Jump to content

s4xon

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Haven't heard if Detroit was protecting Howard or Mrazek.  Howard has a M-NTC so I think he is automatically selectable by Vegas if not protected.  Not sure what Vegas would benefit by trading Mrazek.  If they protect Mrazek, then they lose a good player, not Howard.  If they protect Howard and don't trade him, they lose Mrazek.  If they protect Howard and trade Mrazek, they still lose a good player.  

Don't you think most of these lists will have any and all expensive contracts they don't necessarily want on the unprotected list ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carty said:

 

I sure hope that Treliving works a deal for an upgrade in the next 3 1\2 hours before the freeze...    The Flames have a unique advantage of being able to protect a goalie if they trade for one...    There are only a few good choices left since Bishop and Darling are out of the picture, and there are a few other teams also looking for a goalie...   I just don't see the cost being any less after the expansion draft when other teams are also going to be able to bid on the best goaltenders...

I don't believe after MAF that there is any upgrade to Elliott really available.  None of the other names being thrown about strike me as an upgrade and none have the experience with our system that Elliott has. I am almost of the opinion we saw BT best shot at fixing the goaltending here last year. He let this seasons Darling and Bishop chance slip by, and it looks like we are not in MAF either.

I expect a 1a/1b type tandem again this coming season with hopes 1 will step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Don't you think most of these lists will have any and all expensive contracts they don't necessarily want on the unprotected list ?

 

Check out the expansion tool and figure out which D-man they are going to lose.  A young one or someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sabres signed Ullmark to a backup worthy contract.

Lehner - RFA, 59GP,  age 25, 3.1 mil last year

Nilsson - UFA, 26GP, age 26, 1.0 mil last year

 

Both free agents had almost identical GAA and SV%.

 

Of course depending on what happens in the next little while, I'm not totally opposed to having Lehner starting or Nilsson as a back up. If anything Vegas will take Lehner as a bargaining chip. The options are getting shorter and any deals from Vegas wont be cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

I really hope not.  5 mil for a 35 year old with equal if not worse numbers than the current tandem?

Obviously not my first choice, but I do agree its an upgrade on the #1 spot...  the key now is going to be what #2 looks like ,not sure you go with Johnson .. this is where you slide in a 1b. Assuming the cost is low, now you can take a serious run at getting Raanta from LV when they take him.

 

Saw a game in Phoenix last year , due to cheap tickets I was right up close to Smith..  granted it was against Vancouver , but he shut them out .. he definitely doesn't move like a 35 yr old

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Obviously not my first choice, but I do agree its an upgrade on the #1 spot...  the key now is going to be what #2 looks like ,not sure you go with Johnson .. this is where you slide in a 1b. Assuming the cost is low, now you can take a serious run at getting Raanta from LV when they take him.

 

Saw a game in Phoenix last year , due to cheap tickets I was right up close to Smith..  granted it was against Vancouver , but he shut them out .. he definitely doesn't move like a 35 yr old

Its a bit of a upgrade, but mike smith hasent exactly had great seasons the past few years obviously being in arizona has not helped that. But I would hope we arent giving up a ton for a 35 year old making that much a year, if anything maybe we get something coming with mike smith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Obviously not my first choice, but I do agree its an upgrade on the #1 spot...  the key now is going to be what #2 looks like ,not sure you go with Johnson .. this is where you slide in a 1b

I still dont see it as an upgrade. Vaguely comparable numbers, 5 mil, plus losing whomever goes the other way. Not liking this at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

I still dont see it as an upgrade. Vaguely comparable numbers, 5 mil, plus losing whomever goes the other way. Not liking this at all.

It really doesnt make sense in my opinion, unless arizona is asking us to take him off their hands, I dont see him as a huge upgrade on elliott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2017 at 11:25 AM, cross16 said:

 

Capture.PNG

Lets's not forget about the Chart Cross posted a while back...even if its only in the Consistency department , Id call it a huge upgrade .. not saying he's a saviour but he should make us stop wondering what performance we are going to get on a nightly basis .Typically you have to earn your goals on him 

He put up Great numbers , on a VERY bad team .. carried a 55 game load ..

 

 

again , now its a question of who you put behind him.. you have your 2 year stop gap.. now you need the insurance guy ./.Raanta, Grubauer...etc

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Apparantly bob mckenzie reporting ari retains 25% of smith for hickey and conditional 3rd rounder....

Sounds like a done deal just awaiting league approval.

 

BTW, I started a thread to keep track of non Flames related pre ED trades.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

To keep Hickey we could've just signed Elliott. 

I don't know if I like this deal?

In the Big picture ..   its Smith for a conditional 3rd and Ari retains salary

 

If we really want Johnson that badly we can still just sign him again

Hickey, to be honest .. isn't overwhelming me.. he's shaping as a 3rd pair guy .. and he's also going to his 4th year , no guarantee of signing him ..I think he was deeper down the depth chart of the guys we have . That year he made the World Juniors he did not impress me at all. 

Heck, we can still sign Elliot too if we want a vet tandem.

 

if it does roll down that we have a deal with Vegas for Raanta or Grubauer?  we'll have an amazing tandem next year .. no, I like it ... again wasnt my first choice, but I like it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

In the Big picture ..   its Smith for a conditional 3rd and Ari retains salary

 

If we really want Johnson that badly we can still just sign him again

Hickey, to be honest .. isn't overwhelming me.. he's shaping as a 3rd pair guy .. and he's also going to his 4th year , no guarantee of signing him ..I think he was deeper down the depth chart of the guys we have . That year he made the World Juniors he did not impress me at all. 

 

But he was a stable D during the juniors? 

 

I think it's poor asset management. I guess at least it isn't a 1st? 

If Hickey was re-drafted, would he be a 2nd rounder? So it's a, whatever Hickey is worth, plus the 3rd (maybe a 2nd), for Smith.

 

i was interested in seeing what Hickey could turn out to be...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

But he was a stable D during the juniors? 

 

I think it's poor asset management. I guess at least it isn't a 1st? 

If Hickey was re-drafted, would he be a 2nd rounder? So it's a, whatever Hickey is worth, plus the 3rd (maybe a 2nd), for Smith.

 

i was interested in seeing what Hickey could turn out to be...

I agree. I dont like the deal that much, hickey and a 2nd rounder for smith basically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very poor trade. 

I do think Smith is an upgrade but at 35 years old and you gave up a very good D prospect and potentially a 2nd rounder only if they make the playoffs? you just gambled a ton in trade and salary on an aging goalie. 

 

Not good.... hope I'm wrong but this really looks like the flames panicked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I agree. I dont like the deal that much, hickey and a 2nd rounder for smith basically.

I'll wait to see how part 2 pans out.. as I mentioned before, if theyre walking away from Johnson?  BT already has a plan for backup  (or just resign Johnson in UFA)

And I really have to wonder if BT knows something about their ability to sign Hickey without him testing UFA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith is a legit number 1, very good goalie on a very bad team. I love his compete, he very much is a goalie that hates to lose and hates to get scored on. He is going to hold his defense accountable.

 

I hate losing Hickey, but maybe he has told Calgary that he doesn't plan to sign, which drastically changed the look of this trade. The 2nd will hurt, but we also are saving about $1.5m/year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...