Where do you see our roster players?

[robrob1974]

CORE:

Monahan

Gaudreau

Hudler

Giordano

Brodie

ROLE PLAYERS:

Bouma

Glencross (for now, could be re-signed if the contract is right, in a mentoring role)

Russell

Wideman

Colborne

Byron (Filler/Role Player)

FILLER:

Raymond

Stajan

Jones

Bollig

Engelland

Smid

Diaz

Ramo

Hiller

McGrattan

TBD:

Granlund

Jooris

[travel_dude]

CORE:

Monahan

Gaudreau

Hudler

Giordano

Brodie

ROLE PLAYERS:

Bouma

Glencross (for now, could be re-signed if the contract is right, in a mentoring role)

Russell

Wideman

Colborne

Byron (Filler/Role Player)

FILLER:

Raymond

Stajan

Jones

Bollig

Engelland

Smid

Diaz

Ramo

Hiller

McGrattan

TBD:

Granlund

Jooris

Mostly agree. I see Stajan as a role player; steady, 2-way center that can play up and down the lines. Solid numbers on the dot. Diaz is also a perfect 7D; he is available when necessary, but doesn't get too rusty.

[Davis1891]

CORE:

Monahan

Gaudreau

Hudler

Giordano

Brodie

ROLE PLAYERS:

Bouma

Glencross (for now, could be re-signed if the contract is right, in a mentoring role)

Russell

Wideman

Colborne

Byron (Filler/Role Player)

FILLER:

Raymond

Stajan

Jones

Bollig

Engelland

Smid

Diaz

Ramo

Hiller

McGrattan

TBD:

Granlund

Jooris

I agree with this except I'd move Bouma to core. He doesn't put up a lot of numbers but He's only 24 years old, he blocks ALOT of shots, he plays a hard and in your face kind of game, and I can't recall him ever 'taking a night off'. I know it might seem odd to have a 4th liner as part of your core group, but I can't think of many other players that can bring what he brings. Premature or not, we need guys like him for playoff runs.

[Khrox]

Fair enough Davis1891, Bouma is about as core as you can get for a 4th liner. Whether I would name him a big part of the future leadership core or more supporting role is a bit of a different matter. If he is around for the next stage of the team (post-rebuild) I will still be quite happy.

[MAC331]

Right now if Backlund came back I would put him with Gaudreau and Hudler only because Backlund doesn't play well with Glencross. Monahan is quite mature and he is playing well with Glencross and Jones.

[cccsberg]

Nothing against your picks, but I really don't like the whole premise of this exercise. There is no such thing as "Core" players, i.e. untradeable, as anyone is tradeable, even superstars and generational players if the deal and timing are right. Secondly, labelling players and grouping them will tend to develop cliques rather than developing an all-for-one team unity. Finally, you need all types of players to win, and those supposed "role" players are just as critical to success as the glorified "core" payers. Just look at Edmonton, the whole Fab5 and "core" discussion has done nothing but alienate others and fracture the whole team.

We need to develop a team. That team is going to contain certain components that are critical, e.g. PK, game-breakers and etc but without all the other pieces it isn't going to win. Forget the Core/Role/Waiting to ship out & Dregs divisions and start focusing on building a skilled, dedicated and unified whole and the team will be far further ahead.

[cfreining]

One question...

Core players are players, you build your team around... How do you identify a core player? What skill or attribute does such a player need?

Couldn't it happen that a core player is a role player as well?

Ok.... I had three questions... :-D

[Flyerfan52]

Just as I don't see players on specific lines set in stone I don't group them as core, etc. There are too many expectations built into assigning those.

 

There are some I'd prefer to keep but I'm rooting for the crest, not the nameplate.

[kehatch]

You can call them whatever you want.  But LA is built around Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick.  Chicago is built around Toews, Kane, and Seabrook.  Could LA or Chicago trade any of those guys?  Sure.  But they won't.  Are those teams any less because they are built around a solid group of players.  Of course not.  

[Flyerfan52]

You can call them whatever you want.  But LA is built around Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick.  Chicago is built around Toews, Kane, and Seabrook.  Could LA or Chicago trade any of those guys?  Sure.  But they won't.  Are those teams any less because they are built around a solid group of players.  Of course not.  

Keith.Not Seabrook. Although Seabrook is pretty good too. (That's picking nit but Seabrook is likely available. I doubt Keith is.)

 

2 excellent threesomes to build around. Do the Flames have anything close to them? NO!

 

As I've said before, no player should be deemed untouchable. If there is a return that betters the team you go for it.

**********************************************************************************************

I didn't mention that #99 being traded opened the gates because that was more finacial then a hockey trade.

[kehatch]

Keith.Not Seabrook. Although Seabrook is pretty good too. (That's picking nit but Seabrook is likely available. I doubt Keith is.)

2 excellent threesomes to build around. Do the Flames have anything close to them? NO!

As I've said before, no player should be deemed untouchable. If there is a return that betters the team you go for it.

**********************************************************************************************

I didn't mention that #99 being traded opened the gates because that was more finacial then a hockey trade.

Everyone can be traded. Gretzky is a poor example given the situation. But Seguin and Kessel are two modern examples.

And your right. The Flames don't have players of that quality outside of perhaps Giordano. But that is what a rebuilding team does. Identify players with the right attributes to build around in hopes that they develop into those quality players.

Sure Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Giordano, Brodie etc could be moved. But from a practical perspective they won't be. It's semantics.

Regardless, unless Burke or Treliving or posting here in disguise none of us are actually building the team. It's just a discussion to find out who people see as potential players to build a team around vs really good supporting players vs those players that are just filling a seat until we find a better option.

This came from an early interview that Treliving did. He specifically identified one of his immediate jobs was to identify which prospects and players they were going to build the team around.

I think it is an interesting discussion. Is Glencross a long term building block for this team or has the depth surpassed him? Where does Backlund fit into the future of this team? Have people seen enough of Gaudreau to pencil him in as a core player? What about guys like Byron, Colborne, and Bouma who don't have the star power of other younger players but who have made large impacts this season and are at an age to be long term options?

[travel_dude]

Everyone can be traded. Gretzky is a poor example given the situation. But Seguin and Kessel are two modern examples.

And your right. The Flames don't have players of that quality outside of perhaps Giordano. But that is what a rebuilding team does. Identify players with the right attributes to build around in hopes that they develop into those quality players.

Sure Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Giordano, Brodie etc could be moved. But from a practical perspective they won't be. It's semantics.

Regardless, unless Burke or Treliving or posting here in disguise none of us are actually building the team. It's just a discussion to find out who people see as potential players to build a team around vs really good supporting players vs those players that are just filling a seat until we find a better option.

This came from an early interview that Treliving did. He specifically identified one of his immediate jobs was to identify which prospects and players they were going to build the team around.

I think it is an interesting discussion. Is Glencross a long term building block for this team or has the depth surpassed him? Where does Backlund fit into the future of this team? Have people seen enough of Gaudreau to pencil him in as a core player? What about guys like Byron, Colborne, and Bouma who don't have the star power of other younger players but who have made large impacts this season and are at an age to be long term options?

Even if we don't see certain payers as part of the core, the torches and pitchforks would be out if these guys were traded at this point: Johnny Hockey, Monahan, Brodie, and Gio. Johnny creates a buzz every time he handles the puck. Monahan is that big center we have been looking for since forever. Brodano is that combo that keeps us going. Call them core, untradeable, building blocks, whatever.

Hudler is close to that status this year, and really deserves a lot of credit for guiding the rookies along. He leads in scoring each year, ir seems. Colborne is a wait and see prospect, so I think he is kept unless a big overpayment comes back. Really too soon to know if he has that next level.

The rest of the role players are guys that help us win games. Filler are just keeping us near the cap floor. You keep them until a better option is found.

[MAC331]

I think this discussion is great to have, why not ? I like your point about which of our players will possibly be surpassed by better talent through this year and into next. Who will be Centers, who will be wingers will enter the discussion on who to keep for the rebuild going forward. Glencross has served us well but on a good team he is a flex 3rd line to 2nd line LW with some scoring ability. We have to start thinking about who will be our top 2 LW next year (Gaudreau is a lock for one). Raymond, Baertschi and possibly Granlund could be the players trying to grab LW spots.

I have been hard about trading Backlund and Hudler but maybe we do need these players because we don't quite have the developed players we want to replace them. (I'm allowed to change my mind right ? LOL)

On RW Jones, Hudler and Jooris for the top 3 lines is alright until we find out what we have in the likes of Bennett, Reinhart, Knight and Ferland perhaps.

 

The guys I would be looking to trade by the deadline would be Glencross, Stajan and Byron. I don't think they bring back a lot but it makes way for others to advance.

[DL44]

There would probably be a lot less debate if the categories were:

 

1 Core Building blocks: Players to build the team around.. Whether for leadership or skillset or ideally both

 

2 Expendable: Players that should be upgraded on.. They fill the lineup nicely now and maybe for a couple yrs, but...

 

3 Drive to the Airport: Players that aren't good enough now and will not develop any further, or dime a dozen...

 

4. Developmental : Worth waiting on to determine how they they develop.

[robrob1974]

I think this discussion is great to have, why not ? I like your point about which of our players will possibly be surpassed by better talent through this year and into next. Who will be Centers, who will be wingers will enter the discussion on who to keep for the rebuild going forward. Glencross has served us well but on a good team he is a flex 3rd line to 2nd line LW with some scoring ability. We have to start thinking about who will be our top 2 LW next year (Gaudreau is a lock for one). Raymond, Baertschi and possibly Granlund could be the players trying to grab LW spots.

I have been hard about trading Backlund and Hudler but maybe we do need these players because we don't quite have the developed players we want to replace them. (I'm allowed to change my mind right ? LOL)

On RW Jones, Hudler and Jooris for the top 3 lines is alright until we find out what we have in the likes of Bennett, Reinhart, Knight and Ferland perhaps.

The guys I would be looking to trade by the deadline would be Glencross, Stajan and Byron. I don't think they bring back a lot but it makes way for others to advance.

You're totally allowed to change your mind!

My line of thinking to start the year was that we will probably lose most of the season and have a push at the end of the season but finish in the bottom 10 of the league.

While it could still happen, I am now cheering to make the playoffs. They've changed my mind when I was hoping for one of those high picks, but now going for the playoffs.

With Backlund and definitely Hudler, you have the right to change your mind. I don't know your reasons, but for me, we have a great experienced mentor for our kids in Hudler. I just don't see us getting that in a trade involving him. He gives more than the trade would.

Backlund is a guy I am not sure what we have. If he can stay healthy, I feel like he'd bring exactly what a contending team needs in someone who does everything well, much like Staal when he was with the Pens. He'd be a great 3rd line C who can give you the scoring you need from your depth players. In the long run, I think he makes the team deeper.

It depends on what you get in the other centres coming up. But you can't trade him just because a young center is showing promise. That prospect has to prove it first and beat him out.

At the same time, he allows the C prospects to get better in the AHL, buys them a few more years to hone their craft.

[cccsberg]

Interesting exercise, and here is my 2 cents worth.  I removed the grouping "Marginal Player" as I don't see any players on this team meeting the criteria.  The other hiccup here is that no player by definition would be higher than "role player", as most of us would trade any player if it improves the team.  Maybe we should agree on the grouping definition first before BT takes this to heart.  LOL.

 

 

Yes, absolutely we need better definitions. How about focusing on time with the team which eliminates the nasty "value" or "quality" inference and focuses on who's going to be around the longest?

How about:

5 years+?

3-5 years?

1-2 years?

<1 year?

[MAC331]

I have always believed you build from the net out as a priority and the reason I saw Hudler as a trade piece to get another top Dman was because of his contract and performance. Now I see his ability to bring out the best in our younger players, especially Gaudreau and Jooris. I don't think Gaudreau would be having the success he is without Hudler.

Also I have always considered Backlund a flex 2nd or 3rd line C and when back would see him between Gaudreau and Hudler,then make a decision between keeping him or Stajan.

Lots of development is happening right in front of us, I hope Hartley stays with Colborne on RW with Monahan and Glencross. Jooris and Granlund are helping where ever needed but I could see Jooris as a RW and Granlund at a LW in the end.

 

The way it is going we could try to get deeper in top Dmen by trading Glencross, Stajan and Jones.

[MAC331]

This path could make some sense given within a rebuild you are looking to move some players out to get better players into positions of expectation.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I could see where we could trade Glencross, Stajan and Jones this year because we have Raymond, Backlund and now Colborne to replace them. The importance of Jooris and Granlund's play also plays into these possible moves being available to Treliving.

Next year we could see the arrival of Bennett, Baertschi, Ferland, Reinhart and Knight plus Wotherspoon on D.

[cfreining]

Let me give you my definition of a core player:

• makes other players better (on and off the ice)
• Leadership, leads by example,
• completely into the team identity (Hard Worker)
• Is a mentor for new players
• high skill set

I would suggest the players are right now:

Stajan

Hudler

Gio

GlenX

Russel/Bouma (?)

 

extending the core in the very near future:

Monahan

Colborne

Johnny Hockey

 

middle term:

Josh Jooris

Poirier

Bennet

Baertschi

 

 

I am not yet sure about Backlund. He is a good player, shows that he holds himself responsible, but he is too often injured.

 

A spot in the core part has to be earned. Nobody is declared to be a core player just by showing up. They have to exceed the current core, take over responsibility, show this immense will to win hockey games. Show dedication an willingness to teach the younger players.

 

Why Stajan? He is leading by example, he works hard, shows dedication and he has pushed himself out of the whinny boy corner. With him on the fourth line we have 4 lines that can create pressure and wear down the opponent. With him on the fourth line we will have a chance to win the cup in the future. Well... that is just my opinion.

[FiresideChat]

These are the only guys I see being longer term guys (2 years from now say)

 

Hudler

Giordano

Brodie

Gaudreau

Bennett

Monahan

Poirier

 

Everyone else is up in the air, and it's up to those players to put up or lose your spot. 

[cccsberg]

5 years+? TJ Brodie, Monahan, Gaudreau, Granlund, Colborne, Jooris

3-5 years? Backlund(re-sign), Giordano(re-sign), Hudler, Russell, GlenX(re-sign), Ramo

1-2 years? Bouma, Bollig, Raymond, Engelland

<1 year? McGratton, Byron, Jones, Smid, Wideman, Stajan, Setoguchi, Hiller

Additions? Poirier(5), Bennett(5), Ferland(5), Wotherspoon(5), Culkin(5), Arnold, Van Brabant/Wolf, Baertschi, Ortio

**no additions if not currently in AHL with exception of Bennett, though in 5 years that likely to change as well with an additional 4-8 players pressing for NHL jobs in 3-5 years.

 

Let me give you my definition of a core player:

• makes other players better (on and off the ice)
• Leadership, leads by example,
• completely into the team identity (Hard Worker)
• Is a mentor for new players
• high skill set

I would suggest the players are right now:

Stajan

Hudler

Gio

GlenX

Russel/Bouma (?)

 

extending the core in the very near future:

Monahan

Colborne

Johnny Hockey

 

middle term:

Josh Jooris

Poirier

Bennet

Baertschi

 

I am not yet sure about Backlund.

Yes, I like your definition and the list is OK.

[MAC331]

They were saying last night that McGrattan may be put on waivers as Backlund comes back. I think his days as a Flame are over.

Backlund needs to establish his own value with what remains of this year.

I would be including Jooris in a longer term category.

Any decisions on Baertschi, Poirier or Bennett will come out of camp next year.

[travel_dude]

They were saying last night that McGrattan may be put on waivers as Backlund comes back. I think his days as a Flame are over.

Backlund needs to establish his own value with what remains of this year.

I would be including Jooris in a longer term category.

Any decisions on Baertschi, Poirier or Bennett will come out of camp next year.

I don't consider Eric Francis as a guy connected to the team's moves. Sure, they could decide to waive McGrattan, but they could have done that before sending down Ferland or Baertschi or Knight. Waiving Big Ern just to have any two of Byron/Raymond/Granlund/Bouma sitting in the press box doesn't make a lot of sense.

[kehatch]

I don't consider Eric Francis as a guy connected to the team's moves. Sure, they could decide to waive McGrattan, but they could have done that before sending down Ferland or Baertschi or Knight. Waiving Big Ern just to have any two of Byron/Raymond/Granlund/Bouma sitting in the press box doesn't make a lot of sense.

I am not saying they will waive McGrattan. But if they do I think having young guys on a rotation is a good thing as it keeps them hungry. A scratch every three or four games isn't bad. I also won't lose any sleep if Raymond is scratched.

[travel_dude]

I am not saying they will waive McGrattan. But if they do I think having young guys on a rotation is a good thing as it keeps them hungry. A scratch every three or four games isn't bad. I also won't lose any sleep if Raymond is scratched.

True, and I have argued the same at times. My point was that since it is unlikely that Big Ern gets waived, having two younger guys sitting isn't really a great idea. One guy and Big Ern, not as big a deal.

If Big Ern was waived, then you are able to keep Granny. But you have Granny needing minutes to progress. You have Bouma, who is not great offensively but provides blocks and hits every game as well as the PK. You have Raymond, who can easily sit out a few games and not be felt too much right now; after he gets going again he is taking a spot full time. You have Byron, who is struggling right now. You can sit him and not feel too bad. He is a dynamo, who may not add offense, but his speed slows down the other team.

Other than that, every other player basically has a line and a spot. The team goes on a roll, and the players in the lineup play. They go on a losing streak, and the lineup is more fluid.