AHL- Apolyton Hockey League III-- Olympic edition

[Guynemer]

You folks remember last season, during the playoffs, the Wings scored an apparent goal that was waived off because the ref had lost sight of the puck and was going to blow his whistle, and even though the goal was scored before the whistle blew, it was waived off?


The same **** happened to Michigan in the NCAA tournament last night, only this time in ****ing overtime, so the game-winner was waived off, and the Wolverines subsequently lost early in the second OT.

[Flubber]

I'm reading between the lines and somewhat putting words in his mouth, but I am summarizing Asher's statement above as saying that in a few years he expects Edmonton to have a better team then Calgary.

I hope I am still around to quote his prediction and give him the for being correct.

I hope Edmonton still has a franchise when his prediction comes true.

[action=Sparrowhawk][/action]

yes -- I also believe that the Oilers will be very good in a couple of years. They could be good quicker depending on the FA they acquire but they have dumped so many guys that they are relatively free to remake the team. But by lets say 3 years from now I expect that their current picks will be making an impact and being relatively cheap so that the Oil will have the money to surround them with some other talent

The Flames meanwhile have the bulk of their money tied up already in expensive players Iggy (7), Langkow (4+) Bourque (4) Kotalik (3) Hagman (3) Higgins (2.25) Boumeester (6.6) regehr (4) Sarich (3.7) Stajan (3.5) Staois (2.2) Kipper (6). Backlund should become a regilar NHL player but other than that, the prospect cupboard is pretty bare

I also really don't understand some of Sutters moves. With his team d playing pretty well (any problems mainly being Boumeester's failure to be an offensive presence) he trades away a good young d-man in Johnson to acquire Staois. This benches very cheap Adam Pardy who had been fine all season- Why oh why oh why ??? also Kotalik ??? Really ???

hmm so I look at the Flames and see no one who is cheap cracking into the top couple of lines (perhaps exception for Backlund) and hell they have traded away most of their their really cheap role players like Prust, Sjostrom, Lundemark etc etc. It all adds up to being not much cap space available in a year where I don't think much will be available for the Flames to chase

[notyoueither]

This is one argument where I can see both sides a bit . Last year 156 players played 80 games or more. Thats about 25% of the NHL wide playing roster size (30 teams x 20 players in any given game). IN 2007-2008 It was 152 at 80 games or more.

70 game cutoff?? 347 players last year and 336 the year before. So between injuries, healthy scratches, call ups etc etc slightly more than half of the playing roster size managed 70 games in a single year.


So Hemsky in playing 70 games or more in 4 of the last 5 years before this year would be generally in the top half of players on "games played" and 64 games played one year is not horrendous. He has not ranked up there as most durable or iron man before this year but injury prone would seem a bit harsh.

That said , a major surgery is always worrying. While in all likelihood this should end his shoulder issues, there are times when injuries come back despite a surgery.


Oh and I would call Hemsky an "almost" PPG type player

77 in 81 .95
53 in 64 .82
71 in 74 .96
66 in 72 .92
22 in 22 1.00


Either way, and howeevr you characterize him, I would want more than a Hemsky for a top pick

Trades are never equal.

One club values an asset more or less than another club does.

Sometimes it works for both teams because the present values each attaches to assets coming are high, even though the long run values of each are significantly different.

Iginla for Nieuwendyk was such a trade. Dallas gave up a future franchise player, but one that would not help them in the immediate future. Iginla scored 51 points in 1998-99. Dallas won the cup that year. Who won the trade?

There are ten teams in the bottom twelve who would not have the least interest in a 25 yo, 'near PPG player' for a pick in the top three or five. That is because those teams are not in a position to win or needing to win, right now. Next season, or the one after. However, for the few teams wanting or needing to win, now, a player of the calibre of Hemsky could well be worth the pick.

Boston is such a team, they are stacked with mature players. They are in a position to win, now. That would be the fuel for the rumours of the Oilers sending assets to Boston for the number two pick. The Oilers are selling, the Bruins are in a position for buying.

That being said, I do not think a trade involving Hemsky for the two pick is likely. Funny and true from hfboards.com:

I can see it now, Hemsky to Savard, back to Hemsky, over to Savard basically for 60 minutes a night.

[Flubber]

Trades are never equal.

Well thats debatable but I take your point that obviously EACH side must want more what it gets in return for what it gives up but they may be valuing different things. Heck in some cases a decent player is essentially given away as a team values the cap room more than the player

Trades are never equal.





There are ten teams in the bottom twelve who would not have the least interest in a 25 yo, 'near PPG player' for a pick in the top three or five. That is because those teams are not in a position to win or needing to win, right now. Next season, or the one after. However, for the few teams wanting or needing to win, now, a player of the calibre of Hemsky could well be worth the pick.

Boston is such a team, they are stacked with mature players. They are in a position to win, now. That would be the fuel for the rumours of the Oilers sending assets to Boston for the number two pick. The Oilers are selling, the Bruins are in a position for buying.

I don't dispute Boston might have some interest in players now. That being said, they haven't exactly looked like contenders so far this year. All I know is that trading top picks can be tough for GMs and I expect Boston might want more than a Hemsky

All I know for certain is that its impossoble to know what a GM will do. I follow the Flames players closer than those of any team and Sutter has mystified me at times so NOTHING will shock me

[Guynemer]

Just read an astouding (and, to me, very heartening) statistic:

The Red Wings are 14-4-4 against the teams currently ahead of them in the West.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yep, amazing the difference between them and Calgary.

Calgary's best chance now is to catch Colorado. 4 points back with 6 games to play, and Colorado has a game in hand.

Hard to believe that Calgary was tied with the Sharks and the Blackhawks at one point.

Burrows is now only 5 behind Iggy, with 64 points to 69.

[Asher]

Calgary was the highest scoring team in the West through November.

Nice of Luongo to put in a good game now that I'm in the semi-finals.

[Ben Kenobi]

Hard to believe that they've gone from there all the way to losing another division title.

Canucks only need 1 more point to clinch a playoff spot and 7 for the division.

They are now number 1 in offense, number 2 on defense (behind only the Coyotes), and number one in point differential in the west.

Calgary now has the worst offense in the west.

[Asher]

Not that it matters, but Calgary and Edmonton are actually tied for worst in the west and are behind only Boston for the league. Although this is a bit dramatic as there's a ton of teams clustered within a few goals-for scored...one or two empty netters and the ranking changes quite a bit.

I'm wondering if the Sutter "defensive system" is the #1 cause here. When the season first started and the Flames were getting scoring from all lines and were #1 in the west in scoring, Sutter reminded us that the "system" was not yet in place since it takes guys a while to adapt. Over the season, scoring started to dry up...

[Ben Kenobi]

Frankly I think Sutter is a genius beyond all reckoning.

[Flubber]

Calgary's best chance now is to catch Colorado. 4 points back with 6 games to play, and Colorado has a game in hand.
.

I wouldn't call anything the Flames have now as even a good chance. There is a website that put the Flames chances of getting to 8th at about 4 percent and that sounds about right.

But yes Colorado is the only really viable target. I predicted that a few weeks back since I was right in that Detroit has just run off in a surge of excellence.

The Flames chances are not great. being 4 points back is one thing but they also currently would lose the conceivable tie-breaks to the Avs. So here's the way the Flames CAN possibly make the playoffs. They need both

1. Flames sweep their remaining games-- Coyotes, Avs, Hawks , Sharks ,Wild , Canucks -- so the Flames get to 97 points-- ( yes mathematically the Flames can still make the playoffs with a loss or even two but the collapse then required by Colorado becomes astounding.)

AND

2. The Avs obtain less than 8 points over their 7 games remaining --


My personal view is that the Avs will play well enough in their games to render the Flames performance moot but Calgary going 6 wins against that schedule strikes me as remarkably implausible

[Flubber]

I'm wondering if the Sutter "defensive system" is the #1 cause here. When the season first started and the Flames were getting scoring from all lines and were #1 in the west in scoring, Sutter reminded us that the "system" was not yet in place since it takes guys a while to adapt. Over the season, scoring started to dry up...

I wondered about that too but

1. everything I have read, seen and heard about the Flames system involved hard puck pursuit and good positioning when they do not have the puck

2. I have NOT seen the Flames forwards doing things like hanging back super high or being super passive so I have concluded that keeping a forward BACK is NOT a system element.

3. I see the Flames shoot it in, drive the net or try to make a play at the line in about the same proportion as other years

4. Offensive contributions by d-men were low this year but coach Sutter frequently praise Giordano for his pinches and " joining in on the play" even when he didn't score. I would be shocked if those were precluded by any system.

5. I have seen many many games where the Flames out-shoot and out-chance their opponents and sicne the goalie cannot ALWAYS be the reason, I have actually concluded that many of the Flames are less skilled and accurate shooters than those of other teams. It seemed to me that chances where the other team made the great shot and scored were more frequently occasions where the Flame missed the net or something


So I don't reject the idea of system impacts but somehow it doesn't completely resonate with me. The Flames generally get their chances and in the games where they don't , its usually a situation where they simply put out a lacklustre effort.

[Ben Kenobi]

Flubber, personally I think 5-1 would be sufficient for them to make the playoffs. 4-2 might even be enough.

So they still have a chance.

[Flubber]

Flubber, personally I think 5-1 would be sufficient for them to make the playoffs. 4-2 might even be enough.

So they still have a chance.

Since they are 4 points behind Colorado, in theory they could get as little as 5 points and make it but thats not really realistic

Flames 5-1 95 points-- Colorado must be WORSE than 3-4
Flames 4-2 93 points-- Colorado must be WORSE than 2-5

Flames 3-3 91 points-- Colorado must be Worse than 1-6


I looked at a Flames 5-1 and think that needing Colorado to be 2-4-1 or worse is too much to ask or expect--hell even if the Avs go 2-3-2 the Flames are sunk.


Look at it this way-- If everything goes the Flames way for 2 games-- they win two and the Avs lose two so its PERFECT


Even then the Flames are at a subtstantial disadvantage -- tied but with one less game to play and a worse tiebreak so even then with everything happening perfectly, they do not make the playoffs unless they outpoint the Avs in 4 games compared to their 5.

[Ben Kenobi]

Everything hinges on Avs/Flames. If the Avs win, the Flames are history.