Monday, April 4, 2011

This Post Is Mailed In


Look, we aren't going to lie: we didn't watch the game yesterday. Not one single, solitary minute of it. We watched WrestleMania and baseball instead. So we could write about how the Flames beat a garbage team by a single goal, and it apparently took a vintage effort out of Kipper to get it done, but why? It would be bluster and air. If you still believe in this team and are investing your time in it, power to you. If the team makes the playoffs, boy will our faces be red.

Anyways, the picture is what we scribble down before we make a post. It's brainstorming. Something from this list will be talked about on this site this week, we think. In a real post, not a mailed in one like this one.

Furthermore, I think Peter Loubardias should be fired.

6 comments:

  1. My unformed opinion on Jarome: The team doesn't owe him anything. We paid him his money, he is under contract 2013.

    We don't need to trade him because we owe him the chance to win a Cup. We don't. The team needs to trade Jarome if another team offers us a deal we can't say no to, period. Trading Jarome shouldn't be ruled out, but it should only be done for appropriate return.

    I would trade JBlow first, before Kipper, Reggie, or Jarome, I tell you that much, though. JBlow can be replace by a 3-4 million dollar defenceman, pay Kotalik and Hagman to play in Europe, sign Brad Richards to play with Jarome, Bourque and whoever makes an ok 2nd line, Jackman and Tommy K make a good 3rd line, cheapies on the 4th. Reggie, Gio, free agent and Sarich make a faulty blueline, but you could live with that, I think. Kipper is a coin flip, but I suspect the team keeps him.

    So yeah, Im for adding Brad Richards, trading JBlow, keeping Jarome, and see what happens. There is no rush to trade Jarome. If we go with signing Richards and we miss the playoffs again, Jarome is still under contract and could still be traded.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "We watched WrestleMania..."
    No review? WTF DB? I give WM a solid B

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had a discussion with a friend (and fellow flames fan) and I asked, "Who, on this team, would you REALLY be heartbroken if they were traded?"

    We both agreed the answer was "no one"

    Most of the flames are only "good as far as flames players go," i.e. when compared to others who play their position across the league, there are better. The rest are "not worth their salary" regardless if they are good players or not.

    We tend to overvalue our own players, IMHO. This love-in most fans have with Regehr and the idea of him being the best trade bait doesn't pass this sniff test with me. I think his value on THIS team is high; around the league, I doubt the opinion of him is anywhere near the same level.

    This is why I advocate trading Leland Irving (I wrote P.Stein an email to that effect, and while he read it on the air, he got noticeable upset afterwards.)

    If you ask me, Karlsson has shown he can pay in the NHL, to the point that his (usually unplanned) insertion into games has generally turned the complexion of the contest around 180 degrees (whether the Flames end up winning or not). This is more than I can say for the revolving-door that is the position of backup goalie for the Calgary flames since the cup run (save for, maybe Cujo that one game).

    So, if Leland Irving is so great:
    1) Why has Abbotsford managed to still suck so badly this season, when he is supposedly at his best ever?
    2) Why did it take him so long to get up to par? We could have used a serviceable backup for a long time now, but he was never "ready"
    3) Does his performance sincerely legitimize letting Karlsson walk? We could still probably re-sign him for cheap, if nothing else.
    4) Why not put him up for trade? If Irving is anywhere near as great as the Flames brass and rights-holders have lead us to believe, surely SOMEone in this 30-team league would be willing to shell out for him.

    Trading this supposedly valuable asset at the height of his performace would get us the best return. Which is great for a team that SHOULD be looking to rebuild (even if it turns out to be a slow, phased rebuild over the next 5 years). But I get the feeling this is all smoke and mirrors; the organization's commitment to their first-rounder is like throwing good money after bad.

    This is, after all a business. It's also not intramurals. Sticking around a long time and toiling away in the minors should not be a determining factor on whether to bump a player up to the big club or to trade them off. As my father said on the subject, "the guy's we've brought up to this point have been spare parts, at best." Also, there was Dustin Boyd... Why should we expect Irving to be any better than the average flames farm graduate?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I had a discussion with a friend (and fellow flames fan) and I asked, "Who, on this team, would you REALLY be heartbroken if they were traded?"

    We both agreed the answer was "no one"

    Most of the flames are only "good as far as flames players go," i.e. when compared to others who play their position across the league, there are better. The rest are "not worth their salary" regardless if they are good players or not.

    We tend to overvalue our own players, IMHO. This love-in most fans have with Regehr and the idea of him being the best trade bait doesn't pass this sniff test with me. I think his value on THIS team is high; around the league, I doubt the opinion of him is anywhere near the same level.

    This is why I advocate trading Leland Irving (I wrote P.Stein an email to that effect, and while he read it on the air, he got noticeable upset afterwards.)

    If you ask me, Karlsson has shown he can pay in the NHL, to the point that his (usually unplanned) insertion into games has generally turned the complexion of the contest around 180 degrees (whether the Flames end up winning or not). This is more than I can say for the revolving-door that is the position of backup goalie for the Calgary flames since the cup run (save for, maybe Cujo that one game).

    So, if Leland Irving is so great:
    1) Why has Abbotsford managed to still suck so badly this season, when he is supposedly at his best ever?
    2) Why did it take him so long to get up to par? We could have used a serviceable backup for a long time now, but he was never "ready"
    3) Does his performance sincerely legitimize letting Karlsson walk? We could still probably re-sign him for cheap, if nothing else.
    4) Why not put him up for trade? If Irving is anywhere near as great as the Flames brass and rights-holders have lead us to believe, surely SOMEone in this 30-team league would be willing to shell out for him.

    Trading this supposedly valuable asset at the height of his performace would get us the best return. Which is great for a team that SHOULD be looking to rebuild (even if it turns out to be a slow, phased rebuild over the next 5 years). But I get the feeling this is all smoke and mirrors; the organization's commitment to their first-rounder is like throwing good money after bad.

    This is, after all a business. It's also not intramurals. Sticking around a long time and toiling away in the minors should not be a determining factor on whether to bump a player up to the big club or to trade them off. As my father said on the subject, "the guy's we've brought up to this point have been spare parts, at best." Also, there was Dustin Boyd... Why should we expect Irving to be any better than the average flames farm graduate?

    ReplyDelete
  5. P.S. As of today, the flames need to get twice as many points as the blackhawks, in half as many games, in order to squeak into the playoffs.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wrestlemania sucked and I will never be purchasing another one. McMahon needs to hire new writers, and he can start by sending me an email.

    ReplyDelete