The Flames In Three Years

[DL44]

- Pittsburgh is a team based on depth at centre who has won.

- The deepest part of Chicago is at centre.

- Boston is so deep at centre that they have career centres playing the wing.

The way you state as the best way to build a team is Burke style which has not been coming to fruition in Toronto.

Agree with D_X on this one...

Despite the fact those teams are very deep at center doesn't diminish the importance of building the backend out.

Pit was blessed with Crosby, Malkin, Staal...true... But they weren't gonna win anything if they didn't have Fleury/Letang,Gonchar, Whitney, Orpik, and whoever else anchoring the backend... no matter how well Crosby and Malkin played.

Chi - Niemi for the run, Keith/Seabrook/Campbell...

Bos - Thomas, Chara/Seidenberg/Ference/Boychuk etc..

Backend out is generally the way to go...

Obviously... despite the Oilers prospect makeup... they too went with the backend first approach... locking up Khabibulin and then making splashes getting Souray and Visnovsky a few yrs ago... then they tried for Vanek and then Penner... Then they also went and picked up Whitney for the backend.

Since Penner... they haven't really gone for a splashy forward have they? thinking off the top of my head...

Forwards have been nicely piled thru the draft... but the oilers focus otherwise and going forward will be the backend... without a doubt.

[Crzydrvr]

IMO, the best way to build a successful hockey team is down the middle. First centres then defence. Wingers and goalies after.

It's very hard to determine 3 years from now because player performance varies so much from year to year, especially for younger players.

IMO, the first thing the Flames should do is insulate the young players they already have by surrounding them with veterans and limit their pressure to perform. That means Backlund 3rd line and Horak 4th line. Make them work hard to move up the depth charts.

--

--

-Backlund-

-Horak-

EXTRA:

-

-

-

EXTRA:

The next thing the Flames need to do is get rid of some dead weight. They'll have to take dead weight to get rid of dead weight be maybe a trade can stimulate the dead weight.

Stajan, Hagman FOR Gomez (pending waiving of NTCs which should go ahead since Gomez can only list 3 teams he doesn't want to go to and Stajan would probably welcome a move back to the east).

-Gomez-

--

-Backlund-

-Horak-

EXTRA:

-

-

-

EXTRA:

Insert the rest of the forwards:

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross-Jokinen-Moss

Bourque-Backlund-Stempniak

Morrison-Horak-Kostopoulos

EXTRA:Jackman,Leblond

The once strong defence of the Flames is lacking. The ideal pick up would be a puck moving right hand shot top pairing defenceman. Those are few and far between but with a stronger defence it would make other parts of the team more expendible.

Smith, Kiprusoff FOR Kubina, Roloson, 1st

Bouwmeester-Kubina

Giordano-Hannan

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:Sarich

Roloson

Karlsson

- Karlsson and Roloson rotate and the Flames play who's hot.

Is this a playoff team?

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross-Jokinen-Moss

Bourque-Backlund-Stempniak

Morrison-Horak-Kostopoulos

EXTRA:Jackman,Leblond

Bouwmeester-Kubina

Giordano-Hannan

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:Sarich

Roloson

Karlsson

Maybe, maybe not.

The team in the off season:

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross--

Bourque-Backlund-

-Horak-

EXTRA:

Bouwmeester-

Giordano-

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:

Karlsson

IMO, the most important positions to fill will be the 2nd line centre and the right defence. The ideal centre would be a two way centre who can play 2nd or 3rd line minutes depending on how the younger centres are progressing. IMO, you don't want to go for the best players come free agency or you will almost certainly be overpaying.

Stoll would be ideal but with history that probably wouldn't work. Brodziak is still young at 27, has size,a right handed shot, defensive reliability and can move up and down the depth chart.

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross-Brodziak-

Bourque-Backlund-

-Horak-

EXTRA:

Bouwmeester-

Giordano-

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:

I think the defencemen that the Flames should sign are Gilroy and Boychuk.

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross-Brodziak-

Bourque-Backlund-

-Horak-

EXTRA:

Bouwmeester-Gilroy

Giordano-Boychuk

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:

A goalie to mentor Karlsson is imortant. He should still be competeing for the starter job at this time. Niitymaki should suffice.

The Flames should leave and extra wing position on each side open and a defensive spot for camp competition. That leaves two right wing positions and two depth forward positions.

Sign Penner to a one year deal, he needs to rebound and will come cheap. Tootoo is a good winger for the 3rd or 4th line. Carcillo is proving he's more verstile in Chicago. Wellwood is a guy who can move up or down the lineup if needed.

Tanguay-Gomez-Iginla

Glencross-Brodziak-Penner

Bourque-Backlund-(CAMP COMPETITION SPOT)

(CAMP COMPETITION SPOT)-Horak-Tootoo

EXTRA:Carcillo,Wellwool

Bouwmeester-Gilroy

Giordano-Boychuk

Butler-Babchuk

EXTRA:(CAMP COMPETITION SPOT)

Will this team make the playoffs? Maybe, maybe not but it's giving time for the cupboards to fill again with prospects while icing a competitive team.

i thought backlund proved his abilities to play as a third liner/bottom 6 player last year? if you want to develop him into a top tier player, you're going to have to move him up eventually. he's spent more than a season on the bottom 6 and finally got some top 6 time, and didnt look bad at all. and now you want him to move back down so he can work hard to move back?

horak is winning faceoffs, making good offensive reads, playing good positional defence, and generally creating scoring chances with regularity. there is merit with what you said, but IMO he's earned the right to be a 2nd/3rd centerman. i did say he was interchangeable. i don't buy into the "throw them into the wolves" argument here, because even if he doesn't turn into a second liner, he looks to be a solid nhl player at this point. we don't lose anything if he turns into a 3rd/4th line center, because not many people thought he would peak any higher than that anyways.

if they play well, they get the spots. if not, we still have depth to fill in for them. on the other hand, if we keep horak and more specifically backlund locked into the lower lines of the team then we run the risk of alienating them later when they hit free agency.

you say let backs and horak earn a spot, yet you shove kyle brodziak, a career fringe player, onto the second line. i noticed it doesnt say anywhere that HE has to earn his spot. gomez is also locked into a long term contract, and even if the flames do acquire him he hasnt been anything more than a third center for montreal this season, and they're below us in the standings, so what makes you think hell be any better than that in a tighter defensive conference? gomez doesnt have the defensive abilities to play a checking role, but hes basically a huge price tag for what he brings to the table offensively.

[ConnorFutureGM]

Agree with D_X on this one...

Despite the fact those teams are very deep at center doesn't diminish the importance of building the backend out.

Pit was blessed with Crosby, Malkin, Staal...true... But they weren't gonna win anything if they didn't have Fleury/Letang,Gonchar, Whitney, Orpik, and whoever else anchoring the backend... no matter how well Crosby and Malkin played.

Chi - Niemi for the run, Keith/Seabrook/Campbell...

Bos - Thomas, Chara/Seidenberg/Ference/Boychuk etc..

Backend out is generally the way to go...

Obviously... despite the Oilers prospect makeup... they too went with the backend first approach... locking up Khabibulin and then making splashes getting Souray and Visnovsky a few yrs ago... then they tried for Vanek and then Penner... Then they also went and picked up Whitney for the backend.

Since Penner... they haven't really gone for a splashy forward have they? thinking off the top of my head...

Forwards have been nicely piled thru the draft... but the oilers focus otherwise and going forward will be the backend... without a doubt.

The Oilers weren't rebuilding until December 2009 so the signings and trades of Khabibulin, Souray and Visnovsky were filler moves trying to ice a half decent team. The Oilers are drafting defencemen becuase they have an abundence of forwards.

[ConnorFutureGM]

i thought backlund proved his abilities to play as a third liner/bottom 6 player last year? if you want to develop him into a top tier player, you're going to have to move him up eventually. he's spent more than a season on the bottom 6 and finally got some top 6 time, and didnt look bad at all. and now you want him to move back down so he can work hard to move back?

horak is winning faceoffs, making good offensive reads, playing good positional defence, and generally creating scoring chances with regularity. there is merit with what you said, but IMO he's earned the right to be a 2nd/3rd centerman. i did say he was interchangeable. i don't buy into the "throw them into the wolves" argument here, because even if he doesn't turn into a second liner, he looks to be a solid nhl player at this point. we don't lose anything if he turns into a 3rd/4th line center, because not many people thought he would peak any higher than that anyways.

if they play well, they get the spots. if not, we still have depth to fill in for them. on the other hand, if we keep horak and more specifically backlund locked into the lower lines of the team then we run the risk of alienating them later when they hit free agency.

you say let backs and horak earn a spot, yet you shove kyle brodziak, a career fringe player, onto the second line. i noticed it doesnt say anywhere that HE has to earn his spot. gomez is also locked into a long term contract, and even if the flames do acquire him he hasnt been anything more than a third center for montreal this season, and they're below us in the standings, so what makes you think hell be any better than that in a tighter defensive conference? gomez doesnt have the defensive abilities to play a checking role, but hes basically a huge price tag for what he brings to the table offensively.

IMO, players like Backlund and Horak should be in a position to earn their ice time. Brodziak isn't a bonafide 2nd line centre which I think makes him ideal. He can push Backlund and Horak for ice time. If Backlund and Horak play better than Brodziak he can slide to the fourth lune but he's good enough to play 2nd line if they're struggling.

Yes Gomez is a gamble and has been very disappointing for Montreal. IMO, he can play 1st or 2nd line centre and might be able to find his offence with Iginla. He has more offensive ability than Stajan.

[DL44]

The Oilers weren't rebuilding until December 2009 so the signings and trades of Khabibulin, Souray and Visnovsky were filler moves trying to ice a half decent team. The Oilers are drafting defencemen becuase they have an abundence of forwards.

Filler moves?

someone doesn't know what they're talking abooooooouuuuut...

the Oil were obviously trying to be competitive and build to get to the next level.. every team does... only in retrospecive do they appear as 'filler moves'... because the Oil suffered injuries and crapped the bed...

note at a time shortly after they lost Pronger, they knew they had to rebuild the backend...

Trying to claim otherwise is hilarious...

Most teams go backend out...

there is a reason you always hear that from everyone deep seeded in the game..

we're not just making sh** up here...

[ConnorFutureGM]

Filler moves?

someone doesn't know what they're talking abooooooouuuuut...

the Oil were obviously trying to be competitive and build to get to the next level.. every team does... only in retrospecive do they appear as 'filler moves'... because the Oil suffered injuries and crapped the bed...

note at a time shortly after they lost Pronger, they knew they had to rebuild the backend...

Trying to claim otherwise is hilarious...

Most teams go backend out...

there is a reason you always hear that from everyone deep seeded in the game..

we're not just making sh** up here...

No man, the Oilers were trying to get any big name player they could and hoping it would make a difference. The time after the 2006 playoffs was difficult to attract star players and were unable to make the playoffs.

After they lost the cup in 06, the team got drastically worse without Pronger.

They traded Smyth, the heart and soul of the team for a futures package in 07.

Sign Souray in 07 off season two weeks after July 1st (unable to get any other name free agents)

Attempted to sign Vanek to an offer sheet in the 07 off season and failed, signed Penner to an offer sheet. (offer sheet obviously not rebuilding)

Oilers trade some core members of the 06 team for Visnovsky during 08 off season.

Try to trade for Heatley during 09 off season and fail.

During 09 off season want to re-sign Roloson to a 1 year contract but he wants 2 years. Opt for Khabibulin for 4 years.

Trade Visnovsky for Whitney during 2010 season. The owner of the Oilers announce that the team is going to rebuild.

During the season following the cup run to the rebuild, the Oilers were desperate to add any impact player even if the player did not fulfill team needs. The Oilers never really needed wingers of puck moving defencemen but were unable to get a #1 centre. During the time the moves may not looked like filler moves but they never really addressed the Oilers' needs but made a big enough news story that it kept interest and hope for the Oilers going.

I've heard some GMs say they like building back end out but I've heard others they like to build teams down the middle.

[bosn111]

your trades are mostly reasonable but IMO, a team doesn't want Turris and Brassard as their #2 and #3 centres respectively. They are both soft and not solid defensively. Also, you might need more toughness on the back end.

Why does Boston and Ottawa do those trades? Boston's #1 centre is Krejci and Ottawa is rebuilding and they want to keep their picks, they don't want to trade for an over priced contract.

Unless the Flames completely colapse this season, IMO it is best to develop prospects (Baertschi) in lesser leagues before throwing them into the NHL where they might not get adequate ice time to develop. Also, is Backlund 1st line centre quality?

Hmm, let's see, why does Boston do this trade?

Krejci is NOT their #1 centre anymore. Seguin has burst forth and is now their #1.

Bruins lineup right now

Marchand / Seguin / Bergeron

Lucic / Krejci / Horton

Bergeron is traditionally a centreman.

At centre they also have Savard if he gets healthy, Peverly who has already matched his offensive output from last year while with the Bruins in less than half the time (he also has a 20+ goal campaign with 50+ points and was close last year). Chris Kelly who has already passed his offensive output from last year while with the Bruins in less than half the time (He may not have any 20+ goal seasons but is a solid 3rd liner). They also have Campbell.

Proper wingers, you have Lucic, Horton and Marchand who go as top 6. That is why they have Bergeron on the wing. So you ask why Boston makes this trade?

With Bourque, and Hagman in the lineup:

Marchand / Seguin / Horton

Lucic / Bergeron / Bourque

Hagman (Pouliot) / Peverly / Kelly

Thorton / Campbell / Paille

On D they would still have: Chara, Seidenberg, Corvo, Ference, McQuaid, Kampfer and Bartkowski.

Brodie gives them another solid top 4 potential in the future D-man. They also get 2 draft picks. Both of Krejci and Boychuk are FA's after the season and will be looking for raises. Hagman is FA after the season but Bourque is signed long term. With Seguin exploding this season after playing 3rd line last season, Krejci has become expendable and would bring some return (Bourque +).

As for the Ottawa trade:

Why is Ottawa the only Canadian team not willing to spend close to the cap? Because they do not have the fan base to support a low performance team at higher dollar value. They never have been. When 4 of your top 10 point getters of last season are gone, only 5 players broke the 30 point mark, currently 2 of your top 5 point getters are defencemen, 3 of your top 8 in points are 33+ (including Chris Neil) and your #2 centre is a 23 year old Zach Smith who has a whopping 19 points in 86 games in the NHL with a -7 rating. There is definitely a need for higher level players. Alfredsson is 38 and on the verge of retirement. Gonchar is 37. But you are right, they have no need for immediate help, they will just keep drafting in the middle of the pack and might get competitive in 4 years once Alfredsson, Gonchar, Phillips, Neil, Konopka and Spezza are all gone because of retirement or the lack of players wanting to re-sign with a failing team.

Stajan and Smith are 27, Moss is 29. Not like they are ancient.

Stajan would instantly move into the #2 centre spot behind Spezza, Moss would become the #2 RW and Smith could easily step right in on the bottom pair D (or be a cheap #7).

Stajan's contract is bad for a cap team, but next season his actual dollars paid are LOWER than his cap hit. in Ottawa's case, a $2.5 Million for each of 2 seasons for a 2nd line centre is pretty good investment. Moss is UFA after the season and would likely be signed for around $2 Million at most which is solid for a #2 wing. Smith is also FA after the season so if he is outplayed by the other youngsters then it is no skin off of Ottawa's back.

Ottawa can't afford to tank for 3 years while they draft in many new players. Giving up a 2nd and a 4th is likely not a huge deal for the immediate return they are getting. especially when they are in separate draft years.

But you are right, I NEVER took into the consideration the needs or assets on either Boston or Ottawa before suggesting the trade. I did not consider the balance of cap hit, cap space, contract numbers, drafting or any other consideration when making my suggestion. I just stuck my finger up my nose, swished it around a bit, pulled out whatever I found and slopped it on my keyboard.

Thanks for your 2 sentence input on my 2 page plan. I sure am glad you are NOT a GM.

[geos]

Lecalvier is also an option.

A terrible option. That move would saddle this franchise with problems for a decade. Worst contract in the league other than maybe Luongo.

Paying $7M a year for 10 years for a second line centre is franchise suicide.

[jclarke]

If the Flames want to rid themselves of Stajan, they're going to have to take a bad contract back.

Penner is a big, skilled forward who is reliable defensively and can play on either wing. A one year deal for a player who wants to prove himself is a safe gamble.

Penner is overpaid, overated and has been in the doghouse with every coach he has ever had. Throw in a sarcastic attitute and extremely poor work ethic, and that's Dustin Penner. The Oilers were trying to get rid of him for a long time before they found an opportunity to dump him. This is exactly the type of player the Flames don't need. The best approach is probably to suck it up for a few years - move talent that has value for picks to re-stock the shelves, allow some contracts to run their course, pick up some cheap/strong work ethic journeymen to see the team through a few lean years and before you know it, there's a momentum building again. I would hate to see Iginla play for any other team (even Edmonton and I'm an Oiler fan!). He's the heart and soul of the Flames and I think he should be given the choice. Sort of like Smyth was ... oops, nevermind ... ;-)

[ConnorFutureGM]

Hmm, let's see, why does Boston do this trade?

Krejci is NOT their #1 centre anymore. Seguin has burst forth and is now their #1.

Bruins lineup right now

Marchand / Seguin / Bergeron

Lucic / Krejci / Horton

Bergeron is traditionally a centreman.

At centre they also have Savard if he gets healthy, Peverly who has already matched his offensive output from last year while with the Bruins in less than half the time (he also has a 20+ goal campaign with 50+ points and was close last year). Chris Kelly who has already passed his offensive output from last year while with the Bruins in less than half the time (He may not have any 20+ goal seasons but is a solid 3rd liner). They also have Campbell.

Proper wingers, you have Lucic, Horton and Marchand who go as top 6. That is why they have Bergeron on the wing. So you ask why Boston makes this trade?

With Bourque, and Hagman in the lineup:

Marchand / Seguin / Horton

Lucic / Bergeron / Bourque

Hagman (Pouliot) / Peverly / Kelly

Thorton / Campbell / Paille

On D they would still have: Chara, Seidenberg, Corvo, Ference, McQuaid, Kampfer and Bartkowski.

Brodie gives them another solid top 4 potential in the future D-man. They also get 2 draft picks. Both of Krejci and Boychuk are FA's after the season and will be looking for raises. Hagman is FA after the season but Bourque is signed long term. With Seguin exploding this season after playing 3rd line last season, Krejci has become expendable and would bring some return (Bourque +).

As for the Ottawa trade:

Why is Ottawa the only Canadian team not willing to spend close to the cap? Because they do not have the fan base to support a low performance team at higher dollar value. They never have been. When 4 of your top 10 point getters of last season are gone, only 5 players broke the 30 point mark, currently 2 of your top 5 point getters are defencemen, 3 of your top 8 in points are 33+ (including Chris Neil) and your #2 centre is a 23 year old Zach Smith who has a whopping 19 points in 86 games in the NHL with a -7 rating. There is definitely a need for higher level players. Alfredsson is 38 and on the verge of retirement. Gonchar is 37. But you are right, they have no need for immediate help, they will just keep drafting in the middle of the pack and might get competitive in 4 years once Alfredsson, Gonchar, Phillips, Neil, Konopka and Spezza are all gone because of retirement or the lack of players wanting to re-sign with a failing team.

Stajan and Smith are 27, Moss is 29. Not like they are ancient.

Stajan would instantly move into the #2 centre spot behind Spezza, Moss would become the #2 RW and Smith could easily step right in on the bottom pair D (or be a cheap #7).

Stajan's contract is bad for a cap team, but next season his actual dollars paid are LOWER than his cap hit. in Ottawa's case, a $2.5 Million for each of 2 seasons for a 2nd line centre is pretty good investment. Moss is UFA after the season and would likely be signed for around $2 Million at most which is solid for a #2 wing. Smith is also FA after the season so if he is outplayed by the other youngsters then it is no skin off of Ottawa's back.

Ottawa can't afford to tank for 3 years while they draft in many new players. Giving up a 2nd and a 4th is likely not a huge deal for the immediate return they are getting. especially when they are in separate draft years.

But you are right, I NEVER took into the consideration the needs or assets on either Boston or Ottawa before suggesting the trade. I did not consider the balance of cap hit, cap space, contract numbers, drafting or any other consideration when making my suggestion. I just stuck my finger up my nose, swished it around a bit, pulled out whatever I found and slopped it on my keyboard.

Thanks for your 2 sentence input on my 2 page plan. I sure am glad you are NOT a GM.

- Chiarelli stated that Savard won't play this season and may not ever again. Savard has all but officially retired.

Lets break down the trade. Hagman has little to no value in this trade. Boston has several players who can play the wing and are better than Hagman. Hagman would probably be a depth winger. He might be worth a 6th or 7th round pick. You have a 3rd round pick and a conditional pick. What are the conditions on this pick? The trade comes down to:

Bourque, Brodie, 3rd, 6th, conditional pick? FOR Krejci, Boychuk

Krejci is worth much more and is considerably better than Bourque. Krejci has 221 points in 308 games. Bourque has 228 points in 407 career games. In the playoffs, Krejci has 44 points in 52 games. Bourque has 1 point in 5 games. Krejci has won a Stanley Cup and will only be 26 at the end of this season and still be in RFA status. Bourque will be 30. A 3rd round pick and a 6th round pick make little difference in balancing the scales.

Boychuk FOR Brodie is also an unfavourable trade for Boston. Boychuk is a proven 2nd paring NHLer player with a right handed shot. Brodie is an average defensive prospect. Boston might do this trade if they were rebuilding but not now. Boston's defence will become weaker without a ready replcement. Since the Flames are rebuilding on the fly, this trade doesn't make much sense for them either.

Ottawa can afford to reuild. If they couldn't afford to rebuild they would have traded their 6th overall pick for immediate help. A team rebuilding is not going to trade their picks. Florida isn't trading their picks and they are a team that can't afford to be bad.

When you propose these trades you look at no other factors other than what you think is best for the Flames. Even then you don't take in consideration of the needs of the Flames as an organization.

[ConnorFutureGM]

A terrible option. That move would saddle this franchise with problems for a decade. Worst contract in the league other than maybe Luongo.

Paying $7M a year for 10 years for a second line centre is franchise suicide.

Yes, Lecavalier will quickly become the worst contract in the league. The Flames need to rid themselves of Stajan and I doubt Feaster will bury him in the minors.

Penner is overpaid, overated and has been in the doghouse with every coach he has ever had. Throw in a sarcastic attitute and extremely poor work ethic, and that's Dustin Penner. The Oilers were trying to get rid of him for a long time before they found an opportunity to dump him. This is exactly the type of player the Flames don't need. The best approach is probably to suck it up for a few years - move talent that has value for picks to re-stock the shelves, allow some contracts to run their course, pick up some cheap/strong work ethic journeymen to see the team through a few lean years and before you know it, there's a momentum building again. I would hate to see Iginla play for any other team (even Edmonton and I'm an Oiler fan!). He's the heart and soul of the Flames and I think he should be given the choice. Sort of like Smyth was ... oops, nevermind ... ;-)

I agree if Feaster succumbs to the full rebuild than the Flames shouldn't sign any major free agents.

If Feaster still has his heart set on the playoffs and not tearing down the house while restocking for youth, Feaster is going to have to find utility UFAs in IMO.

[Demonous_Xodus]

No man, the Oilers were trying to get any big name player they could and hoping it would make a difference. The time after the 2006 playoffs was difficult to attract star players and were unable to make the playoffs.

After they lost the cup in 06, the team got drastically worse without Pronger.

They traded Smyth, the heart and soul of the team for a futures package in 07.

Sign Souray in 07 off season two weeks after July 1st (unable to get any other name free agents)

Attempted to sign Vanek to an offer sheet in the 07 off season and failed, signed Penner to an offer sheet. (offer sheet obviously not rebuilding)

Oilers trade some core members of the 06 team for Visnovsky during 08 off season.

Try to trade for Heatley during 09 off season and fail.

During 09 off season want to re-sign Roloson to a 1 year contract but he wants 2 years. Opt for Khabibulin for 4 years.

Trade Visnovsky for Whitney during 2010 season. The owner of the Oilers announce that the team is going to rebuild.

During the season following the cup run to the rebuild, the Oilers were desperate to add any impact player even if the player did not fulfill team needs. The Oilers never really needed wingers of puck moving defencemen but were unable to get a #1 centre. During the time the moves may not looked like filler moves but they never really addressed the Oilers' needs but made a big enough news story that it kept interest and hope for the Oilers going.

I've heard some GMs say they like building back end out but I've heard others they like to build teams down the middle.

Examples of why building back-end front works:

However most successful teams will easily opt to concentrate on their defense/goaltenders before their offense. Look at Nashville right now, they're quite successful and they are a prime example of what a great goaltender/defense core can do without any elite forwards (their only "top" forward being Hornqvist).

LA's biggest attribute before they became so deep at center was their success on the backend, with their d-core boasting Doughty, Johnson, Scuderi, Greene, Mitchell, and prospects like Drewiske, Voynov and Martinez. As well as having a great prospect in Bernier, they have one of the best goalies in the game right now in Jon Quick. That's when they went out and got Richards, because they had succeeded in building from the back-end.

The Canucks truly started building their 2011 Finals Team when they acquired Luongo, Bieksa, Edler, etc.

The Flyers' went into overdrive and on a tear when they acquired Chris Pronger and Matt Carle.

Examples of why building forward first fails:

Dallas has only recently found success because they finally acquired a franchise goalie like Lethonen and boasted their d-core with Souray and Pardy.

When's the last time the Islanders won at anything? Their lack of good goaltending and their unexperienced d core can't compensate for their decent offensive core.

Washington just recently decided to get a true goaltender like Vokoun and get their defense tightened with Hamrilk and Wideman.

Ottawa had the a very good offensive core in a while back when they had that big line and guys like Fisher. Their D was abysmal and they never had a top quality goaltender. They still keep trying to go for a fix (Gonchar, Anderson) but they've taken steps in the good direction but it might take a while to make a difference (Lehner, Karlsson, Cowen, Rundblad).

Columbus has a terrible d-core, but a decent offensive core. They tried to bring in Wiz, but haven't addressed just how terrible it has been. Picks like Filatov (traded to Ottawa) haven't turned out too well and they don't have defensive depth to make up for it.

Examples of teams who have realized this:

Florida's recent draft picks have consisted of Erik Gudbranson, Dmitiry Kulikov and Jacob Markstrom. Hmm.

Ottawa is in both categories.

The evidence is right here.

[Crzydrvr]

IMO, players like Backlund and Horak should be in a position to earn their ice time. Brodziak isn't a bonafide 2nd line centre which I think makes him ideal. He can push Backlund and Horak for ice time. If Backlund and Horak play better than Brodziak he can slide to the fourth lune but he's good enough to play 2nd line if they're struggling.

Yes Gomez is a gamble and has been very disappointing for Montreal. IMO, he can play 1st or 2nd line centre and might be able to find his offence with Iginla. He has more offensive ability than Stajan.

but even stajan makes up for his lack of offense with faceoff abilities and defensive prowess(when he wants to).

what kind of message would that send to other players, having a defensive liability on the top line and having good young two-way players duke it out with a 4th liner for top 6 minutes? like i said before, they've earned their ice time. how long do you plan to make them earn it? until christmas again? the last thing the team needs is for a Dutter to say "hey, you know what? make the kids earn their ice time. if they dont play great hockey on the 4th line for 2/3rds of a year, they can stay there".

all players have bad games, forcing a player to be perfect for a whole season before even tacking on maybe 3 minutes more to his ice time is nothing short of tyrannical.

[ConnorFutureGM]

but even stajan makes up for his lack of offense with faceoff abilities and defensive prowess(when he wants to).

what kind of message would that send to other players, having a defensive liability on the top line and having good young two-way players duke it out with a 4th liner for top 6 minutes? like i said before, they've earned their ice time. how long do you plan to make them earn it? until christmas again? the last thing the team needs is for a Dutter to say "hey, you know what? make the kids earn their ice time. if they dont play great hockey on the 4th line for 2/3rds of a year, they can stay there".

all players have bad games, forcing a player to be perfect for a whole season before even tacking on maybe 3 minutes more to his ice time is nothing short of tyrannical.

If you feel they earned their minutes then they should have them. Every player should be accountable. If Horak, Backlund, Igilna, etc are producing more than other players then they should get more ice time and vice versa. IMO, the Flames will get the most out of their younger players if they put the younger players in a position where they need to prove they belong.

[ConnorFutureGM]

Examples of why building back-end front works:

However most successful teams will easily opt to concentrate on their defense/goaltenders before their offense. Look at Nashville right now, they're quite successful and they are a prime example of what a great goaltender/defense core can do without any elite forwards (their only "top" forward being Hornqvist).

LA's biggest attribute before they became so deep at center was their success on the backend, with their d-core boasting Doughty, Johnson, Scuderi, Greene, Mitchell, and prospects like Drewiske, Voynov and Martinez. As well as having a great prospect in Bernier, they have one of the best goalies in the game right now in Jon Quick. That's when they went out and got Richards, because they had succeeded in building from the back-end.

The Canucks truly started building their 2011 Finals Team when they acquired Luongo, Bieksa, Edler, etc.

The Flyers' went into overdrive and on a tear when they acquired Chris Pronger and Matt Carle.

Examples of why building forward first fails:

Dallas has only recently found success because they finally acquired a franchise goalie like Lethonen and boasted their d-core with Souray and Pardy.

When's the last time the Islanders won at anything? Their lack of good goaltending and their unexperienced d core can't compensate for their decent offensive core.

Washington just recently decided to get a true goaltender like Vokoun and get their defense tightened with Hamrilk and Wideman.

Ottawa had the a very good offensive core in a while back when they had that big line and guys like Fisher. Their D was abysmal and they never had a top quality goaltender. They still keep trying to go for a fix (Gonchar, Anderson) but they've taken steps in the good direction but it might take a while to make a difference (Lehner, Karlsson, Cowen, Rundblad).

Columbus has a terrible d-core, but a decent offensive core. They tried to bring in Wiz, but haven't addressed just how terrible it has been. Picks like Filatov (traded to Ottawa) haven't turned out too well and they don't have defensive depth to make up for it.

Examples of teams who have realized this:

Florida's recent draft picks have consisted of Erik Gudbranson, Dmitiry Kulikov and Jacob Markstrom. Hmm.

Ottawa is in both categories.

The evidence is right here.

How is this evidence? You're just spouting off some players and some opinions. You draw conclusions and only look at certain teams and specific players that benefit your position. Maybe you're the expert witness on how to build a hockey team.

There will be no team that solely focuses on the back end or forwards when building a team.

[bosn111]

To ConnorFutureGM

Ok, apparently you are one of those individuals who underrates Flames, overrates other players and does not take into team needs versus what teams have. Nor do you account for the end of contracts. You also do not account for the potential trading partners and what other teams had to offer.

1 player alone does not necessarily make the team great. Ottawa needs more than 1 player. The point of the Ottawa trade is that IT STARTS THE IMPROVEMENT. Ottawa DOES NOT have a #2 centre, a role which Stajan (signed for 2 more years at low actual dollars compared to cap hit) would actually fill nicely. The reason Stajan doesn't fit in Calgary is that he is not a #1 centre, Jokinen is a better #2 centre and Calgary has Backlund and Horak who can play 3rd line as well or better than Stajan. I have said before that the only reason to trade Stajan is that he doesn't have a place on THIS team based on depth. Stajan and Moss definitely improve Ottawa immediately and all they really give up is a 4th line centre and a couple of draft picks in 2 separate years (a 2nd and then likely a 4th or 5th depending on how the conditional pick is set up). If someone offers you 2 proven 2nd line caliber players for a 4th liner, a 2nd round pick and a 4th round pick that you turn them down?

If Boston makes the trade, they still have Bergeron and Seguin as their 1-2 down the centre. Krejci becomes a spare part. Krejci will be looking for a raise after the season (becoming RFA) and with his numbers he is looking, I would guess, in the 5 million range. Basically that gives you a consideration of why I picked him. I would be fine with Bergeron instead, but Boston has him locked up for another 2 years after this season for $5 million per season. Bourque is cheaper than Bergeron on right wing and provides that sniper on the right. As I put in my lineup for Boston with this trade, I left Savard right out, they would have a second line of Lucic (fairly all around), Bergeron (A great passer with solid scoring as well) and Bourque (A sniper). Who does Boston have that is better than Hagman to play 3rd line wing? Paille has never scored over 20 goals or 40 points (he also only played 43 games last season), neither have Pouliot or Thorton. Hagman has scored 20+ goals 3 times, 40+ points twice and is a UFA after the season so they have a choice to re-sign him.

Right now Boston has Krejci, Bergeron, Seguin, Lucic, Horton, Marchand as their top 6, Kelly, Peverly, Campbell, Thorton, Paille, Pouliot and Caron to round out their bottom 6. Hagman is better than the Majority of their current bottom 6, Bourque is much better than any of their bottom 6 and provides a solid spot in the top 6. Move 1 top 6 player you have extra of in that position and a top 4 D man (the hand doesn't affect Boston based on their make up while it does affect Calgary, they still have Corvo, McQuaid and Kampfer who are right handed shots considering McQuaid at 25 in 67 games last year had 3 goals, 12 assists and a +30 in the regular season 4 assists and a plus 8 in 23 playoff games last season) for another top 6 in a position you are short on while adding a talented wing (could be top 6) to your bottom 6, a solid D prospect who is projected as a 4/5 D man and 2 draft picks looks pretty good to me and I am sure most people would agree.

Remember that Krejci and Boychuk are both looking for a raise after the season. The conditional pick would be based specifically on the resigning of the players. Bourque is signed long term. If both Krejci and Boychuk re-sign then you make it a 2nd rounder. If you want to put that into draft pick terms then I would say you would be trading a 1st (Krejci, was actually drafted 2nd round) and a 2nd (Boychuk) for a 2nd (Bourque), a 2nd (conditional), a 3rd (Hagman) and a 3rd. Or a 1st for a 2nd and 2 3rd's + a straight across.

Both trades address issues on all 3 of the teams and looks at what assets each team has, not just Calgary. If it makes you more happy, make the Ottawa trade first and use that 2nd round pick instead of the third if thats what you are worried about. It really makes no difference to me.

[bronco73]

Obviously... despite the Oilers prospect makeup... they too went with the backend first approach... locking up Khabibulin and then making splashes getting Souray and Visnovsky a few yrs ago... then they tried for Vanek and then Penner... Then they also went and picked up Whitney for the backend.

Since Penner... they haven't really gone for a splashy forward have they? thinking off the top of my head...

Forwards have been nicely piled thru the draft... but the oilers focus otherwise and going forward will be the backend... without a doubt.

Heatley, Jagr, Hossa, Nylander.

[Crzydrvr]

Heatley, Jagr, Hossa, Nylander.

we werent exactly supposed to be in the richards sweepstakes, but we ended up being final 2.

those players listed were at the time no brainers as players to attempt to sign. whether or not you had the team needs for those players you were in on it, if you managed to sign the player great you just acquired a solid top 6 forward, and even if you didnt its not like you lose anything on it.

[bronco73]

we werent exactly supposed to be in the richards sweepstakes, but we ended up being final 2.

those players listed were at the time no brainers as players to attempt to sign. whether or not you had the team needs for those players you were in on it, if you managed to sign the player great you just acquired a solid top 6 forward, and even if you didnt its not like you lose anything on it.

? The offer sheet to Vanek would have if I recall been 4 first rounders, which ended up being Ryan Nugent Hopkins, Taylor Hall, Magnus Paajarvi and Tyler Meyers. The Heatley offer was Penner, Cogliano, and Smid. So yes, it was like Edmonton would have lost something on it.

Regardless, the claim by DL44 was that Edmonton didn't try to acquire any forwards after Penner. All I was doing was showing where he was in error. What it would have cost Edmonton to acquire these players is not relevant. However, I am in complete agreement with DL44 that for the next while the focus of the Oilers will be on the back end.

[senor_incendiarse]

Stop turning threads into Flames/Oilers threads, one thread is enough.

[ConnorFutureGM]

To ConnorFutureGM

Ok, apparently you are one of those individuals who underrates Flames, overrates other players and does not take into team needs versus what teams have. Nor do you account for the end of contracts. You also do not account for the potential trading partners and what other teams had to offer.

1 player alone does not necessarily make the team great. Ottawa needs more than 1 player. The point of the Ottawa trade is that IT STARTS THE IMPROVEMENT. Ottawa DOES NOT have a #2 centre, a role which Stajan (signed for 2 more years at low actual dollars compared to cap hit) would actually fill nicely. The reason Stajan doesn't fit in Calgary is that he is not a #1 centre, Jokinen is a better #2 centre and Calgary has Backlund and Horak who can play 3rd line as well or better than Stajan. I have said before that the only reason to trade Stajan is that he doesn't have a place on THIS team based on depth. Stajan and Moss definitely improve Ottawa immediately and all they really give up is a 4th line centre and a couple of draft picks in 2 separate years (a 2nd and then likely a 4th or 5th depending on how the conditional pick is set up). If someone offers you 2 proven 2nd line caliber players for a 4th liner, a 2nd round pick and a 4th round pick that you turn them down?

If Boston makes the trade, they still have Bergeron and Seguin as their 1-2 down the centre. Krejci becomes a spare part. Krejci will be looking for a raise after the season (becoming RFA) and with his numbers he is looking, I would guess, in the 5 million range. Basically that gives you a consideration of why I picked him. I would be fine with Bergeron instead, but Boston has him locked up for another 2 years after this season for $5 million per season. Bourque is cheaper than Bergeron on right wing and provides that sniper on the right. As I put in my lineup for Boston with this trade, I left Savard right out, they would have a second line of Lucic (fairly all around), Bergeron (A great passer with solid scoring as well) and Bourque (A sniper). Who does Boston have that is better than Hagman to play 3rd line wing? Paille has never scored over 20 goals or 40 points (he also only played 43 games last season), neither have Pouliot or Thorton. Hagman has scored 20+ goals 3 times, 40+ points twice and is a UFA after the season so they have a choice to re-sign him.

Right now Boston has Krejci, Bergeron, Seguin, Lucic, Horton, Marchand as their top 6, Kelly, Peverly, Campbell, Thorton, Paille, Pouliot and Caron to round out their bottom 6. Hagman is better than the Majority of their current bottom 6, Bourque is much better than any of their bottom 6 and provides a solid spot in the top 6. Move 1 top 6 player you have extra of in that position and a top 4 D man (the hand doesn't affect Boston based on their make up while it does affect Calgary, they still have Corvo, McQuaid and Kampfer who are right handed shots considering McQuaid at 25 in 67 games last year had 3 goals, 12 assists and a +30 in the regular season 4 assists and a plus 8 in 23 playoff games last season) for another top 6 in a position you are short on while adding a talented wing (could be top 6) to your bottom 6, a solid D prospect who is projected as a 4/5 D man and 2 draft picks looks pretty good to me and I am sure most people would agree.

Remember that Krejci and Boychuk are both looking for a raise after the season. The conditional pick would be based specifically on the resigning of the players. Bourque is signed long term. If both Krejci and Boychuk re-sign then you make it a 2nd rounder. If you want to put that into draft pick terms then I would say you would be trading a 1st (Krejci, was actually drafted 2nd round) and a 2nd (Boychuk) for a 2nd (Bourque), a 2nd (conditional), a 3rd (Hagman) and a 3rd. Or a 1st for a 2nd and 2 3rd's + a straight across.

Both trades address issues on all 3 of the teams and looks at what assets each team has, not just Calgary. If it makes you more happy, make the Ottawa trade first and use that 2nd round pick instead of the third if thats what you are worried about. It really makes no difference to me.

IMO, if Ottawa's goal is to improve, they'd need to improve enough to make the playoffs. I don't think Stajan is good enough to get Ottawa to the playoffs.

For Boston, they are more likely to trade picks and prospects to keep their main players to make their team better now.

From what I've witnessed, during the regular season teams are usually divided into 2 groups. Those who are going for the playoffs and those who surrender the thought of the playoffs. The teams who are going for the playoffs trade away future packages (picks, prospects, young yet to be impact players) for proven players. The teams who surrender to the thought of the playoffs are selling NHL players that are not crucial to the forseeable future of the franchise for the future packages.

It's too early to draw the line between sellers and buyers and with the cap as well as points from OT and shootout losses, there are few bonafide sellers come trade deadline.

The Flames, according to Feaster, are going to be one of those rare teams that tries to rebuild and compete for the playoffs at the same time. They are neither sellers or buyers but opportunists. Burke has been in this position for a few seasons and managed to acquire assets but has yet to make the playoffs. Will Feaster be able to do both?

[Flamer666]

Looking at our prospect pool and existing roster what is the Flames line-up in 2013-2014?

Tools:

• Flames Contracts
  
• Flames Full List of Players and Prospects
  
• Cross's Full List of Propsects
  

Here is my crack at it:

The Flames have some pretty big holes. They are missing a 1C, 1W, and 1D. They really don't have anyone in the system that projects to that level. They also have a number of big questions on the second line. I am not sold on Nemisz and Ferland playing top 6 is a bit of a leap. Irving also needs to prove he can play in the NHL otherwise they have to find a starting goalie.

I didn't include Tanguay, Stajan, and Bourque (still on contract) or anyone not on contract (including Iginla and Kipper). Bourque, Tanguay, Kipper, and Iginla are some of our only assets that could bring back one of our missing top line players. Iginla will also be 36 while Kipper will be 37. There isn't any room for Stajan in the roster.

I kept Bouwmeester since there is already a 1D hole and the Flames don't have anyone in the system projected to be able to take on that role. However, Bouwmeester could be moved for the right return. He would have to fill one of the other big holes though as he would be creating one when he left.

The organization chooses to keep Iginla. If they do he and Tanguay could fill in on the second line. Tanguay could also stay on his own and replace Ferland.

One of the reasons I, and many other, are excited about a player like Turris is that he could potentially fill one of our big 3 (or 4) holes that need filling. Replacing 5 of your top 6 forward positions is a big task and he could fill one of the toughest holes to fill.

The Flames aer so hosed...the problem is we don't think long-term with great new prospects...we are trying to compliment Iginla....Guess what Iggy is about to retire within 2 years( you hears it here first, I guarantee it!!!!) Te team desperately wants Iggy to get a cup and will do everything to do it. Iggy has already said if you don't make it possible I will find a team that will..plain and simple.

Te Flames are a team that put band aids on a missing limb...we need to go through what the Oilers have gone through and feel the pain before we will see the sun shine again.....Those Oilers look great these days

[bronco73]

Stop turning threads into Flames/Oilers threads, one thread is enough.

I didn't. This thread had long been once since before I made my first post in it.

[Demonous_Xodus]

The Flames aer so hosed...the problem is we don't think long-term with great new prospects...we are trying to compliment Iginla....Guess what Iggy is about to retire within 2 years( you hears it here first, I guarantee it!!!!) Te team desperately wants Iggy to get a cup and will do everything to do it. Iggy has already said if you don't make it possible I will find a team that will..plain and simple.

Te Flames are a team that put band aids on a missing limb...we need to go through what the Oilers have gone through and feel the pain before we will see the sun shine again.....Those Oilers look great these days

Why would Iginla retire when he's 36? He still has plenty of career in him.

ALso, learn to spell and use proper grammar. You're making my eyes bleed.

[kehatch]

We need to rebuild

Foundation. That is what a rebuild is about. It is about establishing a foundation that you can build a Stanley Cup winning team on.

The foundation of a NHL team is that four our five players that define the identity of the club. They are the untouchable players that you build your franchise around.

Where would Vancouver be without Daniel Sedin, Henrick Sedin, Luongo, and Kesler? Where would Chicago be without Toews, Kane, Keith, and Seabrook? Where would Pittsburgh be without Crosby, Malkin, Staal, and Fleury? Even a team like Nashville has Weber, Suter, and Rinne.

The Flames don’t have a solid foundation. The Flames foundation used to be Iginla, Kipper, Phaneuf, and Regher. Recently Giordano has elevated himself onto the list. An argument could be made that this didn’t present a cohesive core with a consistent identify. Something that was demonstrated by a lack of a team identify since the 05/06 season.

But regardless on what you think of the teams previous foundation there is no arguing that it is now diminished. Iginla is 35 and Kipper is 36. The window of opportunity with those players is frightfully small. Phaneuf and Regher were both traded without replacing their spot as part of the Flames core. Some will argue that Bouwmeester achieves this, but he is a flawed player that plays an important supporting role but isn’t someone to build a team around.

Feaster’s premise to build on the existing foundation is a faulty one. We don’t have a foundation worth building on. It needs to be rebuilt. I don’t care if it is by stockpiling draft picks and building through the draft or by trading players like Kipper and Iggy to bring back the right players. But Feaster has to do something.

Feaster’s insistence that he won’t trade a player for prospects and draft picks, that any move has to help the team win today, and that he won’t trade core players is going to force us head first to rock bottom. We are going to find ourselves down there without a starting point and we are going to be stuck down there for a long while.