GDT: Movember 8th - Flames @ Avalanche [7:00pm on Sportsnet West]

[Anglesmith]

Monahan will probably be a fine player, but Nate Mack will be a definite first line 80-90 point center that this team desperately needed for the past two decades almost. And all it took in between the two is losing two more games rather than the 'winning mentality' Feaster was feeding us (even though we still ended up terrible).

I don't know about you, but I think the 'winning mentality' is something that a lot of us fans have anyway without needing to be fed, even now in the midst of an acknowledged rebuild. I don't think that intentionally winning games is something you can really criticize.

 

[Volica]

Your Begin had 2 game winning goals but that wasn't enough to get us to first overall not to mention if he wasn't playing who is to say that someone won't have scored them.

No your point was that MacKinnon > Monahan and I am saying
1) Monahan has done just as well to start the year
2) Mac is on a much better team and his success would have been harder on the Flames.

Your complaining about nothing.

You can't say you aren't supporting a tank and then call Calgary winning a few games as a failure

Winning an internet debate 101. Focus on one point rather than the entire picture.
Guys like Bégin. like. In the like portion I am highlighting veterans winning games, and not our rookies Calgary was molding.
By the way; 2 GWG. How many points were we in front of Colorado... hmm... Not saying Calgary would have won the lotto, as that is pure chance; but a simple reversal of roles wise... hmm.

Once again, you, my good sir. Are not reading.
I, let me underline this, am NOT talking about this year, I'm not talking about statistics, I am NOT talking about the rookie scoring race. I am talking 5-8 years down the road, what each player brings to the table.
I mean, let's not kid ourselves here. Monahan is great; so far he's been playing quite well, I think his type of play is what this team also needs, and I like him. On the other hand, there's a reason scouts were talking about Mack 2 years before his draft too.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Winning an internet debate 101. Focus on one point rather than the entire picture.
Guys like Bégin. like. In the like portion I am highlighting veterans winning games, and not our rookies Calgary was molding.
By the way; 2 GWG. How many points were we in front of Colorado... hmm... Not saying Calgary would have won the lotto, as that is pure chance; but a simple reversal of roles wise... hmm.

Once again, you, my good sir. Are not reading.
I, let me underline this, am NOT talking about this year, I'm not talking about statistics, I am NOT talking about the rookie scoring race. I am talking 5-8 years down the road, what each player brings to the table.
I mean, let's not kid ourselves here. Monahan is great; so far he's been playing quite well, I think his type of play is what this team also needs, and I like him. On the other hand, there's a reason scouts were talking about Mack 2 years before his draft too.

Ahh the unknowable where ever player we didn't draft is a star. Like I said you just need something to complain about.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I think Mac will be a more prolific scorer than Monahan, but I think Monahan will be a more complete player, and that is not me being a homer.

I think a Toews and Tavares comparison is valid here. Tavares is an elite offensive talent and I believe he is the #3 offensive player in the game right now. Toews, is a perennial 70-80pt player, while being fantastic in all other areas of the game. Which one is better to have? It's a good debate.

Monahan is not as skilled as Toews, but I think he has the potential to be that 70-80pt guy year in and year out. He will get to play with the likes of Sven, Gaudreau, and Poirier, so the opportunity to play with quality wingers (like Toews has) will be there. I think Monahan will be very good at both ends of the ice.

Don't get me wrong, if I had the choice I'd probably pick Mac, but I don't feel the difference when you look at intangibles is that great.

 

[King In The North]

You can build around either or, imo. Mac will score a lot more, Monahan will be more complete. But I agree, Avs shouldn't have been 1st, or even 2nd overall bad.

 

[Goodlad]

http://flames.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/recap?id=2012020642
http://flames.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/recap?id=2012020609
http://flames.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/recap?id=2012020579
May want to think before you just write. After you look those over, or recall, tell me exactly... those rookie teams we played last year; they had so much to do with these victories eh? This is all from the last couple weeks of the season, where it was clear the rest of the bottom 5 teams had simply packed it in.

I'm not even attacking you. You didn't read what I wrote, and just called me out on something completely different as to what I was saying.

I am not supporting a tank; because I like to see the team I cheer for most win, but if there was ever a time to take the foot off the gas it is probably when you're near the bottom of the league, with two weeks left to play, in a lock-out shortened season.

I remember those games very clearly, and I really don't understand how you could say the Flames made a mistake there. They had already traded away their best forward and best defenceman. They were putting in several rookies every game, and even playing McDonald more.

The other factor, that seems to be glossed over at times, is that the Flames didn't even play very good hockey towards the end. That Detroit game in particular was gifted to us by horrible goaltending. We played horribly against Phoenix, but they played even worse. If I remember correctly it was after that Colorado game that Giguerre called out his teammates for giving up on the season already.

Basically the mgmt/coaches did everything possible to lose those games from my point of view, it just didn't work out that way.