travel_dude

My comment was they need to show it was a one-off. We can debate whether that is true or not, but that was not my meaning.

I do think that we know some things. We know some of the vets are aging out. If you can make some changes using Backlund and Hanifin, I don't think that sets us back. Still leaves 5 other pending UFA's to show how they fit and that last year was a one-off. We assume that at least one new player will be added to the top 6. That has to be a trade to get one or a trade to get rid of salary to sign a UFA. If we don't bring back Lewis, Lucic, Stone, any of the Ritchie's, then we have some internal change regardless. I am not adverse to PTO's but they better be guys that aren't at the end of their careers. Don't waste too much camp evaluating them, just evaluate how they fit with different players, rookie and vet. Go on the analytics and pro scouting. Well, a decent pro scouting, not what we have seen to date.

So we are trading a current 1/2 C for a possible 1C in the future? Would I consider it if Lindy was not extending? Of course. Trading Lindholm signals a rebuild. Make Hubey and Kadri useless signings. I have no issue in trading Lindholm for Necas. That makes sense, but CAR doesn't make that trade. We have to consider what we have that is expendable that we didn't just sign or re-sign. I would say that players like Mange, Dube, Hanifin, Tanev, Backlund, Vladar/Markstrom have to be figured out. Do they have the game we need to compete? Are they able to elevate their game? Dube is probably the best one to keep from that bunch. Vladar is more likely to have a better season overall than Markstrom. Anyway, only players that don't fit what we need going forward should be dealt.

The last time we did an extensive search, we ended up with Gully. Ward was interviewed. Went for the cheap, young rising star type. Not sure if we bothered with other displaced NHL coaches though. Peters was not a search, just hired as soon as he quit CAR. To me, Huska and Muller would be a mistake. Love may be a good choice, but I don't know if he thinks offense more than defense. Not proven at the NHL level. Brunette may not have much experience and took over a team that was already firing on all cylinders, but he would have learned from a good coach and organization. I'm not sure that anyone in this organization has that background. Understudy to Sutter? Coaches a Sutter like game for an AHL team? I don't know.

Trading Hanifin for Nylander makes sense. Hanifin's contract is good now, but won't be next year. Nylander is the same idea, but it makes sense to pay more for a F, especially when we are in need of a F. By itself, this won't work, need other pieces going out the door. Not in this deal but in other areas. At some point you need to make the call on the goalies. Risky to move Vladar or Markstrom without much of a view. But we can't continue playing $8M for two that didn't really give much comfort last season. As much as I like Backlund, I don't see any situation that allows us to re-sign him. If he has value, trade him for a D and a pick. In theory, we have decent depth at C. Embrace the youth in the bottom 6.

Hanifin and Kylington are similar but I think Kyl moves the puck better. Too many movers and not enough defenders. Nylander is a risky trade for the next contract. But I think we need that type of winger, not a defensively responsible one. And a speedy one at that. TOR can get BT signed and then he trades with us. The Huberdeau wasn't BT's hill. He could have evaluated the other trades and really was just told get the best you can from FLA, since Tkachuk wasn't exactly open to other places like CAR. It's not a good trade when you consider what Tkachuk can do with good players and coaching. But had he stayed here, he might have had a slump. As it is, we fared pretty darn good in what we got. Weegar + 1st is worth close to what Tkachuk's value was. The bolded is why you probably don't trade Big Z. We don't need the fights once per year guy. We need the Destroyer. He doesn't have to hit 5 times a game to distract the other team.

I think you have stated it well. Kylington's greatest strength is his skating. He looks like he is getting back in real game shape. I can live with his less than perfect hockey decisions. He may blow a play but manages to get back to cover. And he does play harder on the body than Hanifin. I have no desire to extend Hanifin, so a trade is needed. Toffoli is one of the better fits in the lineup. Even without a top LW, he still managed career highs. He's not the fastest, but has a great shot. I have an issue with just letting Backlund and Tanev walk. I understand it. It makes sense as a way of not extending guys at a certain age. I would prefer that we only walk them to UFA if we are legit contending in the division by TDL. Being in a wild card spot is not enough.

Tkachuk never seemed to be as all in as this year in the playoffs. Almost like he suffered through the coaching decisions. Decided he would be a pest. This year he is more of the complete hockey player. Or so it seems. It's a tough call between him and Bob for playoff MVP. FLA got two completer pieces from us. Both are doing the things they didn't have support to do here. And I would take Lomberg over Lucic, even though I have a soft spot for Lucic. Effective vs nuke option. Effective wins every time.

So trade a prospect for a prospect because so many teams want to trade away their top prospects for a possible lower ceiling prospect? Hows about you play him in the NHL forst and decide what his proection is and could be. I'm sure there are players occupying the top 6 in the NHL that weren't top 10 picks.

Whoopsie, was thinking the comment was about signing that many. Yes, we should not be going into a season with that many pending UFA's. Unless they have calue and we are trading them at TDL. Then...Asset management.

Don't read too much into the UFA comment. It's an extreme statement. When have we signed 7? But, I also don't think we will look for answers solely in FA. There are players that are probably going to be shopped. What that does is free up cap or solve player problems. We have bot, but I don't agree (with some) who is the problem. With the new GM, there is going to be a tendency to build around the top players. Find the right player for Kadri (Nichushkin?). Have we tried Huberdeau enough on the wrong wing and the wrong C to build that top line? Anyway, I think that we have to find the right balance. We maybe are close, success rate not withstanding. Not exactly a fit with some players.

I guess WPG had a big problem that he couldn't fix. Seems like the new guy was as frustrated as PM. As much as I am glad to see FLA on the cusp of the SCF, it pains me to see who is playing a big part there. Not that I think we ever would get by the second round had we made the playoffs, but it would have been fun to face FLA in the finals. Ah, next year. Right???

I think he was actually good in the playoffs, but Sutter killed his offense. Sutter even said as much about being a good player. Suggested that it was more important to play two way. For a UFA, that doesn't get you many offers. You would think he would take a Flames offer to be with his cousin, but maybe another coach casualty.

Unless there is a stud they really want, I would think they would go for a F first in that scenario.

That's the problem isn't it. The system limits the ability to break games open. Maloney was saying that they wanted more goals and less 2-1, 3-2 games. I do kinda agree about not wanting to pay while SUtter is making bank. But I think they bought out his deal, not continuing to pay him 4 per year. It would allow him to return to the game in another aspect for another team. Not that he is looking to do that, but I also think he wanted out. They have been paying for coaching at the same time for years, unfortunately. Ward and Sutter. Gully and BP. BH and Gully. AT least that's what I thought.

Maybe, but I think they looked at him during the playoffs and felt he was better than he actually was. Not exactly used to playing a Sutter system.

I don't know the private side of Conroy, but the public side is very player friendly. He would have learned the hard side of negotiations, but I sense he was the good cop. Whatever he is, we need to shed this supposed idea that the team is nickle and dime with players in talks. I don't know if true, but it sure seems the narrative here at times. Not my biggest concern. I am fed up with the targeting of lesser players. Rooney, Lewis, Ritchie's, Lucic, etc. Some of these guys may have their place on a roster, but not as a UFA signing, nor a everyday roster spot. You want to bring them in on a PTO, fine. See if they are currently better than a fringe prospect that hasn't shown up well at camp. But, FFS stop gifting them 82 games. They are role players and you may need them at times, but waive them and briong them up as required. If you are signing them, they are getting the same money in the AHL. Rant over. My hope is that Nonis, Conroy, Maloney and (maybe) Iggy can put together a decent list of coaches that we should consider. Please don't start talking about Muller and Greene as good coaches that we should be looking at.

Maybe Love is the best thing for this team, but I have my questions about him. Is his style too closely linked to the Flames last style? More volume shooting from low danger areas? AHL coach of the year, gets the most out of the limited talent, but a consistent set of players (less call ups). I don't know how much is fact, but had heard that Love is very demanding and penalizes players by sitting them. Does that work well with a mostly vet team? I'm asking this stuff because I just don't know. We have gone from an old school coach to a young one, back to an older school one to a younger one to an old school one. Does it make sense to go from a vet coach to a rookie one without him having a year to learn the league? Gully and Ward both were A/coaches before we brought them in. Other than recently fired coaches, A/coaches on some teams, and rookie ones, are there any out there that would work here?

I wonder if the similiarity of the Wranglers under Love and the Flames under Sutter works against Love. Love is a success story no doubt, but do the Flames see the NHL game different now, where scoring really hurt us. Brunette would be my preference for a coach that brings an offense faster game. Bob is playing better this year, so I don't know that PM turned them into a cup contender. Anyway, just thinking out loud. I'm concerned about the talk of Tanguay due to the Iggy connection. And the Love talk due to the connection to the Wranglers. We can't just make the cheap choice.

The general consensus is he didn't belong on the Flames, so I am not surprised at your comment. Was okay in NY, but maybe that was playing on a team that used offense first.

I think he did what he was told by the owners. Nothing BT did changed his mind. Virtue signaling or honestly a changed man? Could have gone either way. Considering he chose to shut the door on Pelletier after one bad OT shift, I lean towards the former. Perhaps unfair, just I never bought his reasons for the What number is he thingy. To me that was an apology without adminting it.

Start of the season so many are waived and not taken, but I agree there was not much value then. Late in the season, you might have seen a tanker take him if waived, but not worth much in a trade.

I heard some similar speculation about Iggy if Conroy was brought in. I'm not sure if he would be part of the pro scouting part, but he is definitely the name that adds credibility to the team. We let go guys that are now part of thoer teams' dynasty. Big Al and Newy to think of two. Let go is a bit of a stretch, but these guys went on to become part of the legends of the teams. I believe we will need some experienced front office staff. Promoting from within is fine, but I don't see the fit anymore. We need to revamp the management of this team. I do hope that the coach search is more than the settling we have seen in the past.

I think you need to trade Vladar for a roster player. Not sure his value, but if we truly embrace Wolf, then we need to trade him (or Markstrom if we really want to embrace change). I would be okay in either scenario as I think both goalies will see a rebound this season. I agree that the mix is wrong, but hard to tell exactly what is wrong since a lot of it was coaching. I think we need a player like Nylander though. Too many smaller guys that aren't snipers. Nothing wrong with Pelts abd Mange and Dube, but none of them are snipers and have breakaway speed. I would never trade Lindholm for Nylander though. Maybe Hanifin, so that Toronto can boast about having Calgary East.

Starting backwards. I think the culture improved since Gio left. There I said it. Maybe not directly related to him, just the timing. We had Brodie and Hammy that used to laugh when they got to the bench after a dumb play. We had guys skating off the ice when Tkachuk was fueding with the Kings. What the heck? What kind of team is that, whether you agree with him or not. Gaudreau gets chopped down by Staal and nobody does dick about it. Broken finger after the 21 hack salute. That was the culture. If anything, guys like Kadri are like Tkachuk was then. A bit over the top. Getting so wound up with frustration, they go a little nuts. The team backed him up when Trouba blindsided him. Kucic didn't fight much, but others stood up. They were tight, even if the coach was in a different head space. The west is a different beast for playoff making. You have teams that cycle up and down each year. Vegas was good this year and was broken last year. EDM was near the top this year and meh last year. Seattle was poor last year and good this year. AVS were all over the map. Dallas was good but easier to beat. Ducks only played good as a spoiler. In other words, I would suggest there are very few actual contenders that stay that way every year in the west. A stud goalie one year and back to just okay the next. We suffered the same fate.