Calgary Flames 20/21 Roster and Lines

[jjgallow]

On 10/29/2020 at 12:19 PM, The_People1 said:

How many breakaway chances did Gaudreau squander last season?  I wouldn't be exaggerating if it was literally 50.  Some games he would have 3 and not score. That and 2-on-1s wasted.

 

Are we worried about Gaudreau?  Honestly I'm not.  If he can finish even a bit better, then he's at least an 85-point player.  With some luck, he's a 100-point player.

 

Exactly this, it is what it is.   Gaudreau isn't going to fall off the map.  Maybe in the playoffs he will (which evidently management doesn't care about).

 

As much as we should have traded him, Gaudreau is a world class talent unlike any other.    The thought that we can just demote him and Dube and Mangiapane will fill that gap is entirely ludicrous.

 

Dube has a Very small chance of stepping up more this year.  Again with his size, I'm not counting on a big stepup.

 

Tkachuk could potentially step up more, although he's already incredible as it is.

 

Outside of those two, basically our entire forward roster can be expected to stay the same or decline this coming season and absolutely nobody is going to leapfrog what Gaudreau can do (other than Tkachuk who already did, but this absolutely doesn't help us because they're both LW).

 

Does the core need to change?  Yes.

 

Did BT change the core?  No, that's ludicrous.  If anything at all he stacked us up with even more left wingers than we had before.   We have half the NHL's left wing talent and basically nothing else worth mentioning on forward.

 

The other thing missing in this article was defence and goaltending.    There are still media types who think your left wing is your core.

[travel_dude]

15 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

For me it’s how the first line looked from February 2019 to August 2020. The thing is, they’re good enough to get points when they’re not playing well or making a huge difference. Teams need guys to get points, but I just think they weren’t making a huge difference the way they had in the past. They did look good in a handful of games. 
 

Did they do well enough to keep them together? And if they don’t work with anyone else then what do the a Flames have in them? For me it’s just not working (since last February 2019). 
 

and maybe it’s just a Johnny thing. He looked super disinterested in doing anything until they put Buddy on his line to wake him up. Even after he looked half interested. 
 

i guess you keep them together and ask how do you keep Johnny interested? What drives him? Maybe it is Leivo who might have a bit more muscle, or Bennett who can stick up for him. Maybe less hack Johnny and Monny if there’s someone who will retaliate for them. Maybe Johnny gets the calls if he’s on a different team?

 

All in all, I think the top line will be fine.

Doesn't mean they don't look at new looks.

Or have better or different options come playoffs.

 

We are talking about a top line that still produces at a first line level.

Don't know how much BP impacted the scoring for the first part.

No excuses, just pointing out the obvious.

Backlund on the wing?

Lucic buried to the point of wanting to retire?

 

I worry less about the top 6 than I do the D pairs and the bottom 6.

It's a delicate balance, and we are playing a first season without Brodie.

To a lesser extent without Hamonic.

I think we are deeper, but it will take some adjustments to work out.

The bottom 6 has changed and we aren't sure of what the new lines will work into.

[robrob74]

14 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think Gaudreau and Mangiapane are LW through and through.  Both tried the RW and didn't like it.  Never went back to it.  Tkachuk was a true team guy and made the move to RW so Mangiapane can stay LW.

 

Why did I think Tkachuk was playing LW and Mangiapane RW? Didn’t Mangiapane also play RW on Ryan’s line? 

[The_People1]

12 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Exactly this, it is what it is.   Gaudreau isn't going to fall off the map.  Maybe in the playoffs he will (which evidently management doesn't care about).

 

As much as we should have traded him, Gaudreau is a world class talent unlike any other.    The thought that we can just demote him and Dube and Mangiapane will fill that gap is entirely ludicrous.

 

Dube has a Very small chance of stepping up more this year.  Again with his size, I'm not counting on a big stepup.

 

Tkachuk could potentially step up more, although he's already incredible as it is.

 

Outside of those two, basically our entire forward roster can be expected to stay the same or decline this coming season and absolutely nobody is going to leapfrog what Gaudreau can do (other than Tkachuk who already did, but this absolutely doesn't help us because they're both LW).

 

Does the core need to change?  Yes.

 

Did BT change the core?  No, that's ludicrous.  If anything at all he stacked us up with even more left wingers than we had before.   We have half the NHL's left wing talent and basically nothing else worth mentioning on forward.

 

The other thing missing in this article was defence and goaltending.    There are still media types who think your left wing is your core.

 

Gaudreau will be fine.  I'm interested to see if Ward will mix the lines up completely and go with new looks all around.  Personally, I don't think we are deep enough to spread the talent out over 3 lines which really limits things because we only have 1 RHS in the top 9... Maybe add Leivo now but still.  Mixing is limited when you don't have the RWs on the team.

[The_People1]

4 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Why did I think Tkachuk was playing LW and Mangiapane RW? Didn’t Mangiapane also play RW on Ryan’s line? 

 

Everyone and their dog played RW for a bit.  This is what happens when the GM does not want to "lose" a trade by moving a LW for a RW.  Thus we force a LW to play RW at 80% of max potential.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

Why did I think Tkachuk was playing LW and Mangiapane RW? Didn’t Mangiapane also play RW on Ryan’s line? 

 

59 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Everyone and their dog played RW for a bit.  This is what happens when the GM does not want to "lose" a trade by moving a LW for a RW.  Thus we force a LW to play RW at 80% of max potential.

 

I think most times the lines listed Tkachuk as RW.

He still had a productive year by all accounts.

Mangiapane LW played with Ryan and Hathaway (IIRC), so we are talking over a year ago.

 

We added two guys used to playing RW; Leivo and Simon.

Leivo prefers LW even though he is a RHS.

 

I would be fine with Mangiapane playing top line on RW.

Or Leivo to see if he can handle it.

Or Lindholm.

Check them all out.

 

If Leivo plays in the top 6, then it's likely that Mangiapane LW plays with Dube RW and Bennett C.

Is that a bad thing?

Otherwise, he probably fits best with Tkachuk and Backlund.

 

I want to see the top 1-3 lines outscore opponents every game.

Find me the trios for each that can do that on any given night.

If only one line is clicking, then you may not win.

2/3 and you have a really good chance barring bad goaltending.

3/3 and you are almost unstoppable.

 

So, what I am saying is you pick what should be most consistent in doing this.

Have options when one, two or three lines not working.

Line blender is fine if that has shown some success at some point or is well practiced.

Otherwise it's just grasping at straws.

[CheersMan]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Everyone and their dog played RW for a bit.  This is what happens when the GM does not want to "lose" a trade by moving a LW for a RW.  Thus we force a LW to play RW at 80% of max potential.

This is an interesting concept. You want Brad to lose a trade by say 20% so that we can have an equivalent potential on the RT side? Hmm...

[The_People1]

47 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

This is an interesting concept. You want Brad to lose a trade by say 20% so that we can have an equivalent potential on the RT side? Hmm...

 

Yes.  So everybody can play at their best.

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, CheersMan said:

This is an interesting concept. You want Brad to lose a trade by say 20% so that we can have an equivalent potential on the RT side? Hmm...

 

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes.  So everybody can play at their best.

 

I would advocate for this, if I thought we were deep enough that imbalance was our only problem.

 

Lacking depth and pipeline (imho), the loss of 20% could be felt just as much as the imbalance itself.

 

And in my mind, I'm thinking from our issues for RHD first, then out from there.

 

Tether out.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

I would advocate for this, if I thought we were deep enough that imbalance was our only problem.

 

Lacking depth and pipeline (imho), the loss of 20% could be felt just as much as the imbalance itself.

 

And in my mind, I'm thinking from our issues for RHD first, then out from there.

 

Tether out.

 

We moving Lindholm to Center so we have a RHS C in the top 9.  Who cares about RW right?

[jjgallow]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

We moving Lindholm to Center so we have a RHS C in the top 9.  Who cares about RW right?

 

Who care indeed lol.     Yes it's tricky rotating all the players to RW when it's not really the skill that got them into the NHL.  It must...bother them...on some level although they are all of course team oriented.

[robrob74]

I actually like playing the off wing more than playing my strong handed side. I get the NHL is a lot different. The D don’t ring it around the boards as much as they do in Beer League. But when the puck is rung around, I pick it up on the forehand when I play left wing. Albeit, it puts a player on the blindside. When I play RW I pick it up on my backhand more often.

but these are all elite level guys. I mean elite being the ability to play NHL in comparison to most of us. It’s like Heartbreaker said, any of these guys on any of our beer league teams means we are winning 12-3, that’s including Rinaldo. I don’t mean elite in the NHL... 
 

When Ruutu was with the Canucks, we’d watch warmups and he’d do those puck drills like P. Kane, in a smaller three or four puck maze to handle around. He looked as good as Kane at doing it. It is the same with most bottom level NHLers. 
 

I think we are blowing this LW/RW thing a touch out of proportion. Yes I believe BT has to start drafting skilled RS players. It’s an obvious organizational need and it’s probably more prevalent on the D than the forward group. We probably also need a Top6/9 RSC as well. Taking Lindholm from RW isn’t as terrible as some make it seem and it is a larger need than RW. It’s best to have options for C.
 

maybe Monahan won’t have to play hurt anymore. Or any other players for that matter... which I think playing hurt is a dangerous precedent to start. Look at Ryan Kesler. He had a good career but perhaps may have been more effective in the last few more years than he was. He played through a lot of injuries and it ruined his career, and his hockey afterlife. I still hate the guy. 
 

I just don’t see the problem like others do. 
 

I see the organizational need to concentrate on right shots. But I don’t see that they see that. They talk about how they see it, but they do nothing to fill it, and that there is BPA. In this last draft we saw so many right shots taken by other teams, none by the Flames until later in the Draft. We see other teams get RS players then wonder why we don’t have them. Start drafting right shot and we don’t have to complain about who slots where anymore. 
 

suck it up NHLers, play your off wing, you’re making 2.2+ million to do it. I do it for a fee. In fact nearly 900.00 league fees in Vancouver to play off wing... or wherever Heartbreaker put me! I think NHLers could do it...

[travel_dude]

13 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I do see an organization need to concentrate on right shots. But I don’t see that they see that. They talk about how the see it, but they do nothing to fill it, and that there is BPA. In this last draft we saw so many right shots taken by other teams, none by the Flames until late third or fourth round. And they reach on a Russian D with pick #2. Why not reach in a RS at that time? They got a first rounder with the next pick, they could’ve just taken him with pick #2 and still got Kuz. I think Kuz was a 4th or 5th rounder.

 

I can't really comment on how they rank players, because it obviously doesn't match the TSN or Cragg Button list.

By the time #2 comes around, it's entirely possible that every "next" pick for the Flames is gone.

Outside of the 1st round, I can't even name any picks other teams got that is super-impressive.

 

I have to say, I am overall happy with the guys we got.

Zary, Poirier and Francis stand out, but that's because they are easy to look at results.

The Ruskie goalie is unbeaten in the MHJL and VHL and was called up to the KHL.

That alone is a impressive.

 

Just looking at numbers and available players, 4 RHS forwards and 2 RHS D were available when the Flames picked 2nd.

I don't scout players, so I can't tell you the opinion on them or where the Flames ranked them.

We can say it's a reach by picking one player, but then again we don't even know if they have issues or not.

We end up draft others later that could be steals.

BPA is always going to be contentious, because it doesn't match our BPA. 

[The_People1]

30 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I actually like playing the off wing more than playing my strong handed side. I get the NHL is a lot different. 

 

That's totally cool and many NHLers prefer playing the off wing with much success.

 

So where's the problem then?  It's when you have to "force" someone to move over to the other side when they are not comfortable.  VS, going out and overpaying for a RHS RW who has played RW his entire life.  "Not comfortable" VS "RW 4life".  Not to mention the politics, internal struggles, coaches dealing with unhappy Wingers, etc.  Worse is you make the move to the off wing and take one for the team only to have the GM squeeze you in contract negotiations because your numbers aren't up to par.

 

I'll take LHS RW Mikko Rantanen any day.  But please stop forcing Gaudreau to RW when he wants to be on LW.

[The_People1]

49 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

but these are all elite level guys. I mean elite being the ability to play NHL in comparison to most of us. 

 

Yes and no.  These are elite athletes after all so for all we know, maybe Sean Monahan is a Vezina goaltender if we tried him in net.  But part of being a professional is fine tuning.  You train physically and mentally for a very specific job.  

 

Why not go get the guys who are experts in their field?

 

In the case of moving Lindholm to Center, maybe it's literally impossible to acquire a top line Center with RHS.  So therefore there is no other option but to look internally.  And couple that with a desire/comfort by the player to play Center and it's something we should try.

 

We put Bennett on RW and he got popped.  Can't just force guys over to the off Wing and say "suck it up".  It's dangerous.

[cross16]

Interesting Q +A from Geoff Ward and Eric Francis. Few highlights:

 

More talk about Lindholm at center. Feels Lindholm is a natural center.

Doesn't feel they will change their style of play from the playoffs (I find this very concerning)

Some interesting points about depth and roster flexibility. Expects a lot of competition in camp. 

Mentions specifically that Valimaki is current only Finland playing the right side. Could you be a right side option for them. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/qa-flames-ward-moving-lindholm-top-centre-spot-markstrom-deal/

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's totally cool and many NHLers prefer playing the off wing with much success.

 

So where's the problem then?  It's when you have to "force" someone to move over to the other side when they are not comfortable.  VS, going out and overpaying for a RHS RW who has played RW his entire life.  "Not comfortable" VS "RW 4life".  Not to mention the politics, internal struggles, coaches dealing with unhappy Wingers, etc.  Worse is you make the move to the off wing and take one for the team only to have the GM squeeze you in contract negotiations because your numbers aren't up to par.

 

I'll take LHS RW Mikko Rantanen any day.  But please stop forcing Gaudreau to RW when he wants to be on LW.

 

We haven't gotten any top 6 RW since getting Lindholm.  I have no issue keeping him on RW.

Whether he plays top line or not, he fits the need.

Using him on C is an option, but I don't get the need as much as a nice-to-have.

The 3M line has been successful with three LHS.

The Bennett line was good with Dube at RW.

 

We picked up two guys that can play RW.

Not sure about Nordstrom, but we do have some depth there.

 

Using Lindholm is a mistake as a long term solution, IMHO, unless you are shipping out Monahan, Backlund or Bennett.

Even then, we lose the top RHS RW that we have and are hoping that Leivo replaces him.

 

52 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Interesting Q +A from Geoff Ward and Eric Francis. Few highlights:

 

More talk about Lindholm at center. Feels Lindholm is a natural center.

Doesn't feel they will change their style of play from the playoffs (I find this very concerning)

Some interesting points about depth and roster flexibility. Expects a lot of competition in camp. 

Mentions specifically that Valimaki is current only Finland playing the right side. Could you be a right side option for them. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/qa-flames-ward-moving-lindholm-top-centre-spot-markstrom-deal/

 

More concerned about him seeing Lindholm as a natural C.

Had a career year as a RW, so let's move him to C.

 

[The_People1]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Using Lindholm is a mistake as a long term solution, IMHO, unless you are shipping out Monahan, Backlund or Bennett.

Even then, we lose the top RHS RW that we have and are hoping that Leivo replaces him.

 

 

More concerned about him seeing Lindholm as a natural C.

Had a career year as a RW, so let's move him to C.

 

I think using Lindholm as a Center is a good long term solution but a short term disaster.  He simply needs seasoning and it's going to hurt us to go through the pain... unless we shelter him as a 3rd line Center mainly... but where's our RW right?  Leivo becomes our #1 RW... 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think using Lindholm as a Center is a good long term solution but a short term disaster.  He simply needs seasoning and it's going to hurt us to go through the pain... unless we shelter him as a 3rd line Center mainly... but where's our RW right?  Leivo becomes our #1 RW... 

 

I think what happens is you end up getting 20% less out of all your players (because they're being played off-position), and then the GM gets forced into a desperate trade where that player who's devalued by 20% is then traded at an additional 20% discount.    So now we're basically looking at getting half of what we give.

 

Not sure if it will go that far before they let BT go but....all signs do point to it.

[Sarasti]

14 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I actually like playing the off wing more than playing my strong handed side. I get the NHL is a lot different. The D don’t ring it around the boards as much as they do in Beer League. But when the puck is rung around, I pick it up on the forehand when I play left wing. Albeit, it puts a player on the blindside. When I play RW I pick it up on my backhand more often.

but these are all elite level guys. I mean elite being the ability to play NHL in comparison to most of us. It’s like Heartbreaker said, any of these guys on any of our beer league teams means we are winning 12-3, that’s including Rinaldo. I don’t mean elite in the NHL... 
 

When Ruutu was with the Canucks, we’d watch warmups and he’d do those puck drills like P. Kane, in a smaller three or four puck maze to handle around. He looked as good as Kane at doing it. It is the same with most bottom level NHLers. 
 

I think we are blowing this LW/RW thing a touch out of proportion. Yes I believe BT has to start drafting skilled RS players. It’s an obvious organizational need and it’s probably more prevalent on the D than the forward group. We probably also need a Top6/9 RSC as well. Taking Lindholm from RW isn’t as terrible as some make it seem and it is a larger need than RW. It’s best to have options for C.
 

maybe Monahan won’t have to play hurt anymore. Or any other players for that matter... which I think playing hurt is a dangerous precedent to start. Look at Ryan Kesler. He had a good career but perhaps may have been more effective in the last few more years than he was. He played through a lot of injuries and it ruined his career, and his hockey afterlife. I still hate the guy. 
 

I just don’t see the problem like others do. 
 

I see the organizational need to concentrate on right shots. But I don’t see that they see that. They talk about how they see it, but they do nothing to fill it, and that there is BPA. In this last draft we saw so many right shots taken by other teams, none by the Flames until later in the Draft. We see other teams get RS players then wonder why we don’t have them. Start drafting right shot and we don’t have to complain about who slots where anymore. 
 

suck it up NHLers, play your off wing, you’re making 2.2+ million to do it. I do it for a fee. In fact nearly 900.00 league fees in Vancouver to play off wing... or wherever Heartbreaker put me! I think NHLers could do it...

 

I agree with this.

I'm a LHS forward, but played D for a couple years as well.

All in all I've played every position at some point outside of goaltender.

As far as playing the off-side, I agree its been blown a little out of proportion at times.

It definitely takes an adjustment period and a few minor tweaks. 

But once you get used to it its just as comfortable as playing "strong-side"

 

As far as forward position preference for me it went: C, RW, LW in that order.

[The_People1]

5 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

 

I agree with this.

I'm a LHS forward, but played D for a couple years as well.

All in all I've played every position at some point outside of goaltender.

As far as playing the off-side, I agree its been blown a little out of proportion at times.

It definitely takes an adjustment period and a few minor tweaks. 

But once you get used to it its just as comfortable as playing "strong-side"

 

As far as forward position preference for me it went: C, RW, LW in that order.

 

But also consider how enjoyable it is passing to a LHS RW as a LHS LW/C.  You always leading ahead on their backhand.  Your linemates have to get used to it too.

[travel_dude]

16 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think using Lindholm as a Center is a good long term solution but a short term disaster.  He simply needs seasoning and it's going to hurt us to go through the pain... unless we shelter him as a 3rd line Center mainly... but where's our RW right?  Leivo becomes our #1 RW... 

 

15 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I think what happens is you end up getting 20% less out of all your players (because they're being played off-position), and then the GM gets forced into a desperate trade where that player who's devalued by 20% is then traded at an additional 20% discount.    So now we're basically looking at getting half of what we give.

 

Not sure if it will go that far before they let BT go but....all signs do point to it.

 

Ward is talking about it and BT is aware of it.  He doesn't want a short term disaster.  5 games that are losses is more than they can spare if the idea is to be competitive in the season.  BT doesn't replace Talbot and Hamonic to lose short term.  That may still happen even without moving Lindy to C.

 

There isn't even a long term strategy.

Lindholm to C, then Bennett to LW or #4C.

No top 6 RW replacement.

Leivo is signed for one year.

 

The only way you consider moving Lindholm to 3C (or Backlund to 3C) is you are moving Monahan for a RW.

Or you are moving Gaudreau for a RW.

All of that is fine, if you long term we get a top C and a top 3 RW.

I just don't see it.

 

Monahan for Kozens.

Fine, we have a top 3 "capable" C.

Still no RW to replace Lindy.

Gaudreau for a top 3 RW.

Fine assuming they have the same ceiling.

Move Tkachuk to top line.

Hope that Dube can move up to 2nd line.

[The_People1]

15 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I think what happens is you end up getting 20% less out of all your players (because they're being played off-position), and then the GM gets forced into a desperate trade where that player who's devalued by 20% is then traded at an additional 20% discount.    So now we're basically looking at getting half of what we give.

 

Not sure if it will go that far before they let BT go but....all signs do point to it.

 

That's the fear is you get less than maximum results from a player and then have to move him for an additional loss for a RW anyways.

[robrob74]

37 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's the fear is you get less than maximum results from a player and then have to move him for an additional loss for a RW anyways.

 

And those are the issues of going fully BPA (usually being a LHS player for the Flames). A lot say that it is easy to just trade and sign RHS players after going BPA in the draft. But we see that it’s a really hard thing to do. 
 

drafts are a crapshoot. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wanna look back at all of the RHS that the Flames didn’t draft that have decent careers. I get it, it isn’t good for my health to dwell! lol 

 

but is the chance taken in the draft on a RHS worth it in comparison to losing (what you and JJ, among others claim) a 20% loss in a trade? Maybe more, maybe less? 
 

how would that equate to the chance of the RHS drafted player making the NHL? I guess losing a trade but gaining a quality RHS player is still higher probability of the drafted player making the NHL. 
 

I guess it really depends on our outlook? 

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

And those are the issues of going fully BPA (usually being a LHS player for the Flames). A lot say that it is easy to just trade and sign RHS players after going BPA in the draft. But we see that it’s a really hard thing to do. 
 

drafts are a crapshoot. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wanna look back at all of the RHS that the Flames didn’t draft that have decent careers. I get it, it isn’t good for my health to dwell! lol 

 

but is the chance taken in the draft on a RHS worth it in comparison to losing (what you and JJ, among others claim) a 20% loss in a trade? Maybe more, maybe less? 
 

how would that equate to the chance of the RHS drafted player making the NHL? I guess losing a trade but gaining a quality RHS player is still higher probability of the drafted player making the NHL. 
 

I guess it really depends on our outlook? 

 

On one hand, all picks by BT don't go back too far.  One bad year where Burke was calling the shots (Kanzig etc).  Look at last year's draft and the 2018 draft.  Maybe even the 2017 draft.  Look at what we drafted and see what was picked after us.

 

Hint - from 2019 to 2017, Valimaki was the only player selected where later picks have had better careers to date.  Robert Thomas was a good pick, but he wasn't available to us after we picked Valimaki.  2016, we picked Tkachuk - hard to argue we wasted that pick.

2nd Hint - 2016, our 2nd rounders were Parsons and Dube.  Only 3 players have played more than 50 NHL games to date.  Are they better than Dube?

 

I get what you are saying, but realistically, but it's a bit early to declare our picks as being wrong.  Bennett (2014) maybe.  Lots of good players selected after him.

Other than that, the results are not there.  Pelletier may not seem like a good pick, but nobody from that draft picked 26th or later has played a single NHL game.