Flames Defense

[LouCifer]

4 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

No & no.

We don't even have picks to offer as sweeteners.

 

Hey FF, ya, I was being facetious. Though I like Schlemko, I know there's no way Bart gets it done and I'm aware of the lack of picks we have as well. Even if we had the picks, I wouldn't be sweetening the pot for the 6D position with any of them. 

 

My Brouwer comment was equally facetious but I hit the wrong emoji - meant for it to be a wink!  

 

I do agree with you that Montreal would have interest in Backlund, and I'm glad you're on the don't trade Backlund bus now!  

[Flyerfan52]

5 minutes ago, lou44291 said:

 

Hey FF, ya, I was being facetious. Though I like Schlemko, I know there's no way Bart gets it done and I'm aware of the lack of picks we have as well. Even if we had the picks, I wouldn't be sweetening the pot for the 6D position with any of them. 

 

My Brouwer comment was equally facetious but I hit the wrong emoji - meant for it to be a wink!  

 

I do agree with you that Montreal would have interest in Backlund, and I'm glad you're on the don't trade Backlund bus now!  

No worries. I thought you were just funning.

 

On a serious note if Backs refuses to sign for under market (if I were his agent I'd push that he seems to be more valuable than Monny or Gaudreau) can you imagine a place that needs him more than Montreal? I wonder what ransom we could get filling their main need.

I really don't want to trade him but am afraid we/management are hitching our star to that imaginary tomorrow where we compete now but end up losing midstream as we wait on all the future to grow up.

[CheersMan]

2 hours ago, lou44291 said:

 

I'm with you TD. I heard Schlemko has a broken hand now, and Montreal is reeling... think they'd take a healthy Bart for Schlemko (broken hand and all?) 

I doubt it, but I still like Schlemko and think he's be a decent fit as 6D with Stone. 

 

Think Montreal would take Brouwer? 

It wasn’t that long ago when Schlemko played here.  We got him for nothing.  I appreciated his play and supported him on here regularly, thought he was a decent dman with limited role.  Many here whipped him regularly, simply because he was a 4-6 dman.  Bart is getting whipped in a similar fashion for simply being #6 dman.  I like Schlemko, he would be an improvement, but our 6 spot needs to be available for a deserving one on a cheap contract, right now Bart is filling that role, Kulak can and will as well, maybe Wotherspoon too.

Like someone said earlier, Bart is not the reason this team is losing.  Our problems are not goaltending or defensemen. 

[DirtyDeeds]

13 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

No worries. I thought you were just funning.

 

On a serious note if Backs refuses to sign for under market (if I were his agent I'd push that he seems to be more valuable than Monny or Gaudreau) can you imagine a place that needs him more than Montreal? I wonder what ransom we could get filling their main need.

I really don't want to trade him but am afraid we/management are hitching our star to that imaginary tomorrow where we compete now but end up losing midstream as we wait on all the future to grow up.

Oilers have been finding out this too..... Still.....

 

maybe there is more to JJ's thoughts about development than we want to admit. Then again 

 

Owners want playoff hockey... every year.... 

Management wants right mix of vets fossils and experience to go with all the...

Prospects... we need the quality cheap prospects and we want them to develop faster than anyone else...

 

Goaltending.. We needed it bad.. are we on the correct path?

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Oilers have been finding out this too..... Still.....

 

maybe there is more to JJ's thoughts about development than we want to admit. Then again 

 

Owners want playoff hockey... every year.... 

Management wants right mix of vets fossils and experience to go with all the...

Prospects... we need the quality cheap prospects and we want them to develop faster than anyone else...

 

Goaltending.. We needed it bad.. are we on the correct path?

 

The question becomes who did we get it right with?

Backlund

Brodie

Monahan - some may still dispute this

Gaudreau - was already used to playing against bigger guys, just needed a Hudler to help him complete it

Tkachuk - good start, needs to play in other situations perhaps

 

Who are we failing on?

Bennett, Lazar (not 100% on us)

Poirier, Shinkaruk, Pollock, Klimchuk

MacDonald

Kulak, Andersson, Kylington

 

This list is probably a lot longer, but some of this is just lack of talent (perhaps), lack of NHL opportunity to show the next level, or just plain misuse.  Most of these guys could still become fulltime NHL players, but when will they ever play for the Flames.  And every year we have new guys coming into the AHL or could jump from the OHL.  Guys like Foo (??), Janko, Mangiapane seem to be the best of the AHL.  

[MAC331]

7 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Oilers have been finding out this too..... Still.....

 

maybe there is more to JJ's thoughts about development than we want to admit. Then again 

 

Owners want playoff hockey... every year.... 

Management wants right mix of vets fossils and experience to go with all the...

Prospects... we need the quality cheap prospects and we want them to develop faster than anyone else...

 

Goaltending.. We needed it bad.. are we on the correct path?

I'm not sure what development means anymore. The NHL is so watered down and with this cap world many players are waltzing in from Junior or College and doing well. The AHL and ECHL are more like holding tanks for players there are no openings for at the moment or they need more playing ice time than they would get on the main team. Baertschi and Granlund have been mentioned, prime example of what average players can do "if" given the ice time. Would Shinkaruk and Poirier accomplish the same results if given the ice time on our top 2 lines ? Maybe, maybe not. Every time a GM brings players from outside into the mix the ones you have get push down and out of the depth chart.

[Thebrewcrew]

With Bart in the last year of his contract and being gone after this year why not run with Kulak and Andersson as the 6 and 7? I totally get the Andersson needs to play argument but a platoon with Kulak wouldn't be the worst thing IMO. I say this because I think Andersson will be a full time NHLer next season and getting 30+ games will ease the transition next season. Both are better than Bart too, however I can't see it happening as GG is fixated on L/R pairs 

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

With Bart in the last year of his contract and being gone after this year why not run with Kulak and Andersson as the 6 and 7? I totally get the Andersson needs to play argument but a platoon with Kulak wouldn't be the worst thing IMO. I say this because I think Andersson will be a full time NHLer next season and getting 30+ games will ease the transition next season. Both are better than Bart too, however I can't see it happening as GG is fixated on L/R pairs 

They could drop Bartkowski down to Stockton tomorrow if they wanted to as he is on a two way contract. I don't mind keeping Andersson true to the RSD ad he will get his chance soon the way Stone is playing. He has been almost as bad as Bartkowski and I can see BT trading him at some point this season.

[travel_dude]

27 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

They could drop Bartkowski down to Stockton tomorrow if they wanted to as he is on a two way contract. I don't mind keeping Andersson true to the RSD ad he will get his chance soon the way Stone is playing. He has been almost as bad as Bartkowski and I can see BT trading him at some point this season.

 

Not quite, but close.  Bart has to go through waivers first.  

Anderson kept his game safe and simple.  He had opportunity to put one on net, with a clear path there, but chose to pass off.  Overall, he earned the 13 minutes he played and could have helped a limp defense with more minutes last night.  The best thing was the positive stuff Gully said about him before and after the game.  Sure, they were sheltered a bit on zone starts.  So what.  They managed to play their way out of situations that were causing fits to the top 4.  

 

Whether BT and Gully decide to keep him up after Hamonic returns or return him to Stockton, it's nice to see the new generation show that they are on track.  They are seasoning well, compared to the forward prospects where the best players seem to be the newest ones.

[cross16]

Anderson was good but let's also remember it was 1 game and his first NHL game. Now I like Anderson and I think he will play in the league but need more than 1 game before you give him a spot IMO.

 

He needs to play and yes I think it would be a terrible idea to platoon him at this stage. He's only got 1 year pro experience so lots to learn and you don't learn by sitting for long periods of time. If a spot opens up at the NHL level by all means let him compete for it and play him up here but if there is no full time spot then he needs to go back to the A and play. 

 

Given the play of Kulak and the fact that Hamilton-Hamonic-Stone are all under contract for a while I would suspect we won't see Anderson for a little while. Bit disappointing, mostly because I don't want Stone for 3 more years, but not the end of the world either. 

[MAC331]

22 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Not quite, but close.  Bart has to go through waivers first.  

Anderson kept his game safe and simple.  He had opportunity to put one on net, with a clear path there, but chose to pass off.  Overall, he earned the 13 minutes he played and could have helped a limp defense with more minutes last night.  The best thing was the positive stuff Gully said about him before and after the game.  Sure, they were sheltered a bit on zone starts.  So what.  They managed to play their way out of situations that were causing fits to the top 4.  

 

Whether BT and Gully decide to keep him up after Hamonic returns or return him to Stockton, it's nice to see the new generation show that they are on track.  They are seasoning well, compared to the forward prospects where the best players seem to be the newest ones.

Who cares if he has to go through waivers.

You want to see that any prospect can handle the job when you bring them in. It's a measure of their development and readiness. I think their are a number of forwards that could step in now and help but he team doesn't need them currently. I am just not liking what I am seeing from Stone defensively right now, I hope his play improves but Andersson could make him expendable for a trade later on.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Who cares if he has to go through waivers.

 

Just pointing it out as you just talked about his 2-way contract.  The type of contract is meaningless to burying him in the minors except for what the Flames have to pay him.

His $612k comes off the cap.  

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

Just pointing it out as you just talked about his 2-way contract.  The type of contract is meaningless to burying him in the minors except for what the Flames have to pay him.

His $612k comes off the cap.  

I wouldn't care if they outright released him.

[MAC331]

I will say right here, right now I really like what I am seeing from Kulak so far because he is looking like a true NHLer.

[MAC331]

On ‎2017‎-‎11‎-‎10 at 9:31 AM, cross16 said:

Anderson was good but let's also remember it was 1 game and his first NHL game. Now I like Anderson and I think he will play in the league but need more than 1 game before you give him a spot IMO.

 

He needs to play and yes I think it would be a terrible idea to platoon him at this stage. He's only got 1 year pro experience so lots to learn and you don't learn by sitting for long periods of time. If a spot opens up at the NHL level by all means let him compete for it and play him up here but if there is no full time spot then he needs to go back to the A and play. 

 

Given the play of Kulak and the fact that Hamilton-Hamonic-Stone are all under contract for a while I would suspect we won't see Anderson for a little while. Bit disappointing, mostly because I don't want Stone for 3 more years, but not the end of the world either. 

I tend to agree with regarding Stone and wonder if there is an kind of deal to be had with TOR ? Are they still tight with cap ? What if we took back Bozak, he may be a player we could flip at the TDL or ride out his contract. Would this make any sense ? Just spitballing

[cross16]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I tend to agree with regarding Stone and wonder if there is an kind of deal to be had with TOR ? Are they still tight with cap ? What if we took back Bozak, he may be a player we could flip at the TDL or ride out his contract. Would this make any sense ? Just spitballing

 

They have some LTIR space they can use but they also have a lot of potential bonuses in play so I would suggest their plan is probably to be a big conservative when it comes to adding salary.

 

I don't think it would make sense no. Leafs don't need depth, they need a dman who is stout is his own zone and can matchup against high end competition and that really isn't Stone. Plus with the way the Flames look at center right now I don't think Bozak would be a fit at all. I think if the leafs were to target the Flames for D they would want either Hamonic or Hamilton. 

[travel_dude]

On 11/10/2017 at 9:31 AM, cross16 said:

Anderson was good but let's also remember it was 1 game and his first NHL game. Now I like Anderson and I think he will play in the league but need more than 1 game before you give him a spot IMO.

 

He needs to play and yes I think it would be a terrible idea to platoon him at this stage. He's only got 1 year pro experience so lots to learn and you don't learn by sitting for long periods of time. If a spot opens up at the NHL level by all means let him compete for it and play him up here but if there is no full time spot then he needs to go back to the A and play. 

 

Given the play of Kulak and the fact that Hamilton-Hamonic-Stone are all under contract for a while I would suspect we won't see Anderson for a little while. Bit disappointing, mostly because I don't want Stone for 3 more years, but not the end of the world either. 

 

Actually his 2nd game, but that's nitpicking.  

 

I was surprised by the length of the contract, almost like they were gearing it more towards Fox entering the NHL.  Right now Stone adds something I really expected to see in Andersson; a big shot.  At some point it's going to be a problem if our prospects are anywhere near NHL ready in the next two years.  Kylington, Andersson, Fox, Valimaki.  No room for them now with Stone and Kulak.  No room for them in the near future with the top 4.  I'm not going to get ahead on myself, but the spots aren't going to materialize unless there are injuries or trades.  How do you trade anyone unless you know what the prospects can handle.  One game here or there isn't enough.

[cross16]

21 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Actually his 2nd game, but that's nitpicking.  

 

I know, I just don't put any stock or value into 1 game at the end of the season that didn't mean anything. 

[MAC331]

57 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

They have some LTIR space they can use but they also have a lot of potential bonuses in play so I would suggest their plan is probably to be a big conservative when it comes to adding salary.

 

I don't think it would make sense no. Leafs don't need depth, they need a dman who is stout is his own zone and can matchup against high end competition and that really isn't Stone. Plus with the way the Flames look at center right now I don't think Bozak would be a fit at all. I think if the leafs were to target the Flames for D they would want either Hamonic or Hamilton. 

Fair enough, was just a thought. There has to be some team that could use a RHSD at some point. My thought when they brought Stone back was two fold, he gives us insurance should Hamonic get injured (which he has a history) and provides experience and time for Andersson to be good and ready. I doubt he is here for the full 3 years.

[MAC331]

59 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Actually his 2nd game, but that's nitpicking.  

 

I was surprised by the length of the contract, almost like they were gearing it more towards Fox entering the NHL.  Right now Stone adds something I really expected to see in Andersson; a big shot.  At some point it's going to be a problem if our prospects are anywhere near NHL ready in the next two years.  Kylington, Andersson, Fox, Valimaki.  No room for them now with Stone and Kulak.  No room for them in the near future with the top 4.  I'm not going to get ahead on myself, but the spots aren't going to materialize unless there are injuries or trades.  How do you trade anyone unless you know what the prospects can handle.  One game here or there isn't enough.

I would say with measured development time a prospect is either ready for the test or everyone will find out he isn't. If Andersson was all we had and no one behind him and failed we would be in big trouble. This is the main reason I don't have any problem with BT going with Stone and giving him a good contract. I think BT will be able to trade Stone if and when he becomes expendable.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I would say with measured development time a prospect is either ready for the test or everyone will find out he isn't. If Andersson was all we had and no one behind him and failed we would be in big trouble. This is the main reason I don't have any problem with BT going with Stone and giving him a good contract. I think BT will be able to trade Stone if and when he becomes expendable.

 

That logic is all well and good, but how do you ever know the prospect is ready until you are forced into it.  There is no magic formula for number of years.  Andersson looked to be ready.  He did well enough for his 1st game of the season.   Instead of playing him for three games, we saw 2 with Bart in.  So, we are back to this again.  An injury call-up that may get into a game.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have depth with Stone able to jump up the depth.  The drawback is that we can never really know the level of the prospect unless we have a major injury or trade.  And that's the reason I don't like having Bart available; he's just an ok 6/7 guy.  You can do better.

[MAC331]

40 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That logic is all well and good, but how do you ever know the prospect is ready until you are forced into it.  There is no magic formula for number of years.  Andersson looked to be ready.  He did well enough for his 1st game of the season.   Instead of playing him for three games, we saw 2 with Bart in.  So, we are back to this again.  An injury call-up that may get into a game.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have depth with Stone able to jump up the depth.  The drawback is that we can never really know the level of the prospect unless we have a major injury or trade.  And that's the reason I don't like having Bart available; he's just an ok 6/7 guy.  You can do better.

First I wouldn't use your logic. They have staff that measure these players progress and readiness at all times. They likely know Andersson could do a good job if called up and isn't that what we want, reliable depth so we don't lose quality at the position ? Andersson won't have the experience Stone does but from a talent standpoint he won't hurt the team's play. He is better off in AAA playing everyday than hanging around waiting for Stone or someone else to get injured or perform badly enough for I'm to step in.

[travel_dude]

16 hours ago, MAC331 said:

First I wouldn't use your logic. They have staff that measure these players progress and readiness at all times. They likely know Andersson could do a good job if called up and isn't that what we want, reliable depth so we don't lose quality at the position ? Andersson won't have the experience Stone does but from a talent standpoint he won't hurt the team's play. He is better off in AAA playing everyday than hanging around waiting for Stone or someone else to get injured or perform badly enough for I'm to step in.

 

I don't debate that they know where he is in his AHL play.  That's fine.  It's AHL play.

Last season he spent a month training with the Flames without getting in any meaningful games.  This year he gets called up for an injury replacement and the coach takes the easy course of dressing the guy on his off side on D.  So instead of three games, he gets one.  They noted some deficiencies in his game, but then sent him down before they could see the response.

 

I'm fine with him being in Stockton right now, except they aren't playing till the end of the week.  Perhaps they should have brought him for the Detroit game, just to be sure that Hamonic is 100%.  But, hey we have Bart, who can jump in at a moments notice on the wrong side.  

[MAC331]

21 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't debate that they know where he is in his AHL play.  That's fine.  It's AHL play.

Last season he spent a month training with the Flames without getting in any meaningful games.  This year he gets called up for an injury replacement and the coach takes the easy course of dressing the guy on his off side on D.  So instead of three games, he gets one.  They noted some deficiencies in his game, but then sent him down before they could see the response.

 

I'm fine with him being in Stockton right now, except they aren't playing till the end of the week.  Perhaps they should have brought him for the Detroit game, just to be sure that Hamonic is 100%.  But, hey we have Bart, who can jump in at a moments notice on the wrong side.  

Andersson's time will come

[The_People1]

It's time to ask, is our D overrated?