Rasmus Andersson

[travel_dude]

24 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Our D corp would look alot better if stone was playing bottom pairing mins with say engelland, and then bringing someone else in to play #4 next to brodie. I dont think id want to do that but someone like alzner would sure add some depth to our D corp if we were looking to spend money. If not someone like AOM might be a good fit going into next season depending how things go.

 

To be honest, I don't think that BT could have addressed the #4 spot this season.  No way to protect the player.  Stone was a good option because he is a step up over Wideman (remember him??) and gets to apply for the job for next season.  He may end up in LV or elsewhere.  He may sign a new contract with the Flames, but I think he is yet to prove he is a #4 here.  

 

I don't have enough faith in Kulak yet to say he is a regular NHL'er.  He's functional and played well with Engelland at times.  He's no better than a 6/7 player right now.  I think both Andersson and Kylington are better and have a higher ceiling in the NHL.  I would be fine with Andersson and Kylington playing next season in the NHL, assuming we had a true #4 signed.  

[AlbertaBoy12]

35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

To be honest, I don't think that BT could have addressed the #4 spot this season.  No way to protect the player.  Stone was a good option because he is a step up over Wideman (remember him??) and gets to apply for the job for next season.  He may end up in LV or elsewhere.  He may sign a new contract with the Flames, but I think he is yet to prove he is a #4 here.  

 

I don't have enough faith in Kulak yet to say he is a regular NHL'er.  He's functional and played well with Engelland at times.  He's no better than a 6/7 player right now.  I think both Andersson and Kylington are better and have a higher ceiling in the NHL.  I would be fine with Andersson and Kylington playing next season in the NHL, assuming we had a true #4 signed.  

I agree completely with your assessment of our D corp. I wonder though if next year hickey proves hes ready to step in or AOM if they shift the pairings around.  I know neither guy is as good as say werenski in columbus but at the same time im not sure I want them playing bottom pairing minutes with engelland, especially going into next year.

 

What if we see something like

 

gio-hammy

brodie-x

AOM/hickey/andersson/kylington-stone

engelland

 

Im assuming that they sign engelland back unless vegas makes him an offer he cant refuse leaving him as the extra D man. BT has already stated he wants two young guys up here next year, and I like stone being that steadying presence with one of our younger guys. Im not 100% sold that GG is going to move brodie back to the right side unless its a guy like alzner coming in who would upgrade that left side. I also wonder if maybe its a case where they move brodie up to play with hammy, im not saying they would be a great pairing defensively, but maybe then you use gio on your second pairing to mentor a younger guy with stone on the 3rd pairing to mentor a younger guy, and brodie/hammy can take the tougher minutes as I think they are both fine defensively.

 

brodie-hammy

gio-andersson

hickey/kyling/AOM-stone

 

I know it was TLDR and our D might be a trainwreck looking like that, but if BT decides not to make any trades we might be looking at something like that, which might not be to bad depending how seriously those 4 take this off season.

 

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I agree completely with your assessment of our D corp. I wonder though if next year hickey proves hes ready to step in or AOM if they shift the pairings around.  I know neither guy is as good as say werenski in columbus but at the same time im not sure I want them playing bottom pairing minutes with engelland, especially going into next year.

 

What if we see something like

 

gio-hammy

brodie-x

AOM/hickey/andersson/kylington-stone

engelland

 

Im assuming that they sign engelland back unless vegas makes him an offer he cant refuse leaving him as the extra D man. BT has already stated he wants two young guys up here next year, and I like stone being that steadying presence with one of our younger guys. Im not 100% sold that GG is going to move brodie back to the right side unless its a guy like alzner coming in who would upgrade that left side. I also wonder if maybe its a case where they move brodie up to play with hammy, im not saying they would be a great pairing defensively, but maybe then you use gio on your second pairing to mentor a younger guy with stone on the 3rd pairing to mentor a younger guy, and brodie/hammy can take the tougher minutes as I think they are both fine defensively.

 

brodie-hammy

gio-andersson

hickey/kyling/AOM-stone

 

I know it was TLDR and our D might be a trainwreck looking like that, but if BT decides not to make any trades we might be looking at something like that, which might not be to bad depending how seriously those 4 take this off season.

 

What would be so wrong with Brodie mentoring a younger player, it's not like he isn't a proven experienced vet. Why not Andersson ? He will be 21 at the start of next season.

Bring back Engelland and put AOM with him on the LSD with Bartkowski as our 7th defenseman.

Another defenseman if they could trade for would be Brad Pesce RSD with CAR.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

What would be so wrong with Brodie mentoring a younger player, it's not like he isn't a proven experienced vet. Why not Andersson ? He will be 21 at the start of next season.

Bring back Engelland and put AOM with him on the LSD with Bartkowski as our 7th defenseman.

Another defenseman if they could trade for would be Brad Pesce RSD with CAR.

Theres nothing wrong with brodie mentoring the player, I just dont know if I want a rookie defenceman playing 20 mins a night with a brodie is all. I would love to add brett pesce? or brad pesce? im pretty sure its brett doesnt really matter, but he would be a good add.

[travel_dude]

I know the great model is to keep players in the AHL while they develop, but I am starting to wonder about that logic.  Players like Ekblad and JOnes managed to start in their teens.  But I wonder if the age of defenders reaching their prime is also coming down.  Spoon rotted in the AHL.  Kulak didn't really improve by going back to the AHL.  Morrison was a highly touted college prospect, but fell apart in the AHL.  Brodie is the only one of our current crop that developed there.  

 

I guess what I am saying is that we don't seem to be developing our defense on the farm that well.  Maybe it's time to play the young players that show promise and only use vets as the #7.  Many teams have gone that route.  

[MAC331]

12 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Theres nothing wrong with brodie mentoring the player, I just dont know if I want a rookie defenceman playing 20 mins a night with a brodie is all. I would love to add brett pesce? or brad pesce? im pretty sure its brett doesnt really matter, but he would be a good add.

You are correct Alberta it is Brett, my mistake.

Depending on what happens this offseason and next draft we could have some excess offense type prospects that could interest CAR. I like is game and he brings size and is a RHSD which GG favors. He would be an upgrade over Stone I believe.

[MAC331]

8 hours ago, travel_dude said:

I know the great model is to keep players in the AHL while they develop, but I am starting to wonder about that logic.  Players like Ekblad and JOnes managed to start in their teens.  But I wonder if the age of defenders reaching their prime is also coming down.  Spoon rotted in the AHL.  Kulak didn't really improve by going back to the AHL.  Morrison was a highly touted college prospect, but fell apart in the AHL.  Brodie is the only one of our current crop that developed there.  

 

I guess what I am saying is that we don't seem to be developing our defense on the farm that well.  Maybe it's time to play the young players that show promise and only use vets as the #7.  Many teams have gone that route.  

It really is up to the individual to determine his readiness. Alberta mentioned the 20min playing time, is this not part of their development at the AHL, how many minutes are they playing there ? Physically all these young players have some growing to work through but it doesn't appear prohibitive for doing the job at the NHL level in today's game.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

You are correct Alberta it is Brett, my mistake.

Depending on what happens this offseason and next draft we could have some excess offense type prospects that could interest CAR. I like is game and he brings size and is a RHSD which GG favors. He would be an upgrade over Stone I believe.

Someone like him with the glut of dmen that carolina had is someone I would definatly target, I would be willing to trade our 2018 first or a jankowski for someone like this. I know everyone likes jankowski including myself, but adding some like pesce would be a huge add.

 

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

It really is up to the individual to determine his readiness. Alberta mentioned the 20min playing time, is this not part of their development at the AHL, how many minutes are they playing there ? Physically all these young players have some growing to work through but it doesn't appear prohibitive for doing the job at the NHL level in today's game.

I think the important point to make, is those minutes they are getting in the AHL is very important. Does anyone think that kulak or wotherspoon might have been over confident and approached their time in the minors as I dont need this, its totally possible its happened to other guys. I want to see a d man that comes up, and grabs the bull by the horns, making mistakes is one thing but making them and not learning is another. Kulak and wotherspoon both were either tentative or didnt learn from their mistakes when they played with the big club, so they got sent back down im assuming. Andersson is up here to learn and continue to work on his fitness I believe, as from the sounds of it, its still a problem but not as bad as before. I think if andersson can step in next year in camp, grab the bull by the horns and have his fitness in check he will be in the lineup. 

 

The physical part of the game is important, if a player cant skate or be consistent because of their fitness level(ie andersson) they wont be with the big club very long. Kulak and wotherspoon lacked consistency, and Im assuming thats why they got sent down.

[travel_dude]

To answer some of the questions.....

 

Wotherspoon/Andersson was the top pairing at times.  Spoon really worked on his game down there and was very committed to improving.  He was praised for that.  I don't feel he was given much of a shot on the big team, though, rightly or wrongly.  Only Kulak has ever had a similar opportunity as Bart.  Kulak was a bit of a numbers victim this year, having to be sent down because we had an abundance of players.

 

With the arrival of Bart and Stone, there was no way to keep Kulak.  The roster limit restrictions are done with now, but Kulak is also injured.

 

As far as when they get their shot, most young defense don't get that (NHL ready or not) unless there is a major injury to one of the regular 6.  Even then, the team may have a #7 waiting in the wings.  We saw Grossmann, Wideman, and Jokipakka play games over prospects that could easily have looked better.  Making it out of camp is easier said than done.  Tkachuk was not a standout until the season started.  BT is no different than most GM's; if he has a vet signed, they have to be blown out of the water to lose their spot in camp.

[MAC331]

6 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Someone like him with the glut of dmen that carolina had is someone I would definatly target, I would be willing to trade our 2018 first or a jankowski for someone like this. I know everyone likes jankowski including myself, but adding some like pesce would be a huge add.

 

I think the important point to make, is those minutes they are getting in the AHL is very important. Does anyone think that kulak or wotherspoon might have been over confident and approached their time in the minors as I dont need this, its totally possible its happened to other guys. I want to see a d man that comes up, and grabs the bull by the horns, making mistakes is one thing but making them and not learning is another. Kulak and wotherspoon both were either tentative or didnt learn from their mistakes when they played with the big club, so they got sent back down im assuming. Andersson is up here to learn and continue to work on his fitness I believe, as from the sounds of it, its still a problem but not as bad as before. I think if andersson can step in next year in camp, grab the bull by the horns and have his fitness in check he will be in the lineup. 

 

The physical part of the game is important, if a player cant skate or be consistent because of their fitness level(ie andersson) they wont be with the big club very long. Kulak and wotherspoon lacked consistency, and Im assuming thats why they got sent down.

Hey I have no idea what it would take to get Pesce, maybe a goalie. I seriously wouldn't be trading Jankowski, he may end being as good or better than any C we have now. Mangiapane is a LW that could have some value to them. I will leave the trading to BT. LOL

[AlbertaBoy12]

Just now, MAC331 said:

Hey I have no idea what it would take to get Pesce, maybe a goalie. I seriously wouldn't be trading Jankowski, he may end being as good or better than any C we have now. Mangiapane is a LW that could have some value to them. I will leave the trading to BT. LOL

lol I agree..its far too complicated to make a trade like that. Im just saying thats a pretty big trade to make, I dont think hes going to be as good as hamilton, but that would give us 3 good right shots for the future.

[MAC331]

14 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

lol I agree..its far too complicated to make a trade like that. Im just saying thats a pretty big trade to make, I dont think hes going to be as good as hamilton, but that would give us 3 good right shots for the future.

I have to admit to not having seen Pesce play that much but if he is strong defensively in our end and offers some offense with Brodie, I'm in. I recall him having some rugged edge to his game and I think we need that here. Hamilton is big and getting better with his D play but he doesn't put any fear into anyone.

Having said all this, it will be interesting to first see who of the prospects are here come Camp time and how the look. I think Andersson gets some real consideration.

[AlbertaBoy12]

27 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I have to admit to not having seen Pesce play that much but if he is strong defensively in our end and offers some offense with Brodie, I'm in. I recall him having some rugged edge to his game and I think we need that here. Hamilton is big and getting better with his D play but he doesn't put any fear into anyone.

Having said all this, it will be interesting to first see who of the prospects are here come Camp time and how the look. I think Andersson gets some real consideration.

I think so as well. Thats why I said andersson is up here to work on his fitness and learn with the big club in my opinion. I think the flames see him having a real chance to stay with the big club next year. Although I dont know if thats in a bottom pairing role or as brodies partner. I wouldnt mind seeing us add another D man to soldify our depth.

[MAC331]

29 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I think so as well. Thats why I said andersson is up here to work on his fitness and learn with the big club in my opinion. I think the flames see him having a real chance to stay with the big club next year. Although I dont know if thats in a bottom pairing role or as brodies partner. I wouldnt mind seeing us add another D man to soldify our depth.

We are shy of talent for our RHSD and spending either draft picks or prospects is the decision, much like the Hamilton timing. Morrison and Andersson are as close as we have for RHSD to move up from our talent pool. Are they ready or talented enough for NHL play ? Most would say NO. Pesce has another season at a low cost before he hits his RFA year. I could see a scenario where they try to bring back Engelland for 1 or 2 years for the bottom pairing and try someone like Andersson with Brodie next season. Stone as a UFA is an option but no guarantee he re-signs.

[Cowtownguy]

Never gonna happen, but it would be really kewl to have Burns play for the Flames. The puns are endless.

[DirtyDeeds]

On 3/30/2017 at 6:42 PM, MAC331 said:

What would be so wrong with Brodie mentoring a younger player, it's not like he isn't a proven experienced vet. Why not Andersson ? He will be 21 at the start of next season.

Bring back Engelland and put AOM with him on the LSD with Bartkowski as our 7th defenseman.

Another defenseman if they could trade for would be Brad Pesce RSD with CAR.

I can't recall any young D being mentored by the Flames let alone on second pairing. Wotherspoon was brought up then sat in stands multiple times for example.

 

Defense seems to be one position the Flames would rather let the players rot(as opposed to ripen) in AHL before they get much chance.

 

You can go back as far as Brodie, but even he was brought up and sent back multiple times until an injury forces the Flames hand to play him.

[cross16]

6 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't recall any young D being mentored by the Flames let alone on second pairing. Wotherspoon was brought up then sat in stands multiple times for example.

 

Defense seems to be one position the Flames would rather let the players rot(as opposed to ripen) in AHL before they get much chance.

 

You can go back as far as Brodie, but even he was brought up and sent back multiple times until an injury forces the Flames hand to play him.

 

Unless you are a high pick this is generally how it works on most teams in the NHL. 

[MAC331]

4 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't recall any young D being mentored by the Flames let alone on second pairing. Wotherspoon was brought up then sat in stands multiple times for example.

 

Defense seems to be one position the Flames would rather let the players rot(as opposed to ripen) in AHL before they get much chance.

 

You can go back as far as Brodie, but even he was brought up and sent back multiple times until an injury forces the Flames hand to play him.

Could be however younger players seem to be getting more early opportunities. I feel for Wotherspoon, it would almost be merciful for the Flames to let I'm try somewhere else.

I had heard that Andersson had some maturity to his game so he may get some serious consideration next season. I find myself thinking they should bring back Engelland which would take up the bottom pairing RSD. He has been good with having the younger partners and GG likes teaming vets with the young players. We have a number of LSD to compete for the 6 and 7 spots, maybe Wotherspoon finally lands that #7 spot. ???

[AlbertaBoy12]

41 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't recall any young D being mentored by the Flames let alone on second pairing. Wotherspoon was brought up then sat in stands multiple times for example.

 

Defense seems to be one position the Flames would rather let the players rot(as opposed to ripen) in AHL before they get much chance.

 

You can go back as far as Brodie, but even he was brought up and sent back multiple times until an injury forces the Flames hand to play him.

I dont think any of the young D we have had in the system and then brought up have done anything to deserve staying up. Very rarely have any of them looked ready to play except for brodie, but its not like any of them have grabbed the bull by the horns so to say and really been ready to play. Wotherspoon looked decent in a short showing in the playoffs and came back the next year very hesistant. Kulak looked ok in a short showing but was heavily sheltered and wasent exactly lighting the world on fire. Mistakes are fine for young players but I want to see them ready to make mistakes and learn from them.

[jjgallow]

30 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I dont think any of the young D we have had in the system and then brought up have done anything to deserve staying up. Very rarely have any of them looked ready to play except for brodie, but its not like any of them have grabbed the bull by the horns so to say and really been ready to play. Wotherspoon looked decent in a short showing in the playoffs and came back the next year very hesistant. Kulak looked ok in a short showing but was heavily sheltered and wasent exactly lighting the world on fire. Mistakes are fine for young players but I want to see them ready to make mistakes and learn from them.

 

Entirely agree, and there's nothing wrong with that.   These are D prospects.    Andersson and Kylington look to be well on the path to key roles with the Flames.   Their development is going well, maybe we shouldn't break what's working.    They're getting key minutes and playing key roles...the exact kind of roles and minutes we want them to develop in.   And they're responding.   Yes, they're getting close to NHL capabilities but that doesn't mean its the best way for them to reach their potential.   Nobody wants to see them rot away for 5 years.   But another year, and they could develop into PPG players, for example, in the AHL.  And the year after that, they could translate it to the NHL.   Not such a bad plan.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Entirely agree, and there's nothing wrong with that.   These are D prospects.    Andersson and Kylington look to be well on the path to key roles with the Flames.   Their development is going well, maybe we shouldn't break what's working.    They're getting key minutes and playing key roles...the exact kind of roles and minutes we want them to develop in.   And they're responding.   Yes, they're getting close to NHL capabilities but that doesn't mean its the best way for them to reach their potential.   Nobody wants to see them rot away for 5 years.   But another year, and they could develop into PPG players, for example, in the AHL.  And the year after that, they could translate it to the NHL.   Not such a bad plan.

 

I think you do believe that we don't have a good track record with AHL development.  Backlund and Brodie are the only two that come to mind as successes.  Bouma less so.  What I wonder sometimes is whether playing 3rd pair minutes in the AHL is better or worse than 1st pair minutes in the AHL.  Seeing as we tend to play the 3rd pairing here between 12 and 16 minutes, I wonder.

 

I think we will be left with Bartkowski after the draft, so is he better suited to be a 3rd pairing player here or would Kulak or Kylington be a better fit?

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think you do believe that we don't have a good track record with AHL development.  Backlund and Brodie are the only two that come to mind as successes.  Bouma less so.  What I wonder sometimes is whether playing 3rd pair minutes in the AHL is better or worse than 1st pair minutes in the AHL.  Seeing as we tend to play the 3rd pairing here between 12 and 16 minutes, I wonder.

 

I think we will be left with Bartkowski after the draft, so is he better suited to be a 3rd pairing player here or would Kulak or Kylington be a better fit?

 

I agree that we do have a poor AHL track record.   We also have a poor drafting record, so it is sometimes difficult to look at them in isolation.

 

All I know is that whatever is happening down there right now, is working (with the usual exception of goaltending).

 

 

[MAC331]

Just now, jjgallow said:

 

I agree that we do have a poor AHL track record.   We also have a poor drafting record, so it is sometimes difficult to look at them in isolation.

 

All I know is that whatever is happening down there right now, is working (with the usual exception of goaltending).

 

 

What's wrong with the goaltending results ?

How far back are yo going with these drafts ?

It has always appeared to me that the AHL is like a 2 to 3 year holding tank for players, if they haven't made it up after 3 chances are they won't.

[jjgallow]

On 02/04/2017 at 7:12 PM, MAC331 said:

What's wrong with the goaltending results ?

 

I'm refering to the historical AHL goaltending results...Brian Elliot's doing great of course.    I would ask....what's been Good about our AHL goaltending, historically?

 

On 02/04/2017 at 7:12 PM, MAC331 said:

How far back are yo going with these drafts ?

 

Basically from 1988 - 2010  (and 2012 sucked too).      Drafted Fleury in 1987, and built their dynasty prior to that.   Not a whole lot since.

 

Then in 2011, we pulled a 1987 and drafted Gaudreau along with a handful of other winners (some of which we ruined in development).

 

In 2012, we went back to our old ways and wasted most of the draft.

 

2013 wasn't much better, except we Aced our first pick (Sean Monahan),  so can't write it off (even though it was a no-brainer)

 

2014, 15, and 16     - I HONESTLY feel like we improved, successively, with our drafting over the last three years, and I was really impressed with 15/16.

 

On 02/04/2017 at 7:12 PM, MAC331 said:

It has always appeared to me that the AHL is like a 2 to 3 year holding tank for players, if they haven't made it up after 3 chances are they won't.

 

It has been that for the Flames at times.  It's actually supposed to be development.   And I have to say I am impressed with a number of things down there this year.

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm refering to the historical AHL goaltending results...Brian Elliot's doing great of course.    I would ask....what's been Good about our AHL goaltending, historically?

 

 

Basically from 1988 - 2010  (and 2012 sucked too).      Drafted Fleury in 1987, and built their dynasty prior to that.   Not a whole lot since.

 

Then in 2011, we pulled a 1987 and drafted Gaudreau along with a handful of other winners (some of which we ruined in development).

 

In 2012, we went back to our old ways and wasted most of the draft.

 

2013 wasn't much better, except we Aced our first pick (Sean Monahan),  so can't write it off (even though it was a no-brainer)

 

2014, 15, and 16     - I HONESTLY feel like we improved, successively, with our drafting over the last three years, and I was really impressed with 15/16.

 

 

It has been that for the Flames at times.  It's actually supposed to be development.   And I have to say I am impressed with a number of things down there this year.

I would have to say our draft went to H during the Sutter years because they kept using our draft picks to bring in veteran players through trades. As you point out we only got back into having quality drafts since 2013 however they snuck in Gaudreau and Jankowski. You may find this odd but development is different for everyone, some players come out of Junior and are as good as they will ever be. Others will continue to grow physically and mentally with further repetition. This is what you hope for while they do time in the minors. I believe we are seeing better results because we have better prospects than prior to 2013.