Burn it Down?

[jjgallow]

52 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

……..well a at least not till the offseason.

Something is broken real bad, out scored 20-3 in the last 5 games.

There is a pulse but she's faint. Makes the UFA decisions real easy come trade deadline if things don't change.

 

"The top players aren't going anywhere", that does sound a lot like another Aweful 5-player trade with Toronto followed by Treliving's exit.

 

It was always the most likely outcome so would not be a surprise.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

……..well a at least not till the offseason.

Something is broken real bad, out scored 20-3 in the last 5 games.

There is a pulse but she's faint. Makes the UFA decisions real easy come trade deadline if things don't change.

 

The biggest problem i see with this team is once they win a couple games, they get comfortable and satisfied.  They fall back to bad habits again. 

 

I have no doubt this losing streak with be followed by a dominating 3-game win streak.  Then, right after the monkey is off their backs, they go right back to losing again.

[jjgallow]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

The biggest problem i see with this team is once they win a couple games, they get comfortable and satisfied.  They fall back to bad habits again. 

 

I have no doubt this losing streak with be followed by a dominating 3-game win streak.  Then, right after the monkey is off their backs, they go right back to losing again.

 

 

I feel like...when they had the 2nd worst playoff performance in the NHL (thank you Tampa), management sent a clear signal of "we're good with this".   By doing nothing.

 

Imho that was their last chance to salvage the existing core.

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, jjgallow said:

I feel like...when they had the 2nd worst playoff performance in the NHL (thank you Tampa), management sent a clear signal of "we're good with this".   By doing nothing.

 

Imho that was their last chance to salvage the existing core.

 

Well, we had 3 missed opportunities.

 

1. Zucker... allegedly deal done which would've added another player to our top 6 with Frolik going the other way.  

2. Mark Stone... VGK came in late and offered Brannstrom after what some have rumoured the Flames had the best offer up to that point (Kylington + two 2nd rounders).

3. Kadri... done deal but nixed by Kadri himself.

 

Gaudreau - Monahan - Stone

Tkachuk - Kadri - Lindholm

Bennett - Backlund - Zucker

 

What a difference that could've made.

[Thebrewcrew]

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well, we had 3 missed opportunities.

 

1. Zucker... allegedly deal done which would've added another player to our top 6 with Frolik going the other way.  

2. Mark Stone... VGK came in late and offered Brannstrom after what some have rumoured the Flames had the best offer up to that point (Kylington + two 2nd rounders).

3. Kadri... done deal but nixed by Kadri himself.

 

Gaudreau - Monahan - Stone

Tkachuk - Kadri - Lindholm

Bennett - Backlund - Zucker

 

What a difference that could've made.

They are missed opportunities for sure, but all 3 would have never happened simultaneously. 

 

Stone would have been a pure rental. We’d have had to give him north of 10 to keep him, 9.5 in Nevada is more than in AB.

 

Zucker seemed like a fallback that ran out of time. BT probably guilty of putting too much effort into Stone.

 

Kadri, that one is disappointing. Him and Connor Brown were exactly what the Flames needed. Those guys bring the work boots every night .

 

The cap was tight  for every team in the summer, but we all said the Flames need to add a top 6 forward and they failed to do so. Regression was obviously expected from pretty much the exact same team, would have been nice to add a fresh new body or two so the group didn’t stagnate like it has 

[travel_dude]

31 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

They are missed opportunities for sure, but all 3 would have never happened simultaneously. 

 

Stone would have been a pure rental. We’d have had to give him north of 10 to keep him, 9.5 in Nevada is more than in AB.

 

Zucker seemed like a fallback that ran out of time. BT probably guilty of putting too much effort into Stone.

 

Kadri, that one is disappointing. Him and Connor Brown were exactly what the Flames needed. Those guys bring the work boots every night .

 

The cap was tight  for every team in the summer, but we all said the Flames need to add a top 6 forward and they failed to do so. Regression was obviously expected from pretty much the exact same team, would have been nice to add a fresh new body or two so the group didn’t stagnate like it has 

 

So, was that a show stopper?

Stone instead of paying for Lucic?

All it means is we would have to ship out a player making more than 3m.

 

We didn't trade Frolik for a lesser return because we didn't need to re-sign Stone.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

They are missed opportunities for sure, but all 3 would have never happened simultaneously. 

 

Honestly, we don't know.  If we wanted to make it work for this season capwise, then that means Backlund is gone this year.  Minus Brodie, Frolik, Valimaki, Kylington, and perhaps losing Bennett, Mangiapane, and Jankowski to make room for Stone, Zucker, and Kadri this season.  And maybe even Zagidulin is our back-up this season.  If we can trade Ryan and Czarnik also, then that's an option.

 

Gaudreau - Monahan - Stone

Tkachuk - Kadri - Lindholm

Zucker - Dube - Rieder

Lucic - Rinaldo - Gawdin

 

 

Giordano - Andersson

Hanifin - Hamonic

Davidson - Yelesin

Stone

 

Rittich

Zagidulin

[bosn111]

I get what you are saying about my choice in particular players. They were an example of how to go after players that may not be all stars per se, but fill in roles by doing what is essentially a 2+ for 1 type deal. My thinking is that Tkachuk could already take over the top line LW spot without dropping too much offensively after Gaudreau. Therefore I do not expect a single player back of Gaudreau caliber, but if 1 player can take over Tkachuks current spot plus add a second player who is an upgrade on RW and add a pick / prospect, then that type of trade still makes sense.

 

When you say that the Isles have plenty of cap space, it is if they are able to move cap out to sign Barzal. They currently have 5.5 mil cap space. They will need to re-sign Barzal, Pulock and a G and either re-sign Martin and Brassard or their replacements. The only UFAs are Greiss (3.333), Martin (2.5) and Brassard 1.2. Barzal currently makes under 900k so at 9 mil, that is more than an 8 mil increase and you know Pulock as an RFA will get a decent raise as well. When added together, they have 12.5 mil for raises for Barzal and Pulock, plus signing a goalie and 2 forwards. If Barzal eats 8 mil of that, Pulock gets even 2 mil extra, then they only have 2.5 for a goalie and 2 forwards. That is not big cap space when they already have almost 6 mil cap buried in Ladd and Hickey. The perceived cap space they have doesn't really exist when you work out the math. Eberle and Ladd contracts are anchors for them to be able to re-sign anyone short or even over the next 3-4 years. This means that even if they get Barzal and Pulock re-signed, it gets harder to re-sign Beauviller and others moving forward. While Beauvillier has lower numbers than Tkachuk, he appears to be a 20-30 goal range player, playing middle 6 minutes, consistently in the + of +/ - at only 22 years old. He is signed for 1 more year at 2.1 and then is likely looking in at least the 5-6 mil range. Pulock plays in the low 20 minute range per game on average with 2 games over 25 minutes. At 25 years old, he is consistently a + D man, He may not chew up the offensive points but 9 goals and 37 points is not bad last season. He takes few penalties and the majority of his points are 5 on 5. Less than a third of his points are on the PP. If he isn't a top pair D then at the very least, he is a quality pair 2nd line RD who would be one of our biggest D men at 6'2, 217. Only Hanifin and Stone are taller and none are listed as heavier. Most seasons, Brodie is over a third of his points on PP, and his point totals are basically equal to Pulock's with 2 years 14/15 and 15/16 being slightly higher. Pulock is 4 years younger than Brodie.

 

So basically Pulock is a bigger, RH version of Brodie stats wise who gets a bit less PP time and slightly better 5 on 5 results for currently lower money. Beauvillier may be a little behind Tkachuk and Gaudreau in points but at 22 he is on the rise. These 2 are really the target of my suggested trade, not Eberle who I just noticed has a NTC clause anyways. Eberle was more of a cap balance who could play middle 6 rather than a direct target. If you think he doesn't really add to the trade, what about Josh Bailey instead? I just don't see Bailey being available as he appears to be their top line RW. 

 

What other teams would you look at, and which players that would look at making similar moves? Brodie is not likely getting a huge increase contract wise but on many teams is a serviceable D man. Looking at upcoming RFA needs, and teams who are likely looking to add around the TDL to push in the playoffs are those who might consider adding Gaudreau, Monahan or Brodie. You are not getting young players, prospects or picks from teams that are rebuilding unless they are considered to be on the edge of finishing their rebuild.

 

Washington - Backstrom, Gundas and Holtby going UFA, no core RFA's to sign. Not a good trading partner for Flames.

NYI - See my analysis above and suggestions. They could be willing and able to make moves.

Boston - Coyle, Halak and Chara UFA, Debrusk RFA. Even if Coyle and Halak brought back, no big raises. Chara likely retiring at 42. Debrusk is only bigger ticket. Not a fit.

St. Louis - Pietrangelo is the big ticket. Bowmeester is aging. They are more likely to try to sign Brodie off season is let JBo go. Not a fit.

Edmonton - They would like Johnny, but not going to offer much in return. Not a fit.

Florida - Hoffman and Dadonov are big ticket UFA. They may need to make cap moves in the summer to sign them, but not in season. Not a fit.

Colorado - Has more issue for re-signing in the summer, but don't have a ton they want to move and bring back more salary. Not a fit.

Dallas - Little cap space, but might trade picks for upcoming UFAs (Brodie, Frolik) to make a playoff run. Not sending immediate help back and not before TDL. MAYBE

Arizona - Soderberg is only moderate ticket UFA, likely walking anyways. This would be a 1-1 type trade but nothing jumps out. Not really a fit.

Carolina - Haula only big ticket UFA.TVR likely small raise but they clear a ton of cap with Marleau so no cap issues. They click now as a team. Not a fit.

Montreal - Max Domi is only bigger ticket re-signing. No Cap issues right now but any moves likely need to be fairly balanced. Playoff push? MAYBE

Winnipeg - Kulikov only real UFA, Byfuglin is the elephant in the room. No real cap issues. Add for playoffs? MAYBE

Pittsburgh - Not going to trade for term players. Frolik for Playoffs for a pick? Unlikely

Philedelphia - No cap issues or big signings upcoming. Only middle hockey moves maybe. Not a great fit.

Vancouver - Not a fit, they are breaking out of rebuild with lots of young guys. Might add a vet for playoffs like Frolik, but doubtful.

Vegas - Not a fit, they have no need of our guys.

Toronto - Their contracts are far too rich. Not a good fit cap wise regardless of trade.

Buffalo - Buffalo has a ton of upcoming UFA and RFAs. Some big tickets. Currently out of playoffs. Likely looking for players with term. Gaudreau / Monahan might fit here.

Anaheim - Don't really see the fit. They don't really need cap space and both teams in similar position.

San Jose - Do we really want to help them? Not really a fit. They have tons of cap space.

Tampa - Not likely a good trade partner, even if they are looking for a shakeup.

Columbus - Plenty of cap space for their re-signings of Dubois, Anderson and Korpisalo. Don't see a great fit unless they want immediate help offensively.

Chicago - Strome is big ticket RFA, Goalies are the big thing here and we do not have a glut to choose from. Not a great fit.

Nashville - Grandlund is the big UFA, likely not a huge raise if they even re-sign. Might add upcoming UFA for playoffs. Not best fit.

Ottawa - Lots of contracts to deal with, already rebuilding. Other than Tkachuk, who would we want anyways?

NYR - A few players might get small raises, but not beyond their capability. Rebuilding already so not giving us young guys. Not a great fit.

Minnesota - Koivu only big ticket UFA. They have cap space. Don't see a good fit for what either team really wants / needs.

LA - Looking like rebuilding team. Nothing huge to re-sign next year, maybe Toffoli. They might want Johnny / Monny, but not going to give young return. Not a fit.

Jersey - They likely want to make moves, but who do we target. Hall will get paid as a UFA, so he is likely a rental as we don't have cap space to re-sign without significant moves. Not that him alone will cause cap issues, but we will need to replace Brodie, Frolik etc who are moved / walk in order to make space for him. They are rebuilding as well so no young guys coming back.

Detroit - IF not already rebuilding, they should be. Don't see them moving young guys. When healthy, they should be fine. Not a great fit.

 

However you look at it. The likelihood of doing much any time soon is just not there. A few teams might be willing to change things up to push for playoffs, but the market  isn't there for big name Flames. Even though I make suggestions, I know they are unlikely at best. Time will tell the future but I don't see any big moves much before the TDL.

 

[CheersMan]

4 hours ago, bosn111 said:

However you look at it. The likelihood of doing much any time soon is just not there. A few teams might be willing to change things up to push for playoffs, but the market  isn't there for big name Flames. Even though I make suggestions, I know they are unlikely at best. Time will tell the future but I don't see any big moves much before the TDL.

 

There it is, I found the meat and potatoes of your post, and I agree.

 

[robrob74]

On 11/21/2019 at 2:37 PM, ABC923 said:

How about Gaudreau + Brodie for Ceci + Nylander + 2nd? Assuming Brodie isn't out long term, this gives the leafs a better defender who plays more to the style of the leafs new coach and current team.  They also get a dynamic (most of the time) winger with a very good contract.  We have to tough it out with Ceci for the year, but then he's gone, plus we get another scoring right shot RW who is signed long term to a fair contract.  The 2nd rounder is negotiable.

 

Also worth mentioning: Money is close to even on this deal, plus both teams shake up their respective team cultures.

 

I don’t really like Nylander. He doesn’t do much and he gets paid more than Gaudreau. I feel like he’s a 65 point guy so like a lesser Gaudreau and with our team he would need to drive play. It’s why trading Gaudreau is tricky. He runs the top line and he runs the PP. 

[jjgallow]

23 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I don’t really like Nylander. He doesn’t do much and he gets paid more than Gaudreau. I feel like he’s a 65 point guy so like a lesser Gaudreau and with our team he would need to drive play. It’s why trading Gaudreau is tricky. He runs the top line and he runs the PP. 

 

I don't think trading Gaudreau is tough at all, we have multiple guys who could run powerplay.  What's tough is trading players who stop the other team from controlling the game.  And that's not Gaudreau.   In fact we currently lack these players.

 

On Nylander, I agree.   It's tough as is actually from here.  But it would be entirely missing the point of why a trade is needed.  It would be all of Gaudreau's weaknesses without the strengths.

[The_People1]

On 11/22/2019 at 6:08 PM, bosn111 said:

I get what you are saying about my choice in particular players. They were an example of how to go after players that may not be all stars per se, but fill in roles by doing what is essentially a 2+ for 1 type deal. My thinking is that Tkachuk could already take over the top line LW spot without dropping too much offensively after Gaudreau. Therefore I do not expect a single player back of Gaudreau caliber, but if 1 player can take over Tkachuks current spot plus add a second player who is an upgrade on RW and add a pick / prospect, then that type of trade still makes sense.

 

I'm open to the idea that we trade Gaudreau for a young up and comer but the names you mentioned are just a miss.

 

Spencer Knight is dominating US College right now.  Could we move Gaudreau for Knight?... knowing he's probably 3 years away from NHL ready?  Meanwhile, FLA has locked up Bobrovsky for $10 x 7-years.  http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=209480

 

Could the Sabres use Gaudreau?  They have some cap room and they could use a stud LW.  Maybe we could target Dylan Cozens who is probably NHL ready next season?  RHS C but needs to add some bulk to his frame...  http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=197770

 

Who else?  Nico Hischier and Nolan Patrick are buy-low players right now.

[jjgallow]

 

Flames continue to oblige, Bill Peters I did not expect but when things change they don't wait

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Flames continue to oblige, Bill Peters I did not expect but when things change they don't wait

 

not fired! 😠

[jjgallow]

13 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

not fired! 😠

 

They are probably just figuring out how to not make this entire thread come true.    Or, how that process will look like.

 

Bill isn't  the only one looking behind his back now