So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[MAC331]

2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

The leafs want RD since they already have Reily and Gardiner on LD.

Maybe they could trade Gardiner or Reilly for a RH D from someone else.

[cross16]

48 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Here is one Mark Giordano to TOR for one of Mitch Marner or William Nylander both RHS that could play RW.

 

I think Marner is close to untouchable and I while I can see Nylander being dealt at some point Gio isn't the right target. I think if they were to move Nylander it be for a core dman in the prime of his career and that isn't Gio. 

[Flyerfan52]

53 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I don't think Philly would trade Simmonds for Gaudreau and Ferland let alone adding Giroux in there. 

 

I think Simmonds would be a nearly impossible get. Not sure there is a better contract in the league than that one. 

Agree on both points but especially the high lighted 1.

If the Flyers traded for Gaudreau it would be to play with Giroux & Simmonds. The return would start with B Schenn for cap space & probably 1 of their many young, good LDs. Depending on which LD there might be a pick coming back with Hagg or Morin but not if it was Ghost or Provorov.

[JTech780]

I get the idea of trading Giordano, but I just don't think it's a good move at this point unless we are getting a top pairing guy in return. I just don't think our defense is deep enough with Giordano let alone after trading him away.

 

I might be in the minority on this but I think the offense is there for this team, so for me it's not a major concern. I think you will see bounce back years from Gaudreau and Monahan. I think Tkachuk, Bennett, Ferland and Lazar will all take steps forward offensively. Also I think there are guys on the farm that capable of contributing more than some of the vets playing 4th line right now. 

[Flyerfan52]

14 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I get the idea of trading Giordano, but I just don't think it's a good move at this point unless we are getting a top pairing guy in return. I just don't think our defense is deep enough with Giordano let alone after trading him away.

 

I might be in the minority on this but I think the offense is there for this team, so for me it's not a major concern. I think you will see bounce back years from Gaudreau and Monahan. I think Tkachuk, Bennett, Ferland and Lazar will all take steps forward offensively. Also I think there are guys on the farm that capable of contributing more than some of the vets playing 4th line right now. 

The 3 I high lighted will have to as they'll likely be on bridge contracts of the "show me" kind.

[The_People1]

When it comes to Backlund, do we think it's a question of "if" or a question of "when"? ... to trade him.  Long term centers,

 

Monahan

Bennett

Jankowski

Lazar

 

Because, 

- who in their right mind would extend him at $6-mil-per for 6 years?

- with one more cap friendly year and coming off a career year, this is the "sell high" moment.  His value will likely never be higher than this.

- Bennett has every potential to put up even better numbers "soon" and also play a complete game already

- Backlund has been injury prone in the past

 

What do you think is Backlund's value right now?  Can we get one of the Hurricane's young D?  Would Backlund be a fit for the Coyotes who traded away Hanzal and need Centers?

[AlbertaBoy12]

28 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

When it comes to Backlund, do we think it's a question of "if" or a question of "when"? ... to trade him.  Long term centers,

 

Monahan

Bennett

Jankowski

Lazar

 

Because, 

- who in their right mind would extend him at $6-mil-per for 6 years?

- with one more cap friendly year and coming off a career year, this is the "sell high" moment.  His value will likely never be higher than this.

- Bennett has every potential to put up even better numbers "soon" and also play a complete game already

- Backlund has been injury prone in the past

 

What do you think is Backlund's value right now?  Can we get one of the Hurricane's young D?  Would Backlund be a fit for the Coyotes who traded away Hanzal and need Centers?

I think its more relevant to ask when, I dont see the flames keeping him long term, as I dont think he will end up as more then the 3rd line center if bennett continues his development. I love having the guy but before we sign him long term id rather ship him off to a team to address another need especially if that need could be bring a back a young #1, for example who wouldnt trade backlund for matt murray,(not sure I would right this second but you get the idea).

 

Im assuming BT will have a pretty good idea on him come july 1st when he looks at the team and starts the intial negotiation for backlunds next contract.

[cross16]

I think there is more "if" then than some think. While I agree on the merits of trading him becuase you have Bennett and Jankowski I would also caution we don't realy know what they have in either yet. Don't get me wrong i really like Bennett and I think he is going to break out next year, but I "think" I don't "know". Given how imprortant centers are how comfortable are they trading a VERY good one on the basis of what they "might" have. 

 

I think the way to bridge that is to try and get Backlund on a 5 year deal or less. I think if they can get him for around the same as Frans Nielson (5 years at 25million) you have a situation where he is probably still trade able in 2-3 years. I think that is plan A because then you hedge your risk a little bit by still having Backlund around if Bennett/Jankowski don't become what you thought or if you have to move Bennett to the wing. 

 

Of course the other question is what do you get in trade? Ryan O'Reilly netted what was at the time 2 very good prospects 1 decent one and a pick but is Backlund worth that? Probably not IMO. Brandon Sutter cost a decent 3rd line center, depth dman, and a 2nd so I think your return via trade is going to be in between that. As much as Backlund's value is high right now, I also think its somewhat muted because he is only 1 year away from UFA. So unless you can get an extension in place prior to (which is rare) Flames might not get the value they expect. 

[cccsberg]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't think Philly would trade Simmonds for Gaudreau and Ferland let alone adding Giroux in there. 

 

I think Simmonds would be a nearly impossible get. Not sure there is a better contract in the league than that one. 

While Simmonds is a great contract, Giroux is a terrible one.  It balances out.  The premise of my trade is still there.  Philly has some excellent players that are fully prime, but most of their young guns are very young so they may be looking to get younger.

[cross16]

22 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

very true.. the way Johnny is going to a true clutch impact player , is one of 2 ways .. either he beefs up slightly , and becomes a Fleury like player -- gets in peoples faces, hacks back .. make there be some penalty for tossing him around ..make players think twice before getting in his face...   or ..  the linemates need to make the room for him. A-la You touch Johnny, we touch you...

As much as I dont condone it, just one incident where Johnny gets enough and spears a Kesler in the junk would buy him some space around the league.. and be well worth the game or 2 suspension he'd likely get 

 

Bringing the conversation back a little, but I agree with this Johnny needs to stand up for himself and stop just crying to the officials. Teams are doing it because they know how he is going to respond so someone coming to Gaudreau's defense isn't going to do a darn thing. You think Kesler is going to stand up and fight someone? NO. He'll keep doing it until Johnny can show him it doesn't bother him anymore.

 

I also think people are really overreacting with Johnny here. Did he have the season or playoffs he wanted, no of course not but it's his 3rd season in the league. People act like he can't play in the playoffs but forget he had 9 points in 11 playoff games in 2015 (including 3 in the 5 games vs the Ducks). He's won a National Championship (scoring a key goal), a USHL title and a WJC Gold where he was one of if not their best player. This whole idea that Johnny needs to be traded because he isn't the type of player that can win when it matters is one of the more silly arguments I've heard. 

 

Not saying there are no good merits to trading him because I think there are. I don't just don't a bad week in the playoffs should erase what he has done in his career, nor should we be labeling him as someone who can't play in the playoffs. 3rd year int he league, he can get better. He isn't a finished product. 

[cross16]

19 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

While Simmonds is a great contract, Giroux is a terrible one.  It balances out.  The premise of my trade is still there.  Philly has some excellent players that are fully prime, but most of their young guns are very young so they may be looking to get younger.

 

I see where you are going i'm just not sure I agree that its terrible enough to warrant losing Simmonds. I'ts high and there is term yes but Girioux is still a 60 plus point center (yes I know he was only 58 this year) and 60 plus point centers aren't all that common. I also think his last season was a bit of a one off and he'll bounce back, still a very talented player. 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I think there is more "if" then than some think. While I agree on the merits of trading him becuase you have Bennett and Jankowski I would also caution we don't realy know what they have in either yet. Don't get me wrong i really like Bennett and I think he is going to break out next year, but I "think" I don't "know". Given how imprortant centers are how comfortable are they trading a VERY good one on the basis of what they "might" have. 

 

I think the way to bridge that is to try and get Backlund on a 5 year deal or less. I think if they can get him for around the same as Frans Nielson (5 years at 25million) you have a situation where he is probably still trade able in 2-3 years. I think that is plan A because then you hedge your risk a little bit by still having Backlund around if Bennett/Jankowski don't become what you thought or if you have to move Bennett to the wing. 

 

Of course the other question is what do you get in trade? Ryan O'Reilly netted what was at the time 2 very good prospects 1 decent one and a pick but is Backlund worth that? Probably not IMO. Brandon Sutter cost a decent 3rd line center, depth dman, and a 2nd so I think your return via trade is going to be in between that. As much as Backlund's value is high right now, I also think its somewhat muted because he is only 1 year away from UFA. So unless you can get an extension in place prior to (which is rare) Flames might not get the value they expect. 

I agree with hedging our bets with Backlund at 5x5 keeping him trade worthy while having his experience on the team.

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

While Simmonds is a great contract, Giroux is a terrible one.  It balances out.  The premise of my trade is still there.  Philly has some excellent players that are fully prime, but most of their young guns are very young so they may be looking to get younger.

Simmonds is 28, Giroux is 29. That`s still about prime for forwards. Voracek is 28, Schenn 25 & Filppula (recent trade with 1 year left) is 33 while Couts is 24. That`s the vets that aren`t spear carriers at forward.

It`s at defense where they are transitiioning to youth & in goal we don`t know until they sign some as they wait for Stolarz & Hart to show they are ready.

C`mon, with me on the board please give better reasons than what you`ve tried as I & others will expose them as something that ain`t gonna happen.

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, cccsberg said:

 

How about Giroux and Simmonds for Gaudreau and Ferland, plus/minus any other small bit parts....  Philly saves a few $MM in the exchange, get noticeably younger more in line with their young defence with two guys still improving and local favourite Gaudreau already locked in.  Calgary gets bigger, talented, more experienced guys with skill and in their prime with years left and utilize some of their Cap space to their benefit.  

 

Not bad, not bad.     Could happen, the only thing is Philly's historically not been great for smaller guys (even though they could in fact do great with him, and protect him properly).

 

My only thing, is I think we should actually get younger.   Not typically a fan of trades where we get older, except when we're inches away from the cup (which we're not)

[jjgallow]

On 27/04/2017 at 2:41 PM, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Also we dont need more draft picks or defenceman, 

 

Absolutely no clue why you would think that.

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Enlighten us with your wisdom, would love to hear who we can trade him to and for what that makes us better? Stage is all yours

 

right, so I've already done that as have many others, no point in duplicating the thread, all you have to do is read it.

 

The bottom line is that a lot of great suggestions have already been made, and the theory that some players "can't be traded for the same calibre"...doesn't make sense.  Is my point.

 

If you feel that the team doesn't have any needs which would justify the trade, that is your call.   But it isn't everyone's call.   Definitely not mine.  I have slightly higher ambitions than that.

[tmac70]

46 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

right, so I've already done that as have many others, no point in duplicating the thread, all you have to do is read it.

 

The bottom line is that a lot of great suggestions have already been made, and the theory that some players "can't be traded for the same calibre"...doesn't make sense.  Is my point.

 

If you feel that the team doesn't have any needs which would justify the trade, that is your call.   But it isn't everyone's call.   Definitely not mine.  I have slightly higher ambitions than that.

Suggestions and opinions are great however if and buts don't cut it. I have read them, so based on he had an off season, he is small and can not stand up for himself are we not trading from a point of weakness? Hall for JG is not same caliber of player, Hall has more intangibles than Johnny, the only other that may have similar talents are small and skilled. We know what he can be, so find him line mates that help create time and space and the watch the kid flourish.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Absolutely no clue why you would think that.

Absolutely no clue why we would want to load up on players that are years away instead of help right now. Trading johnny for picks and D men that dont help us right now makes no sense. Sure we might be able to trade him for a high first, but that player in this years draft isent going to help us right away and I doubt next years draft pick would either, and how does trading johnny for say morgan reilly( not that toronto would do that trade) doesnt help our forward group. Sooo your logic is flawed.

 

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

right, so I've already done that as have many others, no point in duplicating the thread, all you have to do is read it.

 

The bottom line is that a lot of great suggestions have already been made, and the theory that some players "can't be traded for the same calibre"...doesn't make sense.  Is my point.

 

If you feel that the team doesn't have any needs which would justify the trade, that is your call.   But it isn't everyone's call.   Definitely not mine.  I have slightly higher ambitions than that.

JJ you are arguing what ifs, you have not named any players to trade johnny for. Many people have argued names that just dont make sense, im sure everyone would be all ears if you listed a trade that made sense right now.

[cccsberg]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Not bad, not bad.     Could happen, the only thing is Philly's historically not been great for smaller guys (even though they could in fact do great with him, and protect him properly).

 

My only thing, is I think we should actually get younger.   Not typically a fan of trades where we get older, except when we're inches away from the cup (which we're not)

The age thing is definitely a factor, with both the Flames and Philly having some very promising young D in their systems.  Calgary I think could go either way, with the suggestion giving them a solid 5 years to make hay with players better suited for the playoffs.  If Philly stands pat they are going to have to rebuild on the fly a la SJS in a few years.

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Not bad, not bad.     Could happen, the only thing is Philly's historically not been great for smaller guys (even though they could in fact do great with him, and protect him properly).

 

My only thing, is I think we should actually get younger.   Not typically a fan of trades where we get older, except when we're inches away from the cup (which we're not)

It's a new era. Hex is charge has done the opposite of the stereotypes you seem to be basing this on. Konecny (a recent 1st)  is 5'10" & 175. There are other examples if you look @ the roster, pipeline & recent draft history.

Do you still view the Habs as the "Flying Frenchmen" of old?

[Flyerfan52]

15 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

The age thing is definitely a factor, with both the Flames and Philly having some very promising young D in their systems.  Calgary I think could go either way, with the suggestion giving them a solid 5 years to make hay with players better suited for the playoffs.  If Philly stands pat they are going to have to rebuild on the fly a la SJS in a few years.

Check the pipeline in Philly designed to replace the vets when they do age out. Since those vets are only in their late 20s that leaves a few more drafts of forwards while the 20ish defense keep rotating onto the roster.

Hex drafted well & got rid of Homer's mistakes while Holmgren traded the high round picks for bandaids.

 

Going by the history of past GMs is a fool's game. I keep hearing Chevy is a do no trades type but the 1 large trade he did make is still paying off for the Jets while Buffalo is out a better D, lost 2 good prospects & have a problem child that will probably never become what he could. Picking your spot still trumps making bad 1s just to look like you're doing something.

 

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

It's a new era. Hex is charge has done the opposite of the stereotypes you seem to be basing this on. Konecny (a recent 1st)  is 5'10" & 175. There are other examples if you look @ the roster, pipeline & recent draft history.

Do you still view the Habs as the "Flying Frenchmen" of old?

 

I believe...you just called me old....maybe that's fair, lol

 

Sorry, just not as in touch with Philly (haven't been since Lindros).   Well on the plus side...they might go for it then.  On the negative, he'd have the same issues of being neutralized.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Suggestions and opinions are great however if and buts don't cut it. I have read them, so based on he had an off season, he is small and can not stand up for himself are we not trading from a point of weakness? Hall for JG is not same caliber of player, Hall has more intangibles than Johnny, the only other that may have similar talents are small and skilled. We know what he can be, so find him line mates that help create time and space and the watch the kid flourish.

 

Taylor Hall is also two years older....Gaudreau has more upside and less baggage.   I'm not sure that I agree with you, to be honest.

 

I'm also not sure that Hall is the solution here either.     But I disagree that it would be an unfair trade.

 

And both players can do better.  True of most players.

[cccsberg]

9 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Taylor Hall is also two years older....Gaudreau has more upside and less baggage.   I'm not sure that I agree with you, to be honest.

 

I'm also not sure that Hall is the solution here either.     But I disagree that it would be an unfair trade.

 

And both players can do better.  True of most players.

It returns both players to (near) their hometowns and both play similar positions.  It would be a pretty fair trade but not sure why a team would make it, unless the players were starting to complain.  I think it might motivate both guys to higher success as they would both be close, but not at the place they really wanted to be.

[MAC331]

10 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

It returns both players to (near) their hometowns and both play similar positions.  It would be a pretty fair trade but not sure why a team would make it, unless the players were starting to complain.  I think it might motivate both guys to higher success as they would both be close, but not at the place they really wanted to be.

Seriously I don't think the Flames are unsatisfied with Gaudreau enough to trade him. He is very much part of the plan here. I hope he learned some things about himself this season and spends the offseason making some positive changes to be better next season.