Andrew Mangiapane

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Similar players for sure. The comp for Pelletier I saw prior to the draft was somewhere between Jaden Schwartz and Yanni Gourde.

 

Undersized guys that play bigger than their size, highly competitive but also have some skill. 

 

The limited viewing of him at WJC showed the skills but was not playing with the right guys most of the time.

He seems to be the guy that makes a line better, not stand out alone.

[jjgallow]

We need to draft and develop these guys more, not less.

 

However.   I do have a caveat on this.

 

We can't marry them.

 

I would trade Mangiapane or Gaudreau or Pelletier in  three seconds flat and it's not because I don't like them.  It's because they have Value and your value needs to be diversified so that all areas of the ice and all roles are covered on a team.

 

This can range from under-value draft assets, to undrafted players.

 

An over-age that comes to mind in this draft, and a relative of Shane Doan:

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/201817/josh-doan

Dude was invisible last season.   Then all of a sudden he played like "oh yeah I'm actually a really good prospect you all should have drafted me"

 

This draft is full of unreviewed talent.    I really think a smart team acquires a ton of picks and does their home work because the picks are cheap right now and the talent is really no different than any other year.

 

Ville Koivunen

Alexander Kisakov

Kyle Kukkonen

Danila Klimovich

 

[travel_dude]

I understand that we need to get better in many areas.

Trades sometimes accomplish those things.

But two areas that we have been lacking are scoring and leadin on the ice (100% attitude and work).

Mangiapane checks both boxes.

Gaudreau generates team scoring more than anyone else.

Pelletier, though not proven yet, is work ethic and attitude.

 

Here's what I don't get.

You want to trade from an area of weakness elsewise to shore up another area of weakness?

Not a high scoring team right now, lets trade the two guys that generate it.

Pick one (one PING only).

[jjgallow]

On 5/23/2021 at 10:40 PM, travel_dude said:

I understand that we need to get better in many areas.

Trades sometimes accomplish those things.

But two areas that we have been lacking are scoring and leadin on the ice (100% attitude and work).

Mangiapane checks both boxes.

Gaudreau generates team scoring more than anyone else.

Pelletier, though not proven yet, is work ethic and attitude.

 

Here's what I don't get.

You want to trade from an area of weakness elsewise to shore up another area of weakness?

Not a high scoring team right now, lets trade the two guys that generate it.

Pick one (one PING only).

 

If LW is an area of weakness for us, then that is basically admitting this entire core is just done.

 

I'm not shy about pointing out weaknesses and even I don't see how LW can be viewed as a weakness, it's pretty clear our lack of scoring comes from weaknesses at center, RW, and even D.   The only thing it would do is give Tkachuck the minutes he needs to develop into the first line player we need him to be (and that he already was prevously).   Don't get me wrong, the guy to trade is really Gaudreau.   I'm not pushing for a Mangiapane trade, I just wouldn't be opposed to a trade involving any of our LWers depending on the return.

 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

If LW is an area of weakness for us, then that is basically admitting this entire core is just done.

 

I'm not shy about pointing out weaknesses and even I don't see how LW can be viewed as a weakness, it's pretty clear our lack of scoring comes from weaknesses at center, RW, and even D.   The only thing it would do is give Tkachuck the minutes he needs to develop into the first line player we need him to be (and that he already was prevously).   Don't get me wrong, the guy to trade is really Gaudreau.   I'm not pushing for a Mangiapane trade, I just wouldn't be opposed to a trade involving any of our LWers depending on the return.

 

 

Goal scoring seems to be a weakness, not specifically positional.

Mangiapane is a goal scorer.

That's why I said don't trade him.

Gaudreau sets up the most scoring.

Top line and a struggling Monahan not scoring contributed to our failings.

Yes, a top C would help, but not if you trade away the players that drive the play.

 

I would like to specifically improve the #1C spot, the top 6 RW and for sure the top pairing D.

How you get there is anyone's guess.

Not a lot of assets to use.

Cap space requires moving out Gio, Backllund, Lucic and trades require taking your pick of top 6 (Gaudreau, Monahan or Tkachuk).

If we could turn the first three into one top D, and one of the top players into a top C, we would be a lot closer.

Gaudreau and Tkachuk have the most value, but also have skills harder to replace.

If Monahan + 1st in 2021 + Pelletier brought you a top C, would you do it?

Forgoes the rebuild and re-stocking of D.

If some other trade including Backlund brought you a Seth Jones type, would that suffice?

Might get expensive.

 

[jjgallow]

45 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Goal scoring seems to be a weakness, not specifically positional.

Mangiapane is a goal scorer.

That's why I said don't trade him.

Gaudreau sets up the most scoring.

Top line and a struggling Monahan not scoring contributed to our failings.

Yes, a top C would help, but not if you trade away the players that drive the play.

 

I would like to specifically improve the #1C spot, the top 6 RW and for sure the top pairing D.

How you get there is anyone's guess.

Not a lot of assets to use.

Cap space requires moving out Gio, Backllund, Lucic and trades require taking your pick of top 6 (Gaudreau, Monahan or Tkachuk).

If we could turn the first three into one top D, and one of the top players into a top C, we would be a lot closer.

Gaudreau and Tkachuk have the most value, but also have skills harder to replace.

If Monahan + 1st in 2021 + Pelletier brought you a top C, would you do it?

Forgoes the rebuild and re-stocking of D.

If some other trade including Backlund brought you a Seth Jones type, would that suffice?

Might get expensive.

 

 

ok well trading Mangiapane isn't a hill i want to die on when there are so many more entertaining hills out there.

 

I do like the player and I like how he was acquired.

 

With regards to C, RW and D,   I completely agree except I would do it in the reverse order with goaltending ahead of that.

 

So, how we acquire these guys is I think you do it all.   Yeah you do those trades you discussed (and you do include JG and others).

 

But you also do unconventional.

 

So I've never been strong with contract stuff.       But, for instance, this list:

 

Josh Doan

Ville Koivunen

Alexander Kisakov

Kyle Kukkonen

Danila Klimovich

 

Some are over-agers, some are misfits, some have lack of exposure.        Maybe one player out of that list is a Mangiapane.   Then again one could be a Brett Hull or Martin St Louis   (maybe one in 50 of these).   So, I'd really like to see us doing a LOT more of this personally.   You can get everything from Mangiapanes to hall of famers by simply being flexible in thinking and not labelling players under 21.   I'd like to see more signings, PTOs, aquisition of 6th round picks...whatever is needed.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

If LW is an area of weakness for us, then that is basically admitting this entire core is just done.

 

I'm not shy about pointing out weaknesses and even I don't see how LW can be viewed as a weakness, it's pretty clear our lack of scoring comes from weaknesses at center, RW, and even D.   The only thing it would do is give Tkachuck the minutes he needs to develop into the first line player we need him to be (and that he already was prevously).   Don't get me wrong, the guy to trade is really Gaudreau.   I'm not pushing for a Mangiapane trade, I just wouldn't be opposed to a trade involving any of our LWers depending on the return.

 

 

i think they’re viewing team scoring as a weakness and that Johnny is necessary for team scoring. He is on LW so it is coincidental. 
 

but a LW core of, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Dube might not be that bad, and Dube might be a guy to shift from LW To RW if needed.... but I will admit, it’s a smaller LW core... 

 

#1C, #1&2&3RW, two Top Pair D, and a backup goalie. I think Markstrom can supplement until the retool is completed. He might ask to be traded to a playoff team. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Goal scoring seems to be a weakness, not specifically positional.

Mangiapane is a goal scorer.

That's why I said don't trade him.

Gaudreau sets up the most scoring.

Top line and a struggling Monahan not scoring contributed to our failings.

Yes, a top C would help, but not if you trade away the players that drive the play.

 

I would like to specifically improve the #1C spot, the top 6 RW and for sure the top pairing D.

How you get there is anyone's guess.

Not a lot of assets to use.

Cap space requires moving out Gio, Backllund, Lucic and trades require taking your pick of top 6 (Gaudreau, Monahan or Tkachuk).

If we could turn the first three into one top D, and one of the top players into a top C, we would be a lot closer.

Gaudreau and Tkachuk have the most value, but also have skills harder to replace.

If Monahan + 1st in 2021 + Pelletier brought you a top C, would you do it?

Forgoes the rebuild and re-stocking of D.

If some other trade including Backlund brought you a Seth Jones type, would that suffice?

Might get expensive.

 

well, was Monahan injured the whole season? When did the injury start to hinder his scoring? He wasn’t scoring from the start so if it was dried up because he was injured then it would mean he was injured the entire time.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

well, was Monahan injured the whole season? When did the injury start to hinder his scoring? He wasn’t scoring from the start so if it was dried up because he was injured then it would mean he was injured the entire time.

 

That was mentioned by Gaudreau, that he was ailing the entire year.

I'm no sports doctor, but one might assume that a bum hip would impact your shot leverage.

 

[robrob74]

4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That was mentioned by Gaudreau, that he was ailing the entire year.

I'm no sports doctor, but one might assume that a bum hip would impact your shot leverage.

 

 

yup! So dum that they wouldn’t shut him down.

 

Monahan should read Keslers career. He’s going to go out early if he keeps this up and end up gibbled in the end. Also, in the end, the team won’t be there when his careee is over.

[travel_dude]

24 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

yup! So dum that they wouldn’t shut him down.

 

Monahan should read Keslers career. He’s going to go out early if he keeps this up and end up gibbled in the end. Also, in the end, the team won’t be there when his careee is over.

 

I'm not reporting it as being fact.

The only thing we truly know is he was dealing with it some "some" time.

They should have shut him down sooner than they did.

Like when it became apparent that it might hinder his recovery by delaying, or that it was more than just an annoyance that impacted his game.

 

I just don't have the facts man.

 

Monahan was asked to play a more defensive and perhaps physical game this season.

The 2nd line was given a role they perhaps shouldn't be given?

And the one reliable player moved to C, because we didn't have enough depth at C.

 

Did we ever even try Mangiapane on LW and Gaudreau on RW with Monahan and just ask them to score goals?

Focus on Lucic-Bennett-Dube as a new scoring threat?

No, we believed that we needed to move up Lindholm and move down Backlund.

And move Bennett to RW or #4C at best.

That's on Wardo.

Sutter may not have drastically changes things up, but at that point it ws too late to salvage.

Bennett wanted out.

We were stuck with what we had.

[travel_dude]

48 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

i think they’re viewing team scoring as a weakness and that Johnny is necessary for team scoring. He is on LW so it is coincidental. 
 

but a LW core of, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Dube might not be that bad, and Dube might be a guy to shift from LW To RW if needed.... but I will admit, it’s a smaller LW core... 

 

#1C, #1&2&3RW, two Top Pair D, and a backup goalie. I think Markstrom can supplement until the retool is completed. He might ask to be traded to a playoff team. 

 

Yes, you are interpreting what I said the right way.

I see Tkachuk as a RW when played with Mangiapane or Gaudreau.

We keep all three and we have good scoring in the top 6.

Add in Lindholm and a top C, and we have two good lines.

 

That implies that we use Backlund and Monahan and perhaps Dube and a 1st to improve the RW and C.

 

Unfortunately, I am all over the map on how to improve the team.

Part of me says move out Backlund, Monahan, and Lucic, plus whatever picks or prospects improve the #1C and top 6 RW spots.

The other part of me says we need to upgrade the top pairing.

 

Ship out:

Gio, Monahan, Backlund, Lucic, 1st in 2021, Dube, prospects

 

Bring in:

Top D like Seth Jones, top C, sign UFA RW'er, sign #3C

 

Maybe we have to sacrifice one of Gaudreau or Tkachuk, but those would hurt the most.  I don't see them as the reason we failed in the playoffs.  Maybe Gaudreau is too small for the playoffs, but if he played with a true sniper he wouldn't be the target of every defensive player.  Maybe if he got a pass every now and then he would sore more.  Seems like he is learning that part of the game a bit better.

 

[jjgallow]

 

Congrats Mangiapane on the big win

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Congrats Mangiapane on the big win

 

MVP of tournament and selected to team all star.

Impressed that much after miisng the first three games.

Got there just in time to score 3 GVG.

 

If only he wasn;t too small and to unskilled to score in the NHL.

Wait.....

[Sarasti]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

MVP of tournament and selected to team all star.

Impressed that much after miisng the first three games.

Got there just in time to score 3 GVG.

 

If only he wasn;t too small and to unskilled to score in the NHL.

Wait.....

 

Elite 5v5 player in emergence here.

Exciting to watch.

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

 

Elite 5v5 player in emergence here.

Exciting to watch.

 

He plays much taller than his actual size.

Can't remember the last lazy play I saw him make.

Knock him down (happens a lot) and he pops back up again.

Could use a few more players like that.

 

I would like to see him be part of a line built for the top 6.

Playing with a broken Monahan or asking him to drag along Lucic is asking a bit much.

3M line was deadly, but we aren't using that now.

Mangiapane-Lindholm-Tkachuk was pretty decent, but then again Gaudreau lit up that line as well.

Need something better than Mangiapane-Monahan-Ritchie.

[robrob74]

28 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

He plays much taller than his actual size.

Can't remember the last lazy play I saw him make.

Knock him down (happens a lot) and he pops back up again.

Could use a few more players like that.

 

I would like to see him be part of a line built for the top 6.

Playing with a broken Monahan or asking him to drag along Lucic is asking a bit much.

3M line was deadly, but we aren't using that now.

Mangiapane-Lindholm-Tkachuk was pretty decent, but then again Gaudreau lit up that line as well.

Need something better than Mangiapane-Monahan-Ritchie.

I kind of think we should re-sign Ryan as the devil you know. Play him with Lucic. 
 

can we play Backlund as a 2C again? 
 

trade Monahan for a RW. 
trade Tkachuk+ for Eichel. 
 

Gaudreau, Eichel, RW/Lindholm 

Mangiapane, Lindholm/Backlund, Lindholm/RW

 

if we converted Lindholm back to RW, he could play 1st or 2nd line RW to play with Eichel or Backlund. If we kept him at C, we have a RW spot to fill. 
 

my dream is to have Lucic play 4th line. But maybe he gets taken as leadership and protection in the Expansion Draft? If not, play him with Ryan (1-1.5m/yr) on the 4th. 
 

we would need to find a 3C if we put Backs back up. I would do

 

Mangiapane, Backlund, Lindholm

 

then play Gaudreau, Eichel, RW (from Monahan trade)…

[zima]

23 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I kind of think we should re-sign Ryan as the devil you know. Play him with Lucic. 
 

can we play Backlund as a 2C again? 
 

trade Monahan for a RW. 
trade Tkachuk+ for Eichel. 
 

Gaudreau, Eichel, RW/Lindholm 

Mangiapane, Lindholm/Backlund, Lindholm/RW

 

if we converted Lindholm back to RW, he could play 1st or 2nd line RW to play with Eichel or Backlund. If we kept him at C, we have a RW spot to fill. 
 

my dream is to have Lucic play 4th line. But maybe he gets taken as leadership and protection in the Expansion Draft? If not, play him with Ryan (1-1.5m/yr) on the 4th. 
 

we would need to find a 3C if we put Backs back up. I would do

 

Mangiapane, Backlund, Lindholm

 

then play Gaudreau, Eichel, RW (from Monahan trade)…

So now that we got Chaisson back were do you think he will trend 3rd or 4th line?

[travel_dude]

16 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I kind of think we should re-sign Ryan as the devil you know. Play him with Lucic. 
 

can we play Backlund as a 2C again? 
 

trade Monahan for a RW. 
trade Tkachuk+ for Eichel. 
 

Gaudreau, Eichel, RW/Lindholm 

Mangiapane, Lindholm/Backlund, Lindholm/RW

 

if we converted Lindholm back to RW, he could play 1st or 2nd line RW to play with Eichel or Backlund. If we kept him at C, we have a RW spot to fill. 
 

my dream is to have Lucic play 4th line. But maybe he gets taken as leadership and protection in the Expansion Draft? If not, play him with Ryan (1-1.5m/yr) on the 4th. 
 

we would need to find a 3C if we put Backs back up. I would do

 

Mangiapane, Backlund, Lindholm

 

then play Gaudreau, Eichel, RW (from Monahan trade)…

 

TBH, I don't know what to do with Backlund.

He's our best defensive C, but is going to start aging out as a top 6 option.

Ryan isn't that far off, but is a better 4th line C right now, if we have depth.

If we trade Monahan for a RW, then we lose that depth.

If we trade Tkachuk for Eichel, we maintain that depth and actually are better. 

 

Ideally, if we plan on a big makeover, we ship Monahan + Tkachuk for Eichel + Reinhart.

We get back a top C and a top RW.

Obviously, it's going to take more than just Monahan + Tkachuk, but it does allow for a big change to the core:

It still leaves us short.

 

Gaudreau-Eichel-Lindholm

Mangiapane-Reinhart-Dube

Ruzicka-Backlund-RW

Lucic-Ryan-RW

 

That 3RW is critical.  Don't think we have anyone in the system to play there.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, zima said:

So now that we got Chaisson back were do you think he will trend 3rd or 4th line?

 

Huh?

[zima]

4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Huh?

https://flamesnation.ca/2016/06/27/calgary-flames-trade-patrick-sieloff-for-alex-chiasson-sign-him/

Perhaps we just picked him up to put on the Kraken block

[Heartbreaker]

3 minutes ago, zima said:

https://flamesnation.ca/2016/06/27/calgary-flames-trade-patrick-sieloff-for-alex-chiasson-sign-him/

Perhaps we just picked him up to put on the Kraken block

 

Ahh... that article is five years old.

Love.

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, zima said:

https://flamesnation.ca/2016/06/27/calgary-flames-trade-patrick-sieloff-for-alex-chiasson-sign-him/

Perhaps we just picked him up to put on the Kraken block

 

6 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Ahh... that article is five years old.

Love.

 

A little dated.

 

[zima]

Ok never mind I guess Im on drugs don't know how I ended up with the Chaisson trade on my search engine this morning since this was from 2016 lol

 

[zima]

I was reading about the possible trade to Buffalo and the start was about the Chaisson trade of course I didn't pay attention of the date at the start mental block 🤪