Flames Defense

[conundrumed]

8 hours ago, cross16 said:

Looks significantly better, even as call ups/promotions happen. 

It really does. Bonus points for not taking bad contracts back. Maybe none of these guys make the show, but that's where we were regardless. She's an uphill struggle, but I applaud Conroy for starting at the base and correcting the lack of D prospects. It's the right place to start, imo. The alternative of constantly having to sign AHL vets to deals is painful. Make it a prospect team. Scoreboard barely matters. Under 25 team is perfect.

[Thebrewcrew]

I think the Flames have to sign two defenders in UFA.

 

I don't care whether or not they're rebuilding, they've got 2.5 NHL D. Kylington is the .5, he's still not 100% back IMO and may not reach the level he was at in 21/22, without a suitable partner.

 

I look at through the lens of "how do they develop Wolf". He needs some help from the blueline. They'll ruin Wolf if they put him in a spot where they're giving up 4 goals and 35-40 shots a night.

 

 

Doesn't have to be sexy, Demelo/Edmundson/Scandella/Roy/Carrier. There's actually a decent list of defenceman available in UFA. I think you can get some of those guys on a short term deal. Can always deal them at a TDL as well. Carrier in particular, probably a longer term commitment.

 

I would expect a fierce battle for the 5/6/7 roles. Hanley/Okhotiuk/Pachal/Miromanov/Kuznetsov/Solovyov/Poirier/Grushnikov. All of a sudden you have a very unproven logjam. Eight guys for three spots. With the exception of Poirier, I'd likely look to include one of those guys in a Mangiapane trade. They just have too many bodies. 

 

Biggest point I'm trying to make is, they can be bad, without being a defensive trainwreck in front of their young goalie. 

 

 

 

 

[cberg]

23 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think the Flames have to sign two defenders in UFA.

 

I don't care whether or not they're rebuilding, they've got 2.5 NHL D. Kylington is the .5, he's still not 100% back IMO and may not reach the level he was at in 21/22, without a suitable partner.

 

I look at through the lens of "how do they develop Wolf". He needs some help from the blueline. They'll ruin Wolf if they put him in a spot where they're giving up 4 goals and 35-40 shots a night.

 

 

Doesn't have to be sexy, Demelo/Edmundson/Scandella/Roy/Carrier. There's actually a decent list of defenceman available in UFA. I think you can get some of those guys on a short term deal. Can always deal them at a TDL as well. Carrier in particular, probably a longer term commitment.

 

I would expect a fierce battle for the 5/6/7 roles. Hanley/Okhotiuk/Pachal/Miromanov/Kuznetsov/Solovyov/Poirier/Grushnikov. All of a sudden you have a very unproven logjam. Eight guys for three spots. With the exception of Poirier, I'd likely look to include one of those guys in a Mangiapane trade. They just have too many bodies. 

 

Biggest point I'm trying to make is, they can be bad, without being a defensive trainwreck in front of their young goalie. 

 

 

 

 

So are you saying they are losing specifically because of their current, inadequate D?

[Thebrewcrew]

12 minutes ago, cberg said:

So are you saying they are losing specifically because of their current, inadequate D?

Look they’re simply just a bad team right now. But the blueline is a major issue. They haven’t done a good enough job at prioritizing defence in the draft, the blueline that they are trotting out right now is a direct result of that.

 

If the Flames want to tank next year, all they have to do is run it back with a very similar group of blueline. They would have to play the heck out of Weegar and Andersson. Burn them out by mid-season, lose a lot of games.

 

 

What I’d be trying to do is prevent a Devan Dubnyk situation with Wolf. Highly touted prospect, they put him in a terrible situation in Edmonton. Give him at least 4 NHL D. The third pair and 7th D, by all means, make it an open competition .

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think the Flames have to sign two defenders in UFA.

 

I don't care whether or not they're rebuilding, they've got 2.5 NHL D. Kylington is the .5, he's still not 100% back IMO and may not reach the level he was at in 21/22, without a suitable partner.

 

I look at through the lens of "how do they develop Wolf". He needs some help from the blueline. They'll ruin Wolf if they put him in a spot where they're giving up 4 goals and 35-40 shots a night.

 

 

Doesn't have to be sexy, Demelo/Edmundson/Scandella/Roy/Carrier. There's actually a decent list of defenceman available in UFA. I think you can get some of those guys on a short term deal. Can always deal them at a TDL as well. Carrier in particular, probably a longer term commitment.

 

I would expect a fierce battle for the 5/6/7 roles. Hanley/Okhotiuk/Pachal/Miromanov/Kuznetsov/Solovyov/Poirier/Grushnikov. All of a sudden you have a very unproven logjam. Eight guys for three spots. With the exception of Poirier, I'd likely look to include one of those guys in a Mangiapane trade. They just have too many bodies. 

 

Biggest point I'm trying to make is, they can be bad, without being a defensive trainwreck in front of their young goalie. 

 

We are assuming Markstrom will be traded this summer but I kind of doubt it.  There aren't any suitors willing to pay the Flames price tag.  He might be back for one more year and then traded at next TDL.

 

If the D stays bad, then keep Markstrom for 50 games and play Wolf 32 to ease him into the NHL.  After all, Hanley and Pachal are still under contract for 1 more year after this.  Miromanov will be 3rd pair RD.

 

My preference is to not sign anyone and run with the kids like Solovyov, Kuznetsov, and the new kids we recently traded for.

[The_People1]

29 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

If the Flames want to tank next year, all they have to do is run it back with a very similar group of blueline. They would have to play the heck out of Weegar and Andersson. Burn them out by mid-season, lose a lot of games. 

 

In fact, just run Markstrom back too.  Stuff Vladar in the minors next season.  As if we lose him on waivers.  No one wants him.

 

And yes, just tankasaurus rekts next season.  After we draft a #1 D in this coming draft, then we need a #1 Center next year's draft.  Don't mess this rebuild up by rising up the basement too fast.  Let 2024/25 be a tank year.  That leaves us with a #1 G (Wolf), a #1 D (one of Dickinson, Buium, Parekh, or Yakemchuk), and then a #1 C in next year's draft.   

[conundrumed]

On 4/5/2024 at 12:18 AM, The_People1 said:

 

In fact, just run Markstrom back too.  Stuff Vladar in the minors next season.  As if we lose him on waivers.  No one wants him.

 

And yes, just tankasaurus rekts next season.  After we draft a #1 D in this coming draft, then we need a #1 Center next year's draft.  Don't mess this rebuild up by rising up the basement too fast.  Let 2024/25 be a tank year.  That leaves us with a #1 G (Wolf), a #1 D (one of Dickinson, Buium, Parekh, or Yakemchuk), and then a #1 C in next year's draft.   

Kind of a solid argument to draft Catton this year. He has top 6, perhaps 1C potential. Then focus on the Van pick and our 2nd for, say, the dmen that round out the top 10 available in this draft. Maybe Sam O'Reilly's still on the board at the Dallas pick?

All depends on the Flames' approach of course. Solid dmen are available lower, just that the top 5 dominate the conversation.

[cross16]

On 4/4/2024 at 9:04 PM, Thebrewcrew said:

I think the Flames have to sign two defenders in UFA.

 

I don't care whether or not they're rebuilding, they've got 2.5 NHL D. Kylington is the .5, he's still not 100% back IMO and may not reach the level he was at in 21/22, without a suitable partner.

 

I look at through the lens of "how do they develop Wolf". He needs some help from the blueline. They'll ruin Wolf if they put him in a spot where they're giving up 4 goals and 35-40 shots a night.

 

 

Doesn't have to be sexy, Demelo/Edmundson/Scandella/Roy/Carrier. There's actually a decent list of defenceman available in UFA. I think you can get some of those guys on a short term deal. Can always deal them at a TDL as well. Carrier in particular, probably a longer term commitment.

 

I would expect a fierce battle for the 5/6/7 roles. Hanley/Okhotiuk/Pachal/Miromanov/Kuznetsov/Solovyov/Poirier/Grushnikov. All of a sudden you have a very unproven logjam. Eight guys for three spots. With the exception of Poirier, I'd likely look to include one of those guys in a Mangiapane trade. They just have too many bodies. 

 

Biggest point I'm trying to make is, they can be bad, without being a defensive trainwreck in front of their young goalie. 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree and would just add while Wolf is a big factor I also don't think you set up young players well for success by just tossing them into the deep end without help.  Really none of the young dmen we have really profile as top 4 options, maybe have a 4/5 in there, so asking at least 1 of them to play 2nd pair is asking too much and IMO is not a good development model either. 

 

Need a stabilizing presence back there to help both Wolf and the young d they want to see develop. 

 

It's not even a given Kylington will be back. 

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I agree and would just add while Wolf is a big factor I also don't think you set up young players well for success by just tossing them into the deep end without help.  Really none of the young dmen we have really profile as top 4 options, maybe have a 4/5 in there, so asking at least 1 of them to play 2nd pair is asking too much and IMO is not a good development model either. 

 

Need a stabilizing presence back there to help both Wolf and the young d they want to see develop. 

 

It's not even a given Kylington will be back. 

 

Even if Kylington is back, that doesn't give us the stability we need next season, unless you are looking to finish bottom 10.  Kylington is best paired with a Tanev like defensive D.  Pachal is okay, but has a lot of growing to do to get there.  He has less games than Kylington.

 

When I look at who we have signed or likely to extend, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling:

Andersson

Weegar

Miromanov

Pachal (signed - waivers)

Hanley (signed - waivers)

Okhotiuk (RFA - waivers)

Kylington (UFA)

 

That's too many 4-7 guys.  I would be reluctant to put Pachal on waivers.  Okhotiuk has about the same number of games as Pachal and also requires waivers.  I can't really come up with pairings that leave me confident, seing as we have seen Ras paired with most of the top 4-ish guys we have.  Bringing in a top 2 LD might help, but I think that only solves one issue.

[jjgallow]

 

In my search for D who fell off the map, I came up with Noel Fransen.   Ranked anywhere from 1st round to 3rd round depending on who you go by.  And sometimes not ranked.

 

mentioning here as I haven't seen him mentioned before

[jjgallow]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Even if Kylington is back, that doesn't give us the stability we need next season, unless you are looking to finish bottom 10.  Kylington is best paired with a Tanev like defensive D.  Pachal is okay, but has a lot of growing to do to get there.  He has less games than Kylington.

 

When I look at who we have signed or likely to extend, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling:

Andersson

Weegar

Miromanov

Pachal (signed - waivers)

Hanley (signed - waivers)

Okhotiuk (RFA - waivers)

Kylington (UFA)

 

That's too many 4-7 guys.  I would be reluctant to put Pachal on waivers.  Okhotiuk has about the same number of games as Pachal and also requires waivers.  I can't really come up with pairings that leave me confident, seing as we have seen Ras paired with most of the top 4-ish guys we have.  Bringing in a top 2 LD might help, but I think that only solves one issue.

 

 

[cross16]

26 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Even if Kylington is back, that doesn't give us the stability we need next season, unless you are looking to finish bottom 10.  Kylington is best paired with a Tanev like defensive D.  Pachal is okay, but has a lot of growing to do to get there.  He has less games than Kylington.

 

When I look at who we have signed or likely to extend, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling:

Andersson

Weegar

Miromanov

Pachal (signed - waivers)

Hanley (signed - waivers)

Okhotiuk (RFA - waivers)

Kylington (UFA)

 

That's too many 4-7 guys.  I would be reluctant to put Pachal on waivers.  Okhotiuk has about the same number of games as Pachal and also requires waivers.  I can't really come up with pairings that leave me confident, seing as we have seen Ras paired with most of the top 4-ish guys we have.  Bringing in a top 2 LD might help, but I think that only solves one issue.

 

Which I think the Flames are and should be.  "looking for" can be debated and is everywhere so rather than go down that path I think the reality is there is little the Flames can do this off season to get out of the bottom 10. They are not a good team and I don't see much that can happen between now and next fall that's going to change their fortunes. There are some solid UFA dman available but now one that IMO anyway, is going to take this D core from bottom of the league to even average. 

 

My focus is on what's best for the young players. 

[conundrumed]

49 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

In my search for D who fell off the map, I came up with Noel Fransen.   Ranked anywhere from 1st round to 3rd round depending on who you go by.  And sometimes not ranked.

 

mentioning here as I haven't seen him mentioned before

I think when we get to the Dallas pick and our 3rd, so maybe 2 picks in the 60-70 range, him and over-ager Pulkkinen kind of intrigue me. Provided they're still around. Fransen didn't fall off the map, he entered it unexpectedly. Kids and progression...lord only knows.

And of course they both shoot left, why wouldn't they? lol

The draft fun for me is looking beyond the top 25. We have 2 picks in the 25-50 range and 2 more in 50-75. Maybe 2 more 75-100ish, but that's dicey.

Still better than how I've grown used to zero to maybe 1 on a good day. lol

[The_People1]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Kind of a solid argument to draft Catton this year. He has top 6, perhaps 1C potential. Then focus on the Van pick and our 2nd for, say, the dmen that round out the top 10 available in this draft. Maybe Sam O'Reilly's still on the board at the Dallas pick?

All depends on the Flames' approach of course. Solid dmen are available lower, just that the top 5 dominate the conversation.

 

D crop seems good in the top 8 this year though.  Is there no drop off by the Canuck's pick?  

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Which I think the Flames are and should be.  "looking for" can be debated and is everywhere so rather than go down that path I think the reality is there is little the Flames can do this off season to get out of the bottom 10. They are not a good team and I don't see much that can happen between now and next fall that's going to change their fortunes. There are some solid UFA dman available but now one that IMO anyway, is going to take this D core from bottom of the league to even average. 

 

My focus is on what's best for the young players. 

 

Some days Connie says the right things, then some days I hear the thoughts about looking to rebuild quickly.  Maybe it's just concern on my part, but I feel that they might just try to getting back to compete.  Decisions like keeping Markstrom even if the offers are there.  Or go big on UFA's thinking they can get back to top 16.  

 

It may all be needless worry on my part.    

 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

My focus is on what's best for the young players. 

 

In some cases, losing together is what's best for young players.  They have to look around that room and help each other become the solution.

[The_People1]

15 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Some days Connie says the right things, then some days I hear the thoughts about looking to rebuild quickly.  Maybe it's just concern on my part, but I feel that they might just try to getting back to compete.  Decisions like keeping Markstrom even if the offers are there.  Or go big on UFA's thinking they can get back to top 16.  

 

It may all be needless worry on my part.    

 

 

I feel the same.  Wishy-washy direction.  Not a clear message from Conroy.  I think players look around and ask questions wondering if they will be traded soon or what.  It's tough for the room.

[conundrumed]

22 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

D crop seems good in the top 8 this year though.  Is there no drop off by the Canuck's pick?  

It's all speculative. lol @jjgallow mentioned an interesting dman in Fransen. jj's getting busy, I've taken decent looks at him too. I've mentioned Pulkkinen. They say dmen take longer to develop, so does that also not apply to watching for d+1 dmen?

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, conundrumed said:

It's all speculative. lol @jjgallow mentioned an interesting dman in Fransen. jj's getting busy, I've taken decent looks at him too. I've mentioned Pulkkinen. They say dmen take longer to develop, so does that also not apply to watching for d+1 dmen?

 

If D take longer, then take a D this year and a C next year?  All will be ready at the same time 2026/27

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

It's all speculative. lol @jjgallow mentioned an interesting dman in Fransen. jj's getting busy, I've taken decent looks at him too. I've mentioned Pulkkinen. They say dmen take longer to develop, so does that also not apply to watching for d+1 dmen?

 

Pulkkinen looks decent.  6'-6"..  shouldn't stop us from drafting a D in the top 8 though.  I would go two D in the first round because you never know if they bust.  We must get a top tier NHL D from these next few drafts.

[conundrumed]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Pulkkinen looks decent.  6'-6"..  shouldn't stop us from drafting a D in the top 8 though.  I would go two D in the first round because you never know if they bust.  We must get a top tier NHL D from these next few drafts.

Dickinson is the guy for me. If he's there, just take him. He's pretty much really good at everything. Queue the Pietrangelo comps. No complaints with his handlers either.

Him or Levshunov, then it's a bit grayer for me. I'm not sure that I'd take Buium ahead of Catton or Helenius.

Wasn't Helen the face that launched a thousand ships? lol

[The_People1]

35 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Dickinson is the guy for me. If he's there, just take him. He's pretty much really good at everything. Queue the Pietrangelo comps. No complaints with his handlers either.

Him or Levshunov, then it's a bit grayer for me. I'm not sure that I'd take Buium ahead of Catton or Helenius.

Wasn't Helen the face that launched a thousand ships? lol

 

Crazy 4-points separate picks 5/6/7/8.  Dickinson is not going to be there at 8.  So every loss is crucial down the stretch.

 

Celebrini, Levshunov, and Demidov gone top 4 certainly.  Lindstrom gone picks 3-5.

 

I think picks 4-7 is where Dickinson ends up.

[The_People1]

39 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

 

Wasn't Helen the face that launched a thousand ships? lol

 

And is it bad I don't get this reference... 🤔

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

In some cases, losing together is what's best for young players.  They have to look around that room and help each other become the solution.

 

I don't view this as a win/loss discussion though because there isn't a dman out there, that I think would realistically sign with the flames, who is going to alter their path.  It's all depth guys and the idea is to give them a veteran whose been there done that, can help with some of he highs/lows, give them tips/advice, and also shelter them a little from the mistake prone players young players tend to be. For me there is a lot of value in that. I think the Flames are going to lose a lot next season but that doesn't mean it makes sense to not support your young players. 

 

I don't really but the blocking argument either. There should be no rush to get Gurshnikov into the lineup nor Porier, let them earn it.  Not to mention the Flames only have 5 NHL dmen under contract next year 2 of which are top 3 and then Hanley (age 32) Pachal (waiver claim bottom paring dman) and Miromanov (looking to be bottom pair at best). There are 2 top 4 spots available and you could argue the entire bottom pairing is open to. I don't think the flames would bat an eye at losing Hanley or Pachal given they got them both for free anyway and honestly if the Flames feel more comfortable with Hanley or Pachal playing right now over someone like a Kuznetsov that says something. 

 

[conundrumed]

28 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

And is it bad I don't get this reference... 🤔

lol...really? None of the pre-eminent greek mythology working for you? Joe Rogan never brings it up? lol

Being playfully facetious...