just last year people were calling me a psycho because I said the key to Michigan was Zach Werenski and not Kyle Connor, watch the games people
Jets have a terrible pool defensively and it's funny people don't realize that and **** Jets fans off by suggesting they trade Trouba for useless wingers. But I still think they have good forward depth, just overrated. If Fiala and Aberg aren't prospects, neither is Jankowski. Carrier and Dougherty still exist you know. Carrier is better than both Andersson and Kylington. Our prospects have more depth, but theirs is just better by pure value.
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,658
- 6,766
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,432
- 11,107
Fiala isn't a prospect. He's not even an NHL rookie anymore.
That's like us saying Tkachuk is a prospect.
Aberg is still a prospect, although, we are entering his D+6 draft year. I like these Swedish picks in the second round or later, for some reason if you leave them to marinate, you'll get a good NHL'er by the time they're nearing their mid-20's.
Carrier is a nice little offensive Dman, but Andersson might be one of the best non-NHL Dmen in the league right now. Not sure how many 19-20 year olds are given the reigns to a teams' #1D role... but this kid did it and flourished.
I liked the pick, and it might be because I was at that draft when they took him, but every time I watch him I keep thinking about how good of a player this guy'll be. NHL'er written all over him, and top 4 (imo) is very likely.
These pools are similar. No matter how you cut it. Decent depth, no mega-star names.
Dude go back to Edmonton
lol okay you can convince yourself of whatever you like. I've watched enough prospects spin their wheels in the AHL to know who looks like they're a good bet to make the show and who is probably going to fade away.
Parsons, Jankowski, Andersson and Gillies are the prospects that this team can realistically count on graduating to the NHL and sticking.
Think about how many Flames have graduated from the AHL in the last decade. 5 or 6 players? Only 2 of them have become impact players.
Graduating prospects is a fickle process. Most impact players make the NHL early on (unless they go the college route, then they might take a bit longer). If Parsons, Jankowski, Andersson and Gillies all make it out this crop of prospects, I'd consider that quite the success.
Prospects like Kylington, Dube, Fox, Mangiapane, Klimchuk, Porier, Shinkurak are all a dime a dozen. All show potential but still have big question marks. Fox can prove himself as a blue chip if he can keep improving on his freshman year.
Last edited:
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,658
- 6,766
I'll agree with you on the first part, except I wouldn't put Parsons as a lock just because goalies are
Kylington was Swedens best player at the WJC... sometimes people forget how good he is when he plays against his peers,
Fox just had a modern day record setting season. But sure, he's a dime a dozen. He is likely the #1D for USA next year. Not to mention he also set USNTDP records previous to this year...
Mangiapane had 2 100 point seasons and just had a very successful first year of pro.
Dube is a solid player that might not have huge upside but he's going to be a good bottom 6 forward for this team and he should play a big role on Canada next year.
Those four in particular are not dime a dozen prospects.
And then there is Kulak who is already an NHL talent in my books.
Last edited:
I just think the price to get a better goalie option was too high, even for the young guys like Raanta. You never know with young goalies coming from solid teams. Just seems like a big risk to give up a 1st rounder for, if that was potentially the price.
Smith is a better goalie than Elliot when he's on his game and he played for one of the NHL's worst teams (and rosters for that matter) over the last couple of years. Add the fact that he is a fantastic puck mover, which bodes well for a defence designed like the flames core guys. This could work out quite well and finally solidify our crease for a couple years.
We basically gave up a 3rd, doubtful that Hickey was going to sign (he does have potential, but coming from college, he's still unproven imo), and Johnson is a UFA.
If that 3rd becomes a 2nd, you know Smith will have a large part in that. So I'm ok with the conditions.
Cautiously optimistic is my feeling after letting it sink in for a couple days.
Smith is a better goalie than Elliot when he's on his game and he played for one of the NHL's worst teams (and rosters for that matter) over the last couple of years. Add the fact that he is a fantastic puck mover, which bodes well for a defence designed like the flames core guys. This could work out quite well and finally solidify our crease for a couple years.
We basically gave up a 3rd, doubtful that Hickey was going to sign (he does have potential, but coming from college, he's still unproven imo), and Johnson is a UFA.
If that 3rd becomes a 2nd, you know Smith will have a large part in that. So I'm ok with the conditions.
Cautiously optimistic is my feeling after letting it sink in for a couple days.
Pretty much agree with this assessment of our best prospects. Parsons is awesome, but he's a goalie, so who really knows.
I hope Andersson can make the team next year and my dark horse come training camp would be mangiapane.
Yeah I tweaked my post to elaborate on Fox. He can definitely move into that blue chip category. College prospects are tricky to gauge. Lots of them excel in the NCAA but don't have it translate to the NHL.
From what I heard Kylington still looks pretty poor defensively in the AHL.
Mangiapane is a good prospect but he's small and despite our success with Gaudreau, small players are still a big question mark. He had a decent year but far from a good bet to make it still.
Dube is a Bouma, Ferland, Granlund level prospect. Low Ceiling, but good chance he hits it. Doubtful he's an impact player.
