cross16
-
Posts
29,746 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
488
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by cross16
-
I think its pretty fair to say that if BT doesn't sign engelland the flames don't make the playoffs so I dont' think is fair to call that a bad signing at all. i get most fans dont like him and i get the "advanced stats" arn't in his favor but perosnally i like him and think he is a very good fit here. yes his AAV is a bit too high but thats FA, and the fact is the Flames need top 6 NHL dman which I think englelland clealry is. Raymond, i liked the player, didn't like the term and still don't like the term. i get why they signed him but i don't get the 3rd year. Could have stomached 2 years but the 3rd was tough. Not a great signing by BT but not an awful one teither. I like the Bolig trade personally. wish they gave up a 4th instead of a 3rd and i thought the 3rd price tag was a tad too high bu i also like what he brought, and continues to bring, to a young team. Treliving IMO has yet to really make a glaring mistake. he's made little ones here and there that "Might" hurt the club in 2-3 years time but nothing super glaring which is what i like about him. sure we can argue he overpaid for someone here, or gave too much term there, but i don't think there is a big red X marking any of his transactions so far.
-
No GM is perfect, and if Treliving doesn't sign Engelland the Flames don't make the playoffs so I fail to see how that was a bad move. He's still very solid depth for the Flames. Bolig was a good acquisition too and I fimarly believe his experience with winning helped this team. Yes the Raymond deal sucks but i'll give him a past because not many banked on Gaudreau having the season he did, didn't bank on 16 goals from Bouma and Ferland being ready to quickly. No GM bats 1000 they all make mistakes.
-
I like the deal. I'm not sure a trade is coming because I'm not seeing a team that would want a 4.5 mill cap hit in net anymore. I think the plan is to let them battle it out because I think they were expecting one of Hiller/Ramo to really grab the job last year and neither did so I think this year they want one of the three to grab it. I'm not worried about Ortio and waivers. Look at all the goalie movement this offseason and tell me who needs a goalie that bad anymore? the thing with Ortio and waivers that's key to remember is if you are going to claim a player on waivers he needs to stay on your NHL team because if you grab him and want to send him down he gets offered back to the original club first. NHL teams are filling that need so I don't think Ortio is going to interest a lot of teams on waivers and I think would clear.
-
Starter options are dwindling. I think the only teams that could maybe look for a starter, or someone to play significant games other than Calgary would be: Carolina - Cam Ward aging Maybe Philly to play alongside Mason but cap is an issue for them Everyone else looks pretty set in net so if Ramo wants to play in the NHL coming back to Calgary is likely his best shot.
-
I like the idea of adding a goalie option, especially when it looks pretty clear that Ramo is moving on, but not for 2 2nds. I like the idea of someone like Michael Neuvrith in FA or Martin Jones via trade, pending asking price isnt' too crazy, someone who can come in here and compete for a job but not necessarily carry the goalie of the future title. I think the Flames have the goalie of their future in one of Ortio, Gilles, Macdonald but its not just clear which one of those it is yet. With Hiller having only 1 year on his deal and the fact that I don't think he even played that great last year I think it makes sense to solidify goaltending futher. Especially when you have no guarantees Ortio is even ready.
-
I really hope that's not the Flames either. 2 2nd round picks is too much for a backup goalie who at soon to be 28 years old has limited "long term" potential anyway.
-
I've always felt that Ramo is heading to July 1 regardless of what the Flames offer, unless they overpay and I would expect the Flames and Ramo to be negotiating. I don't think its a case at all of not having faith in Ortio or Hiller I think its simple asset management. Hiller has a 1 year deal and if they don't re sign Ramo then next off season your are left with Ortio and maybe Gilles as your under contrat goalie options? not a good place to be in. Regardless of negotiations I expect Ramo to hit free agency just because I think he wants to see if there are teams out there that view him as a starter and will give him that chance. I think the Flames will make their best offer, let him go to July 1 and then see if he comes back. That's why I think they are checking in on available goalies.
-
Never a good idea to pay a guy more then you think he is worth just because you have the cap room. Flames are going to be much shorter on cap room next offseason when Giordano, Gaudrea and Monahan all get new deals so you have to be very careful right now with who you commit money to. Flames need to set a price on Ramo they feel is fair and of he agrees great and it not let him go see if he can get it elsewhere. I'd like to have Ramo but only at a certain price which to me is 3.5 or less on a 3 year deal or less.
-
Benning in Vancovuer has already come out and said they are trading a goalie and Miller isn't one of them so one of Lack or Markstrom is on the move. Leafs filled for arbitration on Bernier and Duhatschek said today he's heard Reimer is available and they are shopping him. Its a saturated goalie market but in regards to Ramo I think he will have more interst then you think especially is you believe th price tag. If its true that the Oilers have offered a first for Talbot and the Sens want a top 6 and a pick for Lehner I think Ramos value goes up because all he costs is salary. I could easily see teams look there first if these prices don't come up because at those prices you better be darn sure you are acquiring a future star. Only way I see Ramo overseas if the KHL comes calling again and is willing to pay top dollar to get him back because I still think he will generate interest in the 3 or so mill year range. Tehre are enough teams that need goalies, maybe not to start but need options at the goalie spot to keep Ramo employed.
-
I mentioned somewhere else the potential of taking Legwand from the Sens to try and get a better deal on a different player so if it means the Flames take Lehner and Legwand and lower the price I'm all for it. The Flames could easily eat 1 year at 3.5 on Legwand even if they have to sit him up the press box most of the time. I too prefer Lehner over Talbot and personally I don't see the huge value in Talbot. I think Talbot is the new Lindback, a backup goalie on one of the top defensive teams in the league that people assume will only get better as a starter and I'm not so sure. I would go after Lehner too but your right if the Oilers are indeed offering their first rounder and that's where the goalie market is I'm out. I'd much rather keep HIller/Orito or sign someone like Neuvirth than spend a first round pick on a goalie. I don't even want to move one of our seconds for a goalie.
-
I think a second is a bit rich for me. I'm not sure I see a legit starter in Lehner and rather he looks like more of a stop gap so for me given that fact and the depth of the draft I'd rather not trade a 2nd. The Flames have enough depth up front, potential log jam even, that I think makes it easy to look at trading a roster player plus a mid round pick. Maybe Jooris and a 3rd or Drew Shore and a 4th is something I would prefer over a straight second. If Ramo prices himself out of the Flames range and option I would look at is Michael Neuvirth. I think by now the idea of Neuvirth being a starter in the NHL is done but I think he's still an option to be part of a rotation. I can't see him being overly expensive either so maybe you can get him on a shorter team deal to provide some depth and another option in net. Obviously Ramo would be my priority but that depends on contract.
-
That's correct. If a team claims a player on waivers before they could try and send that player down or trade them they have to be offered back to the original teams. Typically you only claim a player on waivers if you intend on him being on your active roster its not a good process for trying to stock talent which is why I agree that the odds of Ortio getting claimed are quite small because I can't see a team needing a goalie at that point in the season enough to put in a claim. Not very likely you go into a season with such an unsettled goalie situation so baring a big injury I just don't see a team needing a goalie bad enough.
-
I think this is a key issue that is not being discussed enough. IMO, reading between the lines I personally don't think that either Ramo or hiller really enjoyed the two goalie system and honestly almost goalies won't. Goalies typically want to be the guy and have the coach believe in them as the guy and that won't happen in calgary if Ramo and hiller are here. It wouldn't shock me if Ramo went to UFA to were what wa out the. Obviously if teams are calling and offering the same situation and money as calgary then calgary becomes more attractive but if a team calls him up and wants to offer him a similar deal to what hiller got to be a starter I think he would walk in a second.
-
I agree Jtech. Honestly if you got a 4th round pick for hiller I'd actually be impressed and I think if he were to be dealt that would be a reasonable return to expect. A 3rd isn't out of the question but the only reason I think Dubnyk got a 3rd was the wild became a bit desperate to address their goaltending. You don't have that same desperation in the offseason. The reality is that hiller is an older and average staring goalie with one year on his deal. If you are trading for him you arnt trading for him to be the guy you a trading for him to be part of a short term solution and unfortunately right now on the market ther are other short term solutions that don't cost anything. I think moving hiller may be difficult so while I personally would rather have Ramo I think the flames may get forced into keeping hiller and losing Ramo. I'm not sure I see this two goalie system with Ramo and hiller working again for another season based on what both have said post season. They both toed the party line for the most part but IMO reading between the lines it was no ideal for either.
-
Wotherspoon just needs to come into a camp healthy and have a chance to take a job. I thought he was ok in the playoffs, as good as Schlemko, Potter, Diaz for sure, but he needs to stay healthy. I think every year since he has been drafted he seems to have issues, mainly shoulders if I recall correctly, that seem to derail his offseason. Hopefully he can finally get healthy and work out strong in the offseason and come in ready to take a job but I agree at this point you can't hand him anything he needs to prove it. I am however, willing to give him a bit of a pass due to injury issues. Personally, pass on Beauchemin. 35 years old so risky on a multi year deal and I wasn't overly impressed with him during the Ducks series. Still solid but nothing special anymore like he use to be and I don't think signing a guy in that situation is worth it just to have him as a depth d or on the 3rd pairing and you will still likely need to pay him 3 mill plus. Personally I'm not impressed but much on the FA market when it comes to defence. They've got some internal options that can battle and create depth and outside of maybe a Bartowski, I think I would look to the trade market. Too many older dman who I think are going to be too expensive just to add a bit of a depth. I'd rather address depth in the age bracket of 25-30 via trade then sign someone 30plus on a short term deal.
-
Wow I think you are all seriously underrating Wideman and quite frankly being pretty harsh. I thougth Wideman had a terrific season and I strongly disagree using terms like "losing a step" or "liability defensivly" when it comes to Wideman. I don't think he has lost a step at all, does he make glaring mistakes in his own end sure that's the type of dman he is but I think overall he was still quite solid defensivly nor do I think Russell covered up for him. I think the two of them just complimented each other very well and played off each others strengths and weakness. Wideman is going to go for a bigger play, in all areas, and its going to cost him from time to time and Russell was there to cover him just like Russell is most of the time too safe and won't make a play that Wideman can make. Pairing had great synergy and both played off each other and personally I thought Wideman had a better year then Russell. Now having said that given his age, his contract and his history of having one good year to one bad year, I am very open to a trade but only the right now and I don't see it happening. Wideman's contract is decent value, but with the cap not going up that much and lots of teams closer to the top I think you are going to have a very hard time moving that contract and getting any value.
-
I"m not suggesting at all that Hudler will drop off once he is signed. I don't really questions Hudler's motivation to be honest because he proved here when times were not very good that he still showed up motivated and ready to go it is not a questions of motivation. it's a question of what is it going to take to sign him and how smart it is. For example, Mike Cammalleri was coming off a not very impressive year at the age of 32 (just like Hudler will be next year) and he got 5 year 25 million dollar deal. If its going to take a 5 year deal and probably close to 6 (when you consider Hudler's numbers to Cammy's) then I don't think that is smart at all. For me, I'm not even sure its smart to go to 4 years because at 4 years Hudler is probably worth in the 5.5 -6 mill range and at 35/26 years old I really have a hard time seeing Hudler being worth more then 5. Absolutly TD if you can get Hudler for 3 years go for it and I'd even be prepared to give a little extra $ on the AAV to get that done but I think 3 years is the max I'm prepared to give and Hudler and camp may want more and that would be fine if they did. The debate for me has nothing to do with Hudler as a person it comes down to the fit within your cap and how much Hudler is worth. I don't think Hudler is the type of player you keep at all costs is I guess what I'm saying. That is reverserved for your Gios, Monahan, likely Gaudreau at this point, and hopefully Bennett. Hudler you retain at the right price and right contract only and if it exceeds your number you have to look at trading him. Of course you won't trade him for an upgrade, not likely anyway, but you could trade him and fill other holes on the roster.
-
While the word overachieving may be a bit strong I think there is certainly good reason to believe this is the peak of both Hudler and Wideman and a season we may not see again. Hudler I would say has a high chance to repeat because he has chemistry with Gaudreau and Monahan but I personally don't consider Hudler a PPG, or very close it, player so in that way you could make the case he overachieved this season but I think his mean or his norm is as a good 2nd line player in the 55-66 point range. The bigger question with Hudler is contract for me and less about whether or not you believed he overachieved or what type of player he is. One year before UFA and heading towards potentially a big pay day. Flames and Treliving have to debate whether or not its going to be worth it to pay Hudler what he could potentially be looking for on the open market. I'm not saying he needs to go, but if he starts asking for over 3 years at an AAV of 5.5 or more I think you have to really consider if that is a smart move for the club. I know he is a good leader and has been great with the kids but I'm not sure locking up a 32 year old Hudler till he is 36 or more at big money is a wise investment for the Flames. That's the debate I'm having internally and based on that decision maybe you move him this offseason if you get the right return.
-
I don't think you need to accelerate the rebuild, the rebuild is done this is about building. Rebuilding to me means you are trading away assets, clearing cap room and trading core pieces and all that has been done. What more pieces are on the club that need to be dealt away? Sure you may not like the contracts of Engelland, Smid, Raymond, but you are not "rebuilding" just because you have a few contracts you don't like. This teams has key young players in good situations, has identified a good chunk of what could be a core moving forward, and has cap space to lock up that core so IMO the Flames are no longer rebuilding, they are building and in order to build you may have to make trades to improve the roster. I'm not saying sell the farm out to a trade and overpay, far from that. You still need to be smart but I also really disagree with the notion that the Flames should sit on their hands and let the "rebuild" continue because IMO the rebuild is over especially on the blueline. I'd be more inclined to agree that the rebuild was ongoing if they were waiting for top prospects on the blueline but they aren't. The top prospects are already here and contributing so you are drafting to keep the cupboard stocked, not re stock them.
-
I think you have to strike a balance because while I like the current skating ability of the Flames back end I think their lack of size really hurt them in the Ducks series. Where I do agree with JTech is gone are the days of the big physical/stay at home dman that can just skate OK but you want the size and physicality they bring. Those players are dead, IMO at least, but I don't think the concept of size is dead. The Flames struggle a lot with bigger teams getting in on them in the forecheck and they basically have to collapse to the net and try and block shots to keep the pucks away from the net. They can't really engage forecheckers and stop the cycle and turn it around so that why I don't agree size is not longer important and I think if the Flames D core had a bit more grit to it this series would have been different. While I know we marvel at the Flames shot blocking ability and while I don't want to take away from the courage and tenacity it takes to block a shot, the reality is IMO you can't as a team operate that way all the time and have success. Blocking that many shots means you don't have the puck enough so I want guys that can help me get the puck and get out of my own end. That's where you need the mix of size and skating ability. I think this Flames D is good enough to try and chase the right type of player instead of just signing anyone to just fill a need. Honestly save for a player that may add some NHL/AHL depth I don't see anyone on the free agent market I have interest in. I'd rather return the Flames current blueline, maybe get Schlemko back if the deal is fair, and let him battle it out with the likes of Morrisey, Wotherspoon, Ramage etc for the last spot. Then if a trade open up you can take it, but I don't see free agency as a good tool for improving the defence this offseason.
-
I personally would have gone with Ramo but I understand the decision. I just personally prefer Ramo but I would suspect there will be a short leash given
-
Personally I still prefer Ramo over Hiller. Outside of Ramos penchant for starting the season slow I think once he gets going he is the better goalie. Hiller has issues handling the puck and letting in soft goals at bad times that puts him a notch below in my view. Like I said I get Ramo starts slow but once he gets gojng he is a solid goalie. That being said I am high on Ortio and Gilles and think Hiller has stepped up in the playoffs. What makes the most amount of sense to me I'm both the short and long term is letting Ramo walk and allowin Hiller to split with ortio next year.
-
Reto Berra who had to be sent to the AHL because he was playing so poorly was better than Ramo or as good as Hiller this year? OK........ Sorry JJ, but this is way out there even for you.
-
With basically the entire D under contract for next season I don't think you'll see them go out and get a pairing for Schlemko. If they re sign him, and keep in mind they need to make a deciscion on Wotherspoon sooner rather then later IMO, I think all signs would point to an Engelland - Schlemko 3rd pairing and that would be something I'm completely comfortable with, pending the financials of course.
-
I agree on the D, its adequate but not outstanding and if there was the right upgrade available I deifnetly would not say no to it. am I going out and looking for an upgrade, not necessarily, but I'm not locking in this top 4 and saying we can't upgrade. I view the Flames defence as a playoff caliber defence but not necessarily a cup winning defence so I still think there are improvements you can make. Also have to keep in mind, you had basically career seasons from Wideman - Russell do you get that again? Russell is a pending UFA do you pay to keep him? Gio is a FA next year and both Gio and Wideman are north of 30. Lots of considerations so I don't agree that D is locked in and can't be upgraded. Outside the top pairing I think the 2nd pairing, 3rd pairing and overall depth can all use the right type of upgrade but again I stress the right type of upgrade. Would I use Backlund for it? probably not. I'm personally very reluctant to trade Backlund and unless the Flames struggle to get him signed I would rather keep him. Two way, defensive stud centers are not easy to find (case in point how many have the Flames had in the last 10 years) and as of right now I don't see a replacement on the roster who is close to Backlund's level. Not saying I wouldn't move him for the right deal, I'm just not keen to do it unless its really worth it. When it comes to upgrades my preference would be a scoring winger who can play on the 2nd line. That would take priority for me over defence.
