Toggle sidebar

Milan Lucic over/under 5 goals

Will Milan Lucic get 5 Goals?

  • Total voters
    284
Baxterman

Baxterman

Registered User
Aug 27, 2017
6,939
1,499
McFlyingV said:
Why do you even make a post like this when the stats indicate he has? I've watched pretty much every minute of Calgary's games this season and there's no question Neal has been a more positive contributor than the majority of their forward group. No one in their bottom 6 has looked remotely good. Backlund has looked bad. The top line has looked good on some nights, bad on others (with the exception of Gaudreau). Tkachuk has been mostly good with 1 or 2 bad games. The plethora of wingers tried on Backlund/Tkachuk's line have been completely useless.

It's early and this trend might not continue, but as of right now with the way everyone has played Neal would be a top 6 player on Calgary without question.
Click to expand...

I say it because it is true.

This isn’t to say that Calgary’s forwards have been great, they have been awful for the most part but this isn’t about them being good they just have been better than the pile of crap that is James Neal.
 
Baxterman

Baxterman

Registered User
Aug 27, 2017
6,939
1,499
Mc5RingsAndABeer said:
If you have 20 forwards better than James "leading the NHL in goals" Neal, then the Flames should be going 82-0 with a dynasty.
The dude isn't a nobody. He was a perennial 20 goal scorer until that single season with the Flames.

Also, even if Neal becomes as useless as Lucic the Oiler still won the trade. The Flames have to waste an expansion protection slot on Lucic when Seattle joins. LOL
Click to expand...

Most if not all teams have 20 forwards better than Neal.

Actually if look at the Flames expansion list having Lucic doesn’t change much for them.
 
McFlyingV

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
22,869
13,578
Edmonton, Alberta
Baxterman said:
I say it because it is true.

This isn’t to say that Calgary’s forwards have been great, they have been awful for the most part but this isn’t about them being good they just have been better than the pile of crap that is James Neal.
Click to expand...
Your arguments lack any sort of substance so what is the point of this conversation even? You're providing no stats, no examples, and no evidence, and are basically saying "He's been bad because I said he's bad".
 
SwedishFire

SwedishFire

Registered User
Mar 3, 2011
5,332
1,863
Baxterman said:
Exactly what they needed? They already had Chiasson on their roster if they needed someone to leech off of McD and Draisatl.

And yes he is a garbage player which is why no team wanted to trade for him when he was clearly available.
Click to expand...

I guess thats why he leads entire NHL in goals scored. I guess he just lucked out, enough to have close to 2 goals/game. This may go down to top 5 worst trade ever. Its close to Forsberg for Erat level.
 
Baxterman

Baxterman

Registered User
Aug 27, 2017
6,939
1,499
McFlyingV said:
Your arguments lack any sort of substance so what is the point of this conversation even? You're providing no stats, no examples, and no evidence, and are basically saying "He's been bad because I said he's bad".
Click to expand...

The evidence is in watching him play, he’s trash.

The Flames needed exactly what he was supposed to bring last year and he was complete crap couldn’t come close to being even a competent AHL player.

Thus year a couple of tap-ins from McD and Draisatl and horrific play outside of those few moments doesn’t change the FACT that Neal is a horrible hockey player.
 
Baxterman

Baxterman

Registered User
Aug 27, 2017
6,939
1,499
SwedishFire said:
I guess thats why he leads entire NHL in goals scored. I guess he just lucked out, enough to have close to 2 goals/game. This may go down to top 5 worst trade ever. Its close to Forsberg for Erat level.
Click to expand...

LOL

It won’t even come close to being a top 500 worst trades. Forsberg was 20 years old and will 15+ years that are light years better than the season Neal will have this year. The deals aren’t even close to comparable.

I get that people like to overreact and gave hot takes on this board but James Neal is a horrible hockey player. Losing him is a huge positive for the Flames. The problem was negating the positive of losing Neal by adding, and more importantly playing, an equally bad player in Lucic.
 

Saltcreek

Registered User
Nov 23, 2016
1,272
1,545
Baxterman said:
LOL

It won’t even come close to being a top 500 worst trades. Forsberg was 20 years old and will 15+ years that are light years better than the season Neal will have this year. The deals aren’t even close to comparable.

I get that people like to overreact and gave hot takes on this board but James Neal is a horrible hockey player. Losing him is a huge positive for the Flames. The problem was negating the positive of losing Neal by adding, and more importantly playing, an equally bad player in Lucic.
Click to expand...

It is hard to take you serious when you say that Neal and Lucic are equally bad. That is absolutely false and no matter how much you will it it will never be true.

Neal and Calgary needed to part ways but they got a much worse player in return.
 
McFlyingV

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
22,869
13,578
Edmonton, Alberta
Baxterman said:
The evidence is in watching him play, he’s trash.

The Flames needed exactly what he was supposed to bring last year and he was complete crap couldn’t come close to being even a competent AHL player.

Thus year a couple of tap-ins from McD and Draisatl and horrific play outside of those few moments doesn’t change the FACT that Neal is a horrible hockey player.
Click to expand...
I figured you'd respond with more drivel. I think we're done here.
 
Mc5RingsAndABeer

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
Baxterman said:
Most if not all teams have 20 forwards better than Neal.

Actually if look at the Flames expansion list having Lucic doesn’t change much for them.
Click to expand...
Neal was a 20 goal scorer for 10 straight seasons before joining Calgary (i.e. Calgary is the outlier). Since entering the league, he is 18th among all players for goals scored. He hasn't significantly declined - he was just improperly utilized by Calgary and this season is proving that.

It only doesn't change things if all of the Flames prospects bust. Who are you going to leave exposed? Dube? Bennett? Janikowski? Kylington? Gio? You can only pick one.
 
booyakasha

booyakasha

Registered User
Oct 11, 2007
11,873
5,672
Edmonton, AB
Lucic is no longer an Oiler.
tenor.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aceboogie and frag2
Baxterman

Baxterman

Registered User
Aug 27, 2017
6,939
1,499
Mc5RingsAndABeer said:
Neal was a 20 goal scorer for 10 straight seasons before joining Calgary (i.e. Calgary is the outlier). Since entering the league, he is 18th among all players for goals scored. He hasn't significantly declined - he was just improperly utilized by Calgary and this season is proving that.

It only doesn't change things if all of the Flames prospects bust. Who are you going to leave exposed? Dube? Bennett? Janikowski? Kylington? Gio? You can only pick one.
Click to expand...

I think we will have too many defenseman to protect so likely will lose one of them whether we have Lucic or not.

Valimaki, Anderson, Hanifin will all be protected. We likely re-sign at least one of Brodie or Hamonic and then have Gio and Kylington as well.

So even if you take out Lucic we have issues with the defense. If we somehow get down to the 3 defenseman to protect we can then keep top line, Tkachuk, Backlund with Lucic we have to decide between Bennett and Dube but right now that isn’t really a big concern unless both guys take big steps.

And I would send Francis a very lovely gift basket if he takes Jankowski, he is a tire fire that likely doesn’t keep his spot on this team all year long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom