Saturday, October 22, 2011

This Post Is On Qaddafi, Not Burris.

Burris take will come Monday. If that seems a little cryptic, check out the timeline.

Right now we wanna talk about the talk about Qaddafi. Namely, that the way the despot met his end was somehow...barbaric.

First, let's start by showing what barbarism actually looks like:

Right? That's the work of the man who we are all supposed to believe deserved to be treated like a head of state, rather than the criminal, murderous despot he was.

And this argument out there that he deserved the protections of a POW is the most absurd thing we have ever heard. When Qaddafi was killed the war had been over for some time. He was not a combatant, he was an enemy of the state. Which meant he could be legally executed. That's one of the reasons NATO dropped a bomb on his car.

Ultimately though, we marvel at the absolute petty greed this man displayed. The only reason at all we can think of that would have precluded us from throwing Qaddafi to the dogs his decades of misrule had created was if he paid his way out. He apparently had $200 billion stashed away. If you don't think he was kept alive in Sirte for weeks because the powers were not negotiating with him for his money in exchange for his life, you might be a little naive. But this man, Qaddafi, who had lost his country, was hold up in a bunker in a small town, under the constant buzz of advanced warplanes, who had no hope at all for survival unless he made a deal, was so absolutely greedy that he risked his life in a stupid and desperate gamble for the border, rather than surrender, stay alive, but lose the money he looted from Libya.

It's absolutely insane to us that there is any level of...sympathy may be the wrong word, but concern over this worm-dictators death. Honestly, pick up a fucking history book: people like Qaddafi have been dying like Qaddafi did for a thousand years. What the U.N. calls a warcrime, we call the universes preferred method of poetic justice.

Sic Semper Tyrannis.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Hey, The Flames Have Less Points Than The Islanders...

With one more game played.

We bring this up because it really illustrates that this team has really sound, really intelligent people working in it's front office. And really, why should the Calgary Flame front office feel bad about not being as good at building a team as Garth Snow is? Garth Snow is really, really, smart, after all.

Furthermore, I think Peter Loubardias Ken King should be fired.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Avenge Matt Stajan

Well, Staal will not be in the lineup. So who, Calgary Flames fan, should the Flames make a target? Hmm...who, oh who, on the Rangers could possibly satisfy the blood lust?

Brad Richards? He chose the Rangers over the Flames little marketing gimmick. Do you think rubbing his face into the boards a few times will make it up to Stajan? Probably not, it seems to be lacking some sizzle.

Should the team target former Flame and general winner-at-life Brandon Prust? Perish the thought, Dombeer-aholics. That boy has super models to get too. Also, we are pretty sure Prust could beat up every single player on the Flames roster, so...

Shit, we know who they should destroy physically in retribution for Staal destroying Stajan! Tim Erixon! You know, the kid Darryl drafted even though he was told he wasn't going to sign. The kid left not signed for at least a year after getting drafted, the kid who punked the Flames by orchestrating his own trade to the New York Rangers. You know that guy?

We wonder if Leblond knows Tim Erixon? We do hope Coach Sutter does everything in his power to get the two an introduction.

Otherwise, J Blow could always decide to do something to actually earn the 'A' on his chest and crush a Ranger, but that is probably as likely as an 'Occupy Wall Street' protester being able to give you a coherent economic policy prescription.

Flames need this win. Their next game is against the Preds in an afternoon tilt, so you can already chalk that 'L' up on the board. If the Flames lose this game, they are back into 'losing streak' mode (hey we have something in common with the team!), which would give them several losing streaks against no win streaks. Already, in like game six.

Bodog has the Flames favoured to win. The Rangers are in the midst of a seven game road trip that started off on in the old world. They have lost to every team they have played this year except the Canucks, who they just destroyed.

If you were betting the house, we'd probably bet the Rangers. Flames barely beat the Oilers last time out, and King Henry is just a tad bit better than Dubnyk. But because we have our coke debts paid in full and do not need to wager the house, we will put our meagre $20 on the Flames to win.

Might as well give this team a chance to prove itself, at least until game 20.

Furthermore, we think we can't demand a pink slip for Rob Kerr after we got the scalp of Loubardias. It would make us look miserably greedy. Touche, Mr. King. Touche.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011


Shit son. We were still basking in the light of the win over the Oilers. And you fuckers couldn't even let us do that. We (the collective noise makers in the Flamedom) have to talk about Rene Bourque maybe, quite possibly, if Murray Edwards CNR continues to be valued at half of what it was a year ago-ly, getting traded.

Many people are going to be focused on what the team gets back in return, or what the rumours are, and all that. Which is fine; We are interested in something else.

The message going into the season, the official, from-the-GM's-mouth message was that the Calgary Flames are going to make the playoffs. In fact junk was talked about challenging for the division, and being a high seeded playoff team.

Now since that message was delivered at the start of the season, we have seen the following stories: Stajan, Hagman, Jokinen, and Moss are on the trade block, and Rene Bourque is on the trade block.

These two messages seem to be in conflict with each other, unless of course Jay Feaster thinks he can trade those players for players of better calibre in the short term, which is doubtful. So are the Flames trying to compete this year, or are they shedding salary?

We have no clue, but the evidence we have up to this point suggests that the latter option may be correct. With Jay Feaster officially installed as the GM, his major moves trade-wise have been not about adding players who are better than the players being traded away in the short term, but about adding players who are cheaper than the players who are being traded away.

Regehr was traded for what might amount to be less of a return than what Darryl acquired for Dion; What Feaster didn't acquire in talent, however, he acquired in budget room. Feaster saved $2.77 million dollars with that move.

Further savings were acquired when he traded a 2nd round pick to Sabres to have them take on Kotalik's contract. He saved $3 million dollars with that move.

Feaster would then trade Langkow to the Coyotes for Stempniak. Now this move has enough area in it for reasonable people to find grounds for debate. It isn't unreasonable to see this move as improving the team in the short and long term. We disagree, because it weakened a weak roster spot  (centre), added to the teams log-jam at the wings, and becuase over the course of the season we think Langkow adds more value to a team than Stempniak. But Langkow is old, we can see the other side of the coin. However, the point remains, Langkow was traded for Stempniak, and the club saved $2.6 million dollars by doing so.

The optics going into the season, it can be argued, would seem to paint the club as one that was more interested in shedding salary than acquiring talent when it came to trading players off it's own roster. It has saved ~$8.6 million this year (and $12.62 million over all) with these trades. It has not made itself more competitive.

Regehr appears to be better than Butler (limited sample size alert). At behindthenet they have a stat, Goals Against When You Are Off The Ice Per 60 Minutes TOI, which would seem to be one that would be useful if applied to Dmen (we compare it to the goals against when dude is on the ice per 60, obviously):

So we don't really see how it can be argued that the move was made because of anything other than salary cap relief. The Kotalik deal was obviously done for cap relief so there is no need to do anything on that one, and due to Langkow missing a year from injury, it is probably to early to tell who is the better player. At this point, Stempniak has no goals, and Langkow has one.

What is the point of all this? Well, we started talking about the message the team was sending: the official one was that this was a year where we were going to compete for a playoff spot at a minimum, but the message we have been receiving from the clubs actions suggest that it is more interested in shedding salary than acquiring talent, which doesn't seem consistent with trying to win.

So what is going on?

Did Jay Feaster make all that noise about making the playoffs because he was trying to market the team? Was he trying to sell tickets?

We would doubt this, but that could be hubris. We have seen tickets on StubHub going for less than their face value (If that link doesn't work, it was to two tickets in section 223 for $45 a piece to the Ranger game.). Maybe they are indeed worried about fans showing up; we did notice they didn't tell us what the season ticket renewal rate was this year.

Maybe. Who knows. Could it be anything else? Dreger suggested that perhaps this was Feasters attempt to instill some sort of fear in the locker room, that this was him warning of a shake up if things don't improve. That Feaster is in fact serious when he says we are attempting to get into the playoffs this year, as opposed to treading water until next years free agency period. But does that make any sense? It's only game 5 of the year, and while the teams play so far has raised question marks, would the GM be ready to jettison the parts he made a conscience choice to keep over the offseason this early into the season?

offseason, we would think. Maybe Feaster is afraid that this teams chances to make the playoffs are thin, and because he put his neck out, he is panicking. But if he didn't believe in the team, why would he guarantee a playoff spot in the first place?

Maybe Murray Edwards just wants to clear the decks before next year, and save some salary. This seems plausible, but again, if that is the case, why would Feaster have gone out and said what he said about the playoffs?

Where there is smoke, there is often flames, so maybe the team does indeed have about six players on the trade block, and is looking to unwind some of it's long term commitments. Frankly, we wouldn't even be mad if that was the case, we would probably endorse it. But, again, then why all the talk about making the playoffs?

So Dregers explanation is probably the best one: Feaster has little intention of trading Bourque, and is simply trying to spook some better performance into the team. The incongruousness of the message is odd, though. Maybe it will be an interesting season, after all.

For the record, we really don't like this 'Bourque doesn't give a shit' stuff that is out there, the 'He needs motivation and then he would score 100 goals' stuff.

Here is what we think of Bourque, and his perception amongst the people. One, Bourque is very, very good at hockey. Two, he is so good it looks like he isn't trying. We try to do things on the ice that Bourque does, and we (the mortal man) have to try to do it. So when we see Bourque doesn't, we assume he is lazy or something. No, he is just gifted and playing within a system.

We think Rene is made of glass, and we think Rene knows he is made of glass. You want to know why he doesn't engage physically, it's because (we think) he doesn't want to risk getting injured again, as he is a valuable presence in the line up. Also, remember, these guys are human. Bourque makes a lot of money, he probably feels duty bound to be in the line up, so he isn't going to do things that might get him hurt. We think a lot of people see that and think he isn't engaged, or doesn't care, or is a pussy, when it really is none of those. He just wants to remain healthy, and because he has been injured so many times in his career, he is super sensitive to it.

Now, we can see why an organization would want to trade a guy who plays carefully, especially one who is injury prone and has a contract that extends until 2016. But we think this slander that Bourque is a soft pussy who doesn't care is exactly that, a slander.

Furthermore, I think Peter Loubardias Ken King should be fired.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Screw You RNH

So we were all prepared to walk into here today and drop some wacky on your asses. We were going to write a letter from RNH to his agent, talking about how the Oilers suck and he wants to go home. Like a little boy goes to camp and finds out nobody likes him because he has seborrheic dermatitis and mommy he just wants to go home. Cool.

And then we go look at the stats page for the Coilers, and holy fucking shit RNH has four goals already. Four goals in four games. A letter writer, he would not be.

So fuck you, RNH. What the fuck are we going to write about now?

Scoring depth? Who wants to talk about scoring depth?

The Oilers have scored eight goals in four games. Four Oilers have goals. The Flames have scored 11 goals in four games, but have received contributions from seven players.

Very generally, we think that it shows that Flames have more depth. That isn't a big shocker to anybody, or we don't think it should be, but over the course of 82 it will be a big thing. Of course, this is game 5, so the Oilers can still get by living with one line.

RNH is shooting 40%. He is bound for a let down. Who is to say it doesn't come against us? At the same time, Hall is shooting 6%. Let's not have him break out on us, eh Flames?

Sticking with stats, moseyed on over to the Flames website and was greeted with absolute horror. Horror!

The Flames have two players on the roster, just fucking two, who are plus players. Two! And you would never believe us if we told you who they were...

NIK 'PASSING'S FOR PUSSY'S' HAGMAN and ANTON 'CAN'T BE TRADED AT THE DEADLINE' BABCHUK. And Badsuck has been benched already, so he probably would be a minus if he had played the same amount of games as the rest of the guys.

You might give weight to the plus/minus stat or you may not. We think when everybody on the roster has a minus, that is indicative of the suckification process gaining speed.

A shutout of the Oilers, mixed in with Iggy waking up and continued good play of the second line that is better than your teams second line, everybody on the roster may wake up with a plus. We will definitely be drinking to that.

This is the start of the six game home stand. Every game may matter, but these six matter a lot. They play the Oilers, the Rangers, the Preds, the Avs, the Blues, and the Canucks. This little series will tell us a lot about the team, we think. If this team wants to be a playoff one...actually scratch that, if this team wants the fans to believe that it is a playoff calibre one, it had at a minimum better beat the Oiler, the Rangers, and the Avs. If it wants the fans to really start to get their juices going, they are going to have to beat the Preds and the Blues. If they want the fans to start ejaculating down the Red Mile, they beat all those teams, and then beat the Canucks as well.

So we wait, and we watch the home stand, and then we probably have a good picture of where the team will be.

Furthermore, I think someone should buy Rob Kerr a decent wig to wear while he is on TV with Charlie Simmer.

Monday, October 17, 2011

The Birth Of A Hemorrhoid

You know those pictures that are on the flanks of the Calgary Flames website?

J Blow has one. It's pretty good.

This is the face Bouwmeester makes when he is pretending to be a meanie-head (
Mix in a laxative, bro. Also a body check.

The Garrioch article creating some buzz.

This could be something, who knows, but to us it seems pretty meh inducing. The article says that Feaster wants to trade players, the players being Joker, Stajan, Hagman, & Moss. (Moss is a defenseman in the article, which is cute.)

It's meh inducing because all of those players, besides Stajan, are on the last year of a contract. If the team doesn't have a real good chance of doing anything this year, it makes sense to look to move them for some assets. Stajan is a puke inducing pussy, so that one makes sense as well.

What is a little interesting is that Feaster told everyone who would listen, chest puffed out and all that, that his club was going to make the playoffs as a high seed, and challenge for the division. We don't see how this club does that if it trades off Joker, Stajan, Hagman & Moss. Regardless of how you feel about those players, they are all NHLers, can at least play 10 minutes a night, and therefore losing them from the roster is going to make the team less competitive.

Making the team less competitive seems to jar against the mission goal of making the playoffs (which even comes with the Feaster guarantee).

It seems odd. Why would Feaster be leaking this type of stuff four games into the season? Is he just too loud (ie he is speaking to people he shouldn't be?) or is Garrioch just trying to make copy?

The last thought we have on it, if it is indeed true, means that despite what Feaster says, if the team is outside the playoff hunt, he may embrace reality, his own guarantee be damned, and trade assets we wouldn't need. Which would be very interesting. Time will tell, we guess.

***Big Fat Update***

Book Of Loob hit this already. His has the words "this toe with eyes" when referring to Garrioch. It's pretty good.

Also, Kent's talking about how Coach Junior is being, well, Coach Junior.

Furthermore, I think the Goal Song should be fired.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Iggy -2 Dion +3

Fuck. You know what? Fuck it.

Be better, Calgary.

That's it, that's all. It isn't hard. There is no magic to this.

From the Godfathers work at FN: Scoring Chance Porn!


First Line: +for -against

Tanguay: +6 -7 (15:54 TOI)
Moss: +4  -7 (14:10)
Elvis: +7 -9 (17:26)

Overall:  -6

Second Line:

Glencross: +7 -1 (12:42)
Stempniak: +7 -1 (13:51)

Overall: +18

What the fuck is that? Phil Kessel, Bozak and Lupul beat the shit out of a line with a Hall of Fame RW on it, and a skilled francophone LW. We don't care who the centre is.

Now, the ~5 minutes of ice time that Iggy has over the rest of the field isn't nothing, but he has to be better. He did get 4 shots on goal; the PP was terrible. Who knows.

If you want our two cents, it's the scheme. Jarome should never touch the puck (unless he is just being used as a pass outlet) until he is in the offensive zone. What is this shit where he carries the puck across the blueline? It's stupid. Even if he gets the puck over, you are then asking him to either pass the puck to a teammate and get open for a shot, or to beat the defense himself and then beat the goalie. If the goal is the former, why the fuck are you asking Iggy to make a pass when you have Tanguay on that line who is paid to pass the puck?

Let the centre carry the puck across the blueline. If that means the Flames have to change the way they leave their zone, so be it. Centre should be taking the puck in, or Tanguay should, but the whoever it is, the whole point should be to get the puck to Jarome in a spot Jarome has a high scoring percentage from. If that means the coach is going to have to implement some discipline on the team when it comes to offense, so be it.

The problem with that strategy, though, is it asks a lot from the centre. So either they put Joker on the top line and try it yet again, which makes us all cringe, or they go out and get a more skilled guy (unless you think Morrison is the answer, of course). Good luck with the latter option, and there is probably no appetite for the former.

Jarome is going to have to play better, then. Four games and one point is not going to cut it (slow starter or not) on a team built around his scoring.

Furthermore, I think the Goal Song should be fired.