travel_dude Posted July 16, 2019 Report Share Posted July 16, 2019 1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said: Couldn’t agree more- especially the D zone draws. As bad as the Flames played in the playoffs, D Zone draws ended up being the difference between a 3-1 series lead and a 3-1 deficit. Games 2 and 4 were won if they could have won a D zone draw late in those games Winning the draw is only part of it. The bigger part is what you do once you win or lose it. How many full shifts did we spend on 1/2 of the ice surface? Seems like too many. Multiple chances to clear. Simple mistakes between the goalie, the D and the forwards. Clear it 50 feet, rinse and repeat. Icing, rinse and repeat. Two of the games could easily have been won by us in OT. Frolik in close. Same shift, it's in our net on a somewhat weak defensive play. Backlund misses a tap in, goes the other way and the last guy in scores unimpeded. If you are keeping track, Backlund was on for both the tyiing goal and losing goal of the first OT loss. He was in the box for the tying goal, and on for the losing goal in OT. Gio on for all of them. Hamonic on for the tying goals. They have to be better, not so much we need different players. Most nights they were better, just not in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 19, 2019 Report Share Posted July 19, 2019 On 7/15/2019 at 2:01 PM, robrob74 said: I like everyone’s suggestions. I think the only thing that does scare me is the size department. But that means that they have to buzz and if the team isn’t buzzing it’s not getting anywhere. I think it’s great to have speed and skill, but if they’re not going offensively, a lot of the time they’re average and small. At least bigger guys can take up a bit more space. Although i think one of the things the team needs is to learn to play engaging hockey all the time. Defensive zone draws there were too many goals where they didn’t move after the drop of the puck and allowed clear lanes to pass the puck for tap in goals against, or the last 20 seconds of periods. I think if Dube is going to be part of this next season this is how the forward group needs to line up. given no trades other than Frolik out. Who they select as 13 and 14 for forwards could address some size or toughness options, maybe Lomberg and Tuulola. On defense, trade or buy out Stone and keep Brodie, maybe he deserves a good run at a SC with us as his last hoorah here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 20, 2019 Report Share Posted July 20, 2019 Could we see this happening now ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Lucic, Backlund, Lindholm Mangiapane, Bennett, Czarnik Dube, Ryan, ?????? Work to be done. Does our cap work if we keep Frolik and lose Brodie and Stone ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Mangiapane, Bennett, Lindholm Lucic, Backlund, Frolik Dube, Ryan, Czarnik This would take our compete to a whole new level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 20, 2019 Report Share Posted July 20, 2019 3 hours ago, GM_3300 said: Could we see this happening now ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Lucic, Backlund, Lindholm Mangiapane, Bennett, Czarnik Dube, Ryan, ?????? Work to done. Does our cap work if we keep Frolik and lose Brodie and Stone ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Mangiapane, Bennett, Lindholm Lucic, Backlund, Frolik Dube, Ryan, Czarnik This would take our compete to a whole new level. You left out Jankowski..which would move Bennett to the wing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 19 hours ago, phoenix66 said: You left out Jankowski..which would move Bennett to the wing Jankowski gone traded in this scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 23 hours ago, GM_3300 said: Could we see this happening now ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Lucic, Backlund, Lindholm Mangiapane, Bennett, Czarnik Dube, Ryan, ?????? Work to be done. Does our cap work if we keep Frolik and lose Brodie and Stone ? Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk Mangiapane, Bennett, Lindholm Lucic, Backlund, Frolik Dube, Ryan, Czarnik This would take our compete to a whole new level. What did we get from trading Brodie and Janko? Also, are you buying out Stone or trading him? Hard to comment on cap without that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 1 hour ago, travel_dude said: What did we get from trading Brodie and Janko? Also, are you buying out Stone or trading him? Hard to comment on cap without that. Let's say we buyout Stone and get Scissons and Watson from NAS (this is the deal I would prefer to see happen. Would actually like to see Frolik traded for picks as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsman1 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 I just don't get the Lucic trade on any level.. Now we have a replacement for Hathaway Who should have been signed in the first place and loss of Neal .. One day the real story will come out with why but for a cap strapped team.. This is probably the worst trade in the history of the NHL.. This will be Treliving's albatross.. With the city and Flames now seemingly on the same page as far as a new arena goes.. has our mandate changed to.. win Now!! at all costs !! in order to fill seats for a new arena??? This leaves us with.. Gaudreau/Backlund/Lindhhom Tkachuk/Monahan/Magiapane Bennett/Ryan/Dube Lucic/Jankowski/Czarnick.. and Whatever we end up doing with Frolik cause he won't be here when the puck drops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 32 minutes ago, Horsman1 said: I just don't get the Lucic trade on any level.. Now we have a replacement for Hathaway Who should have been signed in the first place and loss of Neal .. One day the real story will come out with why but for a cap strapped team.. This is probably the worst trade in the history of the NHL.. This will be Treliving's albatross.. With the city and Flames now seemingly on the same page as far as a new arena goes.. has our mandate changed to.. win Now!! at all costs !! in order to fill seats for a new arena??? This leaves us with.. Gaudreau/Backlund/Lindhhom Tkachuk/Monahan/Magiapane Bennett/Ryan/Dube Lucic/Jankowski/Czarnick.. and Whatever we end up doing with Frolik cause he won't be here when the puck drops I am fine with people not liking the trade but to call it the worst trade in the history of the NHL is way over the top. I mean Lucic had the better season in just about every way over Neal. If you look at it over the last two seasons Neal has 5 more points than Lucic and is better defensively and physically. IMO this is a better option than re-signing Hathaway and keeping Neal. I like Hathaway and all but he will never be more than a 4th liner and to give him 4 years would have been mistake, a small one but a mistake non the less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 Much more work left to do. Lucic's numbers last year suggest he's declining rapidly, so you have to wonder if it makes sense to play him above the 4th line. If we resign ourselves to that fact, and he plays special team minutes to average out at about 13 minutes, then he's just an expensive role player. We can also begin to design a top 9 that will be scoring as much as last season. Even with the inevitable loss of Frolik and possibly one of Bennett or Janko. LW - JH, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Lucic C - Monahan, Backlund, Janko, Ryan RW - Lindholm Multi - Bennett, Dube, Czarnik Not exactly balanced. I don't know that Czarnik is a full time NHL player. He's okay, just not consistent enough. Only one true RW'er. And nobody that's played a lot of RW either. If we could use Janko and Frolik and Brodie to bring back a couple of RW's, I would be happier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, travel_dude said: Much more work left to do. Lucic's numbers last year suggest he's declining rapidly, so you have to wonder if it makes sense to play him above the 4th line. If we resign ourselves to that fact, and he plays special team minutes to average out at about 13 minutes, then he's just an expensive role player. We can also begin to design a top 9 that will be scoring as much as last season. Even with the inevitable loss of Frolik and possibly one of Bennett or Janko. LW - JH, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Lucic C - Monahan, Backlund, Janko, Ryan RW - Lindholm Multi - Bennett, Dube, Czarnik Not exactly balanced. I don't know that Czarnik is a full time NHL player. He's okay, just not consistent enough. Only one true RW'er. And nobody that's played a lot of RW either. If we could use Janko and Frolik and Brodie to bring back a couple of RW's, I would be happier. Pretty hard to put up points playing with Brodziak and Kassian majority of the time. I would put Lucic with Ryan and Bennett, I think Lucic would rebound with those two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Horsman1 said: I just don't get the Lucic trade on any level.. Now we have a replacement for Hathaway Who should have been signed in the first place and loss of Neal .. One day the real story will come out with why but for a cap strapped team.. This is probably the worst trade in the history of the NHL.. This will be Treliving's albatross.. With the city and Flames now seemingly on the same page as far as a new arena goes.. has our mandate changed to.. win Now!! at all costs !! in order to fill seats for a new arena??? This leaves us with.. Gaudreau/Backlund/Lindhhom Tkachuk/Monahan/Magiapane Bennett/Ryan/Dube Lucic/Jankowski/Czarnick.. and Whatever we end up doing with Frolik cause he won't be here when the puck drops I think the mandate has always been win at all costs. We sped up the rebuild (mostly because we missed on a bunch of drafts early on) and got rid of picks. We are ok, and I feel like this past season was the perfect weather/storm for us to win the West. We did it (were apparently a resilient bunch) uncharacteristically with poor goaltending. I don’t see this year being as successful as last. I am with Jigs and Peeps on the build of this team and this move only makes it feel like the vision is even more flawed. i think I will not mind Looch and his hits, but just not at the cost. I see at at least three UFA signing flops for BT, and this doesn’t make the last one right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 21, 2019 Report Share Posted July 21, 2019 30 minutes ago, JTech780 said: Pretty hard to put up points playing with Brodziak and Kassian majority of the time. I would put Lucic with Ryan and Bennett, I think Lucic would rebound with those two. Well, I think Kassian played a lot more on the top line as time went on, while Lucic bounced around a lot. If you are expecting more than 30 points out of Lucic, you may be disappointed. As for Ryan and Bennett, are you sugesting Bennett at C or Ryan with Bennett on RW? Just curious. For some odd reason Mangiapane performed quite well with Ryan. I think he was trending quite high in shots for/against, as well as not beng on for many goals against. Since we are talking about roster planning, playing Bennett with Lucic and Ryan means we don't have a RW for Tkachuk. And the 4th line is (as it stands) Mangiapane-Janko-Dube/Czarnik. Think we need to add some upper level depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 5 hours ago, Horsman1 said: I just don't get the Lucic trade on any level.. Now we have a replacement for Hathaway Who should have been signed in the first place and loss of Neal .. One day the real story will come out with why but for a cap strapped team.. This is probably the worst trade in the history of the NHL.. This will be Treliving's albatross.. With the city and Flames now seemingly on the same page as far as a new arena goes.. has our mandate changed to.. win Now!! at all costs !! in order to fill seats for a new arena??? This leaves us with.. Gaudreau/Backlund/Lindhhom Tkachuk/Monahan/Magiapane Bennett/Ryan/Dube Lucic/Jankowski/Czarnick.. and Whatever we end up doing with Frolik cause he won't be here when the puck drops ...a bit melodramatic? Flames are better off with Lucic vs Neal, forget all the other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 4 hours ago, robrob74 said: I think the mandate has always been win at all costs. We sped up the rebuild (mostly because we missed on a bunch of drafts early on) and got rid of picks. We are ok, and I feel like this past season was the perfect weather/storm for us to win the West. We did it (were apparently a resilient bunch) uncharacteristically with poor goaltending. I don’t see this year being as successful as last. I am with Jigs and Peeps on the build of this team and this move only makes it feel like the vision is even more flawed. i think I will not mind Looch and his hits, but just not at the cost. I see at at least three UFA signing flops for BT, and this doesn’t make the last one right. Lucic gets us a better, more effective player, increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick. Sounds like a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 2 hours ago, cccsberg said: Lucic gets us a better, more effective player, increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick. Sounds like a good move. I liked your idea, because it’s good that you think that and I see those positives in the trades. Just because I see them doesn’t make it a good deal. It’s more the contract that will probably be playing bottom 6 than the deal itself that I see as the problem. 5.25 million dollars is probably slightly under what a team wants to pay a 3rd line, not given to one player. Maybe split between two is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 7 hours ago, robrob74 said: I liked your idea, because it’s good that you think that and I see those positives in the trades. Just because I see them doesn’t make it a good deal. It’s more the contract that will probably be playing bottom 6 than the deal itself that I see as the problem. 5.25 million dollars is probably slightly under what a team wants to pay a 3rd line, not given to one player. Maybe split between two is good. Well sure, but that issue was generated over a year ago and the Lucic deal improves on a bad situation. It seems your problem with Lucic is not Lucic, but that it continues to remind you of a previous deal gone bad. Speaking of Neal, as others have said, it seemed good at the time but unfortunately/fortunately for the team he got beat out for the spot he was signed for, which happens all the time. So to bring this thing back to the beginning, I guess you would have been happier if Lindholm was never brought in and Neal was able to get that plum spot beside Gaudreau? Or you'd rather a weaker team with poor depth-like the Oilers-so that Neal "fits" in a Top6 role and his salary makes more sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 4 hours ago, cccsberg said: Well sure, but that issue was generated over a year ago and the Lucic deal improves on a bad situation. It seems your problem with Lucic is not Lucic, but that it continues to remind you of a previous deal gone bad. Speaking of Neal, as others have said, it seemed good at the time but unfortunately/fortunately for the team he got beat out for the spot he was signed for, which happens all the time. So to bring this thing back to the beginning, I guess you would have been happier if Lindholm was never brought in and Neal was able to get that plum spot beside Gaudreau? Or you'd rather a weaker team with poor depth-like the Oilers-so that Neal "fits" in a Top6 role and his salary makes more sense? Let me say for Neal's sake I'm happy for him to be moving on. I still believe as you mention if Neal was left to play with Gaudreau and Monahan he would have had the same numbers as he has always averaged throughout his career. I don't agree with the suggestion he was "beat out" of the intended position by Lindholm, rather by a new coach with other ideas. Peters decision wanted a RHS RW who was good at faceoffs and line support to help Monahan coming off wrist surgery and a few others. Obviously Peters decision was the correct way to go but left Neal in LF without the essential ingredients for his style of game. I think Neal will rebound and has plenty of game left but it wouldn't have worked here. It should prove quite interesting to see how Peters intends to utilize Lucic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 11 hours ago, cccsberg said: ...a bit melodramatic? Flames are better off with Lucic vs Neal, forget all the other stuff. AHH NO!! All the other stuff is why this trade sucks 11 hours ago, cccsberg said: Lucic gets us a better, more effective player, increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick. Sounds like a good move. More effective player? Have you watched any Oiler games. increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick.? 500k what is that going to buy you in today's NHL and Neal has to have a career best year for us to get a 3rd. We just took on a NMC and made our #1 rivals better and bailed them out of a tight situation. BT just got owned. Better choices Buy out Neal Add a 2nd or 3rd rnd to trade Neal for a bag of pucks Bring in Maroon or Smith-Kelly or Engelland on the cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, redfire11 said: AHH NO!! All the other stuff is why this trade sucks More effective player? Have you watched any Oiler games. increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick.? 500k what is that going to buy you in today's NHL and Neal has to have a career best year for us to get a 3rd. We just took on a NMC and made our #1 rivals better and bailed them out of a tight situation. BT just got owned. Better choices Buy out Neal Add a 2nd or 3rd rnd to trade Neal for a bag of pucks Bring in Maroon or Smith-Kelly or Engelland on the cheap Have you watched any of Neal's games, he was far worse than Lucic last year, and over the last 3 years their numbers very similar with Lucic providing a physical presence and better defense. After watching Neal last year, I just can't see a scenario where he goes back to being a 20 goal guy, he was the slowest player in the NHL last year and really wasn't close IMO. Sure he training with Gary Roberts, but when you lose that much of a step all the training in the world isn't going to help you get at back and certainly not at age 32. He will probably have a bit of a bounce back, but that's just because Edmonton will force him into a top 6 role, not because he is good, but because they really don't have anything else. If you listen Holland's interview on the Oilers page he even says as much, to paraphrase he says that Neal has a history of being a 20 goal scorer so maybe he can be that again but he isn't guaranteeing it, he also said that he wasn't a top 6 guy in Calgary because we already have a solid top 6, but Edmonton doesn't so he should fit in a top 6 role there. It is easy as fans to sit here and say that we should have bought out Neal, but we don't write the cheques and I am guessing that ownership wouldn't approve it anyways. I also wouldn't want a $2m buyout sitting on the cap for the next 8 years. If it costs a 1st to move one year of Marleau, who is a better player than Neal, than a 2nd or a 3rd certainly wasn't getting it done to move Neal, even if we ate half of his remaining contract. So buying Neal out or adding a sweeter to move him were not legitimate options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 12 minutes ago, redfire11 said: AHH NO!! All the other stuff is why this trade sucks More effective player? Have you watched any Oiler games. increases Cap space and provides (probable) a nice draft pick.? 500k what is that going to buy you in today's NHL and Neal has to have a career best year for us to get a 3rd. We just took on a NMC and made our #1 rivals better and bailed them out of a tight situation. BT just got owned. Better choices Buy out Neal Add a 2nd or 3rd rnd to trade Neal for a bag of pucks Bring in Maroon or Smith-Kelly or Engelland on the cheap Do you know how expensive a buyout on Neal would be? Do you know the flames owners would actual approve that? It cost the Leafs a 1st rounder to move Marleau (with 1 year left) out for a big of pucks and it was only going to cost a 2nd/3rd to move Neal? That doesn't fit. Not sure how pepole are rationalizing how the Flames bailed out the Oilers of anything. They traded a contract that is almost as bad and added 700K to their cap. I don't expect many to like the trade, I don't even like the trade. It's 2 bad situations that rae likely going to remain bad traded for each other so there isn't much to like. But to make it sounds like it was that easy to get out from Neal and then argue that the Flames are now worse off does not make a lot of sense and really blurs some facts here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, cross16 said: Do you know how expensive a buyout on Neal would be? Do you know the flames owners would actual approve that? It cost the Leafs a 1st rounder to move Marleau (with 1 year left) out for a big of pucks and it was only going to cost a 2nd/3rd to move Neal? That doesn't fit. Not sure how pepole are rationalizing how the Flames bailed out the Oilers of anything. They traded a contract that is almost as bad and added 700K to their cap. I don't expect many to like the trade, I don't even like the trade. It's 2 bad situations that rae likely going to remain bad traded for each other so there isn't much to like. But to make it sounds like it was that easy to get out from Neal and then argue that the Flames are now worse off does not make a lot of sense and really blurs some facts here. I have to believe Treliving is on thin ice with ownership after his sequence of poor UFA selections. The Flames will need another exceptional season for him to stick around. He has wasted a lot of time, effort and money since arriving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 31 minutes ago, GM_3300 said: I have to believe Treliving is on thin ice with ownership after his sequence of poor UFA selections. The Flames will need another exceptional season for him to stick around. He has wasted a lot of time, effort and money since arriving. He will be on thin ice if the Flames are out of the playoffs this year. Bringing a 2nd place in the league team to the playoffs seems to buy a lot of good faith. The Owners were more mad about losing out in the 1st round than anything else. Playoffs is gravy for the owners. The longer it goes, the better the gravy. I might even suggest that the owners liked the trade because we lacked toughness and they were frustrated paying Neal to be a bum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 9 minutes ago, travel_dude said: He will be on thin ice if the Flames are out of the playoffs this year. Bringing a 2nd place in the league team to the playoffs seems to buy a lot of good faith. The Owners were more mad about losing out in the 1st round than anything else. Playoffs is gravy for the owners. The longer it goes, the better the gravy. I might even suggest that the owners liked the trade because we lacked toughness and they were frustrated paying Neal to be a bum. I would say even if the Flames miss the playoffs this season, BT is not going anywhere. Miss two straight, then that's a different story. One bad buyout so far in Brouwer and he's turning a bad Neal signing into something more useful... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM_3300 Posted July 22, 2019 Report Share Posted July 22, 2019 13 minutes ago, travel_dude said: He will be on thin ice if the Flames are out of the playoffs this year. Bringing a 2nd place in the league team to the playoffs seems to buy a lot of good faith. The Owners were more mad about losing out in the 1st round than anything else. Playoffs is gravy for the owners. The longer it goes, the better the gravy. I might even suggest that the owners liked the trade because we lacked toughness and they were frustrated paying Neal to be a bum. I'm sure ownership looks at situations much differently than you think they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.