Player Discussion 2019 Draft

Status
Not open for further replies.

crackdown44

Cold milk cools down hot food
Dec 1, 2017
4,493
5,517
Oh not the players themselves, but similar moves.
A high profile backup looking for a new role.

Are there comparables? Maybe Georgiev or Brossoit but not sure I’d move a first for them. I think Ullmark is the goalie of the future in Buffalo so he won’t move

Arizona is an interesting case. Maybe Raanta becomes available with how well Kuemper has looked this season. I doubt it though

Some decent names in free agency too. I’d sign Talbot for cheap in a heartbeat
 

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
20,844
17,200
We have a budding back-up in Rittich, who could eventually take over. I'd rather not expend anymore assets on a goalie and instead sign one in free-agency. I have a sneaking suspicion we end up with Talbot
 

Mr Snrub

I like the way Snrub thinks!
Oct 12, 2016
5,713
2,410
Oh not the players themselves, but similar moves.
A high profile backup looking for a new role.

Oh, that’s a pretty different question. Well, considering how the trades you memtioned worked out, it might not be the best move, but I wonder if our need for a long-term solution in net is pressing enough that we ought to do it anyways.
 

Khrox

Registered User
May 31, 2018
1,146
874
Don’t think talbot does well here tbh. Would rather stay away and take my chances on someone else.
I don't think Talbot is as good as his career year in Edmonton, but he definitely isn't as bad as he was this year either. I could see him being here on a 1 year as more of a 1b (with Rittich being 1a) and him working really hard to prove this year was a fluke (and also kind of rub it in to Edmonton, sort of like what Steeger did).
 

Sparky93

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
7,002
1,040
I don't think Talbot is as good as his career year in Edmonton, but he definitely isn't as bad as he was this year either. I could see him being here on a 1 year as more of a 1b (with Rittich being 1a) and him working really hard to prove this year was a fluke (and also kind of rub it in to Edmonton, sort of like what Steeger did).
I don’t know, he had a .911 save percentage during his time in Edmonton. That’s about what I’d expect from him in a tandem situation. Looking at their team, it’s hard to imagine a goalie doing much better. For Talbot, it’d have to be an ultra cheap, prove yourself contract, as a steppingstone for him to sign a more lucrative deal elsewhere. I wouldn’t want to commit to him, just in case.
 

Khrox

Registered User
May 31, 2018
1,146
874
I don’t know, he had a .911 save percentage during his time in Edmonton.
We (Calgary) have had one goalie, one year, since 2015/16 with a save percentage higher than 0.911 (Mike Smith last year). Our defence is unquestionably better than Edmonton, if we got 0.911 out of Talbot, that is an improvement on every goaltender the last 4 years (that played at least 10 games in a season).

2015/16

Ramo: 0.909
Ortio: 0.902
Hiller: 0.879

2016/17
Elliot: 0.910
Johnson: 0.910

2017/18
Smith: 0.916
Rittich: 0.904
Gillies: 0.896

2018/19
Rittich: 0.909
Smith: 0.896


After his year this year, I don't see him signing a long term or expensive contract. But a one year (or two year) deal at about 2 mil seems about right. If he is between 0.904-0.909 you aren't doing bad. If he is 0.910+ you got a steal for that contract. And the majority of options that give you between 0.900-0.903/4 range, you're probably paying around 1.5-2 for anyways.
 

Sparky93

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
7,002
1,040
We (Calgary) have had one goalie, one year, since 2015/16 with a save percentage higher than 0.911 (Mike Smith last year). Our defence is unquestionably better than Edmonton, if we got 0.911 out of Talbot, that is an improvement on every goaltender the last 4 years (that played at least 10 games in a season).

2015/16

Ramo: 0.909
Ortio: 0.902
Hiller: 0.879

2016/17
Elliot: 0.910
Johnson: 0.910

2017/18
Smith: 0.916
Rittich: 0.904
Gillies: 0.896

2018/19
Rittich: 0.909
Smith: 0.896


After his year this year, I don't see him signing a long term or expensive contract. But a one year (or two year) deal at about 2 mil seems about right. If he is between 0.904-0.909 you aren't doing bad. If he is 0.910+ you got a steal for that contract. And the majority of options that give you between 0.900-0.903/4 range, you're probably paying around 1.5-2 for anyways.
Judging success by measuring against that list seems like a pretty low bar. Expecting Talbot, or any potential 1A/B to put up a .910, is not a lofty expectation.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,957
8,449
Depends if we’re getting a Talbot, or an Elliott. An Andersen or a Hiller.

They’ll need to pick someone up and I’d bet it’ll be in free agency. *shudder*

But it also depends whether we end up with another insane Jekyll and Hyde.

Hiller was .918 in his first season with us, then .879.
Elliott was .910 in the regular season, then .880 in the ploffs.
Smith was .914 in the first season, and has been .896 this season.

What the hell is happening to these goalies? I can't help but wonder if there's gotta be some reason in the way the team plays that causes the SV% to plummet so badly in year 2. Rittich seems to be going through a similar spike and crash. I don't think it's Sigalet. I think the team has some type of habit that kicks in. Like they stop supporting the goalie and go all super risky habits or something.
 

Khrox

Registered User
May 31, 2018
1,146
874
Rittich seems to be going through a similar spike and crash.
Been a bit of a spike and crash this year, but overall, his save percentage is better than last year (and it's a year where scoring is up league wide, and save percentages are generally lower). Rittich's case is also a bit different, Hiller, Elliott, and Smith were all established NHL caliber starters, Rittich was a starter in Europe, and a platoon in the AHL before this year (where he has been platooning this year). He is still finding his place at the NHL level in terms of games played, and whether he is a 1a/b or a legitimate starter.
 

DomBarr

Registered User
Apr 7, 2014
2,733
895
But it also depends whether we end up with another insane Jekyll and Hyde.

Hiller was .918 in his first season with us, then .879.
Elliott was .910 in the regular season, then .880 in the ploffs.
Smith was .914 in the first season, and has been .896 this season.

What the hell is happening to these goalies? I can't help but wonder if there's gotta be some reason in the way the team plays that causes the SV% to plummet so badly in year 2. Rittich seems to be going through a similar spike and crash. I don't think it's Sigalet. I think the team has some type of habit that kicks in. Like they stop supporting the goalie and go all super risky habits or something.
How can you not think Sigalet is not a significant part of the problem. He is the only constant.
We have had a variety of goalies with diverse set of styles who have success to start. Since Hiller the Flames have had almost a complete change over in D, significant changes in forwards, 3 different head coaches and the goalies all have a drop off after a successful start in Calgary. This points to goalie coaching not a team issue/habit.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,957
8,449
How can you not think Sigalet is not a significant part of the problem. He is the only constant.
We have had a variety of goalies with diverse set of styles who have success to start. Since Hiller the Flames have had almost a complete change over in D, significant changes in forwards, 3 different head coaches and the goalies all have a drop off after a successful start in Calgary. This points to goalie coaching not a team issue/habit.

Sorry, that sentence was supposed to read, "I don't think it's just Sigalet."

Furthermore, there's been some discussion about how an established starter should just be able to tune out Sigalet to return back to what they had been performing at the season before, but that's seemingly not the case here.
 

crazyfisherman

Sharangovich fanboy
Sep 22, 2012
2,686
2,015
I wonder where kaliyev is gonna go, if he falls to mid first id package up and snagg him. Huge potential imo
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
How can you not think Sigalet is not a significant part of the problem. He is the only constant.
We have had a variety of goalies with diverse set of styles who have success to start. Since Hiller the Flames have had almost a complete change over in D, significant changes in forwards, 3 different head coaches and the goalies all have a drop off after a successful start in Calgary. This points to goalie coaching not a team issue/habit.

Could also be these f***ing old shitty goalies that’s primes were years before we ever picked them up.
 

The Gnome

Registered User
May 17, 2010
4,678
740
Calgary
Unless it is a slam dunk goalie prospect, which is very, very rare, I never want to even bother drafting a goalie. Too much risk, especially in the early rounds. Just go BPA for either a forward or Dman. Goalies are a fickle beast and I'd rather try trading for one who is established.
 

SmellOfVictory

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
10,959
653
I wonder where kaliyev is gonna go, if he falls to mid first id package up and snagg him. Huge potential imo
There's a chance he falls all the way to the bottom of the 1st, which would be dope. I'd support the Flames getting him, or someone like Suzuki.
 

Dack

Registered User
Jun 16, 2014
3,911
3,544
Kaliyev is such a strange prospect. I've never seen such a disconnect between the numbers a guy puts up and where he's predicted to go unless he's either small or older and Kaliyev is neither.

He's one of the youngest guys in the draft and he's also got 30 points on his teams second leading scorer. Though I will admit in the only game I've seen of him he certainly didn't jump out at me in terms of skill, which I have to imagine is part of the reason he's not ranked higher.


He's 6'2, one of the youngest players in the draft, is scoring at about the same rate as the 2nd overall pick did last year and he's ranked in the mid first it's so weird.

Tomassino looks really good too. As does Harley.
 
Last edited:

crazyfisherman

Sharangovich fanboy
Sep 22, 2012
2,686
2,015
There's a chance he falls all the way to the bottom of the 1st, which would be dope. I'd support the Flames getting him, or someone like Suzuki.
I highly doubt he does, he was a mid round talent during the mid season ranking by bob and carried on scoring at a ridiculous pace since. At some point his level of production is hard to ignore. People bring up how debrincat fell despite scoring so much but debrincat was still only 3rd/2nd in his team in scoring, kaliyev is 23 point clear on the next guy on his team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dack

Bounces R Way

Registered User
Nov 18, 2013
33,504
52,716
Weegartown
Kind of hoping they draft a forward that has the potential to play middle 6 with some edge. We have two players in the top 100 for hits this year. Hathaway at #32 with 170 and Bennett at #95 with 120. Then Tkachuk and Fantenberg are tied at #196 with 86 each. As awesome has Lindholm has been this year I think they've missed Ferland's physicality a bit. Just don't really have that scary forechecker that can disrupt defenseman in their breakout.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
Kind of hoping they draft a forward that has the potential to play middle 6 with some edge. We have two players in the top 100 for hits this year. Hathaway at #32 with 170 and Bennett at #95 with 120. Then Tkachuk and Fantenberg are tied at #196 with 86 each. As awesome has Lindholm has been this year I think they've missed Ferland's physicality a bit. Just don't really have that scary forechecker that can disrupt defenseman in their breakout.

Could also peg that on us not dressing any kind of toughness in general.
On most nights, Mikael Backlund is our sand-paper centre. Let that sink in. Mikael Backlund is the grittiest/sandpaper centre this team dresses most nights.

That all being said, you still make that Lindholm trade 11/10 times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

Ace Rimmer

Stoke me a clipper.
Kind of hoping they draft a forward that has the potential to play middle 6 with some edge. We have two players in the top 100 for hits this year. Hathaway at #32 with 170 and Bennett at #95 with 120. Then Tkachuk and Fantenberg are tied at #196 with 86 each. As awesome has Lindholm has been this year I think they've missed Ferland's physicality a bit. Just don't really have that scary forechecker that can disrupt defenseman in their breakout.
How will this help the Flames in 4-5 years when this player is ready?

Take BPA. All the time. Every of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crackdown44

crackdown44

Cold milk cools down hot food
Dec 1, 2017
4,493
5,517
Kind of hoping they draft a forward that has the potential to play middle 6 with some edge. We have two players in the top 100 for hits this year. Hathaway at #32 with 170 and Bennett at #95 with 120. Then Tkachuk and Fantenberg are tied at #196 with 86 each. As awesome has Lindholm has been this year I think they've missed Ferland's physicality a bit. Just don't really have that scary forechecker that can disrupt defenseman in their breakout.

Teams with good possession numbers have bad hit totals. You can’t hit when you have the puck

You definitely don’t want to lead or have a lot of players high up in any hits category. If you’re trying to gauge physicality the eye test is a lot better
 

Bounces R Way

Registered User
Nov 18, 2013
33,504
52,716
Weegartown
Could also peg that on us not dressing any kind of toughness in general.
On most nights, Mikael Backlund is our sand-paper centre. Let that sink in. Mikael Backlund is the grittiest/sandpaper centre this team dresses most nights.

That all being said, you still make that Lindholm trade 11/10 times.

Yeah kind of my point. Team doesn't finish enough checks for my liking. I don't think they're "soft" the way the Leafs are or anything but when they're kept to the perimeter and not having enough presence in the center of the ice or on the forecheck they're not as effective IMO.

How will this help the Flames in 4-5 years when this player is ready?

Take BPA. All the time. Every of the time.

BPA is a fine philosophy but after the first 15 picks it gets pretty murky. All I'm saying is if there's a pick to be made between another smallish all skill waterbug type(our prospect pool seems to have a lot of them) and a bigger player with some speed that likes to get in on the forecheck that are similarly rated then I'd like to see some more diversity in the pool.

Teams with good possession numbers have bad hit totals. You can’t hit when you have the puck

You definitely don’t want to lead or have a lot of players high up in any hits category. If you’re trying to gauge physicality the eye test is a lot better

Eh. Vegas is a good possession team that has 3 players in the top 30 for hits. Boston is another one with 2. The Islanders despite not being great possession wise are a playoff team that have 3. Even Tampa who aren't considered a heavyweight team by any means have Paquette in the top 5.
 

Tkachuk Norris

Registered User
Jun 22, 2012
15,602
6,639
I would pick that American goalie if he’s availiable. Best goalie prospect since Vasilevski from what I’ve heard. We have lots of skill and youth at FWD and D. A franchise goalie would be the thing to keep this team at the top of the standings for a long time
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->