2021 Offseason Thread

[sak22]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I think that was what was wrong with the year they made the playoffs under Hartley. Other teams didn't take them seriously and the Flames made them pay (to their credit for taking advantage of that). 

 

 

I don't think that's the case that year.  You win 22 games against the division, go a combined 8-2 against perennial playoff teams like the Sharks and Kings, at some point they stop taking a team lightly if they were prior.  They went 10-0 against the Oilers and Coyotes, teams that were in no position to take teams lightly.  I think a few thing benefited the team, that the Kings were likely a tired team from the previous year, the Sharks had a down year and probably tuned out Maclellan.  Outside that the Flames were a team riding momentum, the underlying stats said they weren't playing good.  The aftermath is well debated with making the Hamilton trade, but is also where I say fans and media are also to blame for the organizations shortcomings.  Hamilton was 22 years old and very much a work in progress, people treated him as the missing piece to being a contender and not as a player to continue to help build a core around.  At 23 years old the guys makes a mistake in a playoff game, and someone on a hot mic is caught calling him a stupid person in general.  A year later the guy is gone, after another moron writer basically says he doesn't give a damn.  

[robrob74]

44 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Limited quote to shorten the post.

When we traded for Dougie and Hammer we were in a much different situation than today.

I don't believe he will use similar tactics to make us whole.

Maybe he sends a 1st for a top D younger player with term.

Would that even be wrong?

How about we trade for Dumba, since he will be lost anyway.

We then expose both Gio and Tanev or offer a minor piece for not selecting Tanev.

 

Let's face it, the real core of the team is still young to work with and build around.

We don't need Backlund, Gio and Lucic unless we are competing for the cup.

Solving that problem is key to BT.

It may be painful at first, but we should recognize it.

 

Any trade to fix the roster should take place after the draft.

Should be a lot of movement.

Maybe target Garland as a RFA.

Just some thoughts. 

 

I can see what you mean. I just think that the re-signing value of some might hinder gaining other contracts that will actually help the team. What are the costs of doing that too?

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I don't think that's the case that year.  You win 22 games against the division, go a combined 8-2 against perennial playoff teams like the Sharks and Kings, at some point they stop taking a team lightly if they were prior.  They went 10-0 against the Oilers and Coyotes, teams that were in no position to take teams lightly.  I think a few thing benefited the team, that the Kings were likely a tired team from the previous year, the Sharks had a down year and probably tuned out Maclellan.  Outside that the Flames were a team riding momentum, the underlying stats said they weren't playing good.  The aftermath is well debated with making the Hamilton trade, but is also where I say fans and media are also to blame for the organizations shortcomings.  Hamilton was 22 years old and very much a work in progress, people treated him as the missing piece to being a contender and not as a player to continue to help build a core around.  At 23 years old the guys makes a mistake in a playoff game, and someone on a hot mic is caught calling him a stupid person in general.  A year later the guy is gone, after another moron writer basically says he doesn't give a damn.  

 

I can see what you mean about the media. I think it was you that talked about how it's hard to play in a Canadian market and that we place expectations and when players don't live up to it, the pedestal crumbles quickly.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

I can see what you mean. I just think that the re-signing value of some might hinder gaining other contracts that will actually help the team. What are the costs of doing that too?

 

Let me attack this another way.

We have a flat cap right now.

If we were able to say sign a top D today, it will be cheaper than in 3 years.

 

I wasn't sure what you meant about re-signing values hindering.

If you mean re-signing Gio or Ryan?

If you mean UFA's that a different story.

 

I think what I see is a team that can't do much to improve in it's present state.

I don't think we need to blow up, but we need to move on from a couple of core players.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Lucic, Backlund, Gio, Hanifin.

Maybe two of the first three should be kept, but at least 2 of the last 4 need to be moved.

 

[MP5029]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Let me attack this another way.

We have a flat cap right now.

If we were able to say sign a top D today, it will be cheaper than in 3 years.

 

I wasn't sure what you meant about re-signing values hindering.

If you mean re-signing Gio or Ryan?

If you mean UFA's that a different story.

 

I think what I see is a team that can't do much to improve in it's present state.

I don't think we need to blow up, but we need to move on from a couple of core players.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Lucic, Backlund, Gio, Hanifin.

Maybe two of the first three should be kept, but at least 2 of the last 4 need to be moved.

 

Lol well let’s do this differently…3 of the first three should be kept, and only the last one of the last four should be kept…

 

 

 

 

[sak22]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I can see what you mean about the media. I think it was you that talked about how it's hard to play in a Canadian market and that we place expectations and when players don't live up to it, the pedestal crumbles quickly.

Yes, It was probably me I'm pretty anti-media and anti-social media.  I think media can be pretty Satoshi Nakamototy in all markets, the difference in Canada is most markets are really one sport cities.  The US the media can be just as harsh or harsher, but they move on.  Boston for example, was a depressed sports town for most of the '80's and '90's and the media obsessed over Bill Buckner costing the Red Sox a World Series.  Years later same city the Bruins pull off an epic choke against Chicago for the Stanley Cup, something that can live on in the minds of sports fans forever, but after that Boston media moves on to the Red Sox and Patriots, Red Sox won that year and the city has had 5 championships since the Bruins so its easy to get over their collapse.  Flames lose to the Avs and its 4 months of pure depression from Calgary sports media because they don't move on to anything else.  Can't be easy for players listening to 12 months of criticism from true hockey legends like Eric Francis and Will Nault, .  I love sports, but at the end of the day all it is for me is entertainment, totally frustrating when it doesn't even provide that, but Bryz is right when he says it:

 

[Thebrewcrew]

 

Steinberg lists Halak, Driedger, Reimer, Rittich and Wedgewood as potential fits to backup the Flames.

 

I'd rule Driedger out, he's going to get a nice deal. Bernier too, he posted a .914 in Detroit. 

 

Personally, I wouldn't wanna go much higher than 1.5 for a backup, knowing how much Markstrom will be playing. I could actually see a reunion with Rittich playing out. 

[travel_dude]

13 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Steinberg lists Halak, Driedger, Reimer, Rittich and Wedgewood as potential fits to backup the Flames.

 

I'd rule Driedger out, he's going to get a nice deal. Bernier too, he posted a .914 in Detroit. 

 

Personally, I wouldn't wanna go much higher than 1.5 for a backup, knowing how much Markstrom will be playing. I could actually see a reunion with Rittich playing out. 

 

The two targets I would be looking at are Drieger and Brossoit.

The latter always seemed to cause us grief playing against.

Drieger is a potential starter down the road.

We also want to prevent EDM from getting him.

 

Brossoit is underrated a bit, since he played behind a porous D.

Either choice allows us a guy that can play 25-30 games, and be insurance against injury.

As much as I want them to use a guy like Parsons to finally reward him, he may not be close to ready.

Or he is the kind that just needs a chance to show himself for once.

[travel_dude]

15 hours ago, MP5029 said:

Lol well let’s do this differently…3 of the first three should be kept, and only the last one of the last four should be kept…

 

 

 

 

 

Ya know, that probably solves a lot of issues.  It might not be fair, but I don't think we can move on with certain players.

Backlund has been incredible for us, but at the same time it seems like he has 2 more gears that he can't shift into.

It's like watching Bennett turn a high danger shot into a puck over the net.

Gio has been a soldier for us.

But I think we are following the wrong general.

Lucic played with two talents; Mange and Backlund.

If anyone got a bump it was him.

 

But that really just moves us in place, doesn't allow us to improve dramatically unless the replacements are stars.

A lot of cap for sure.

I think we could fill up a 4th line with internal players but not the usual grinding, low event stuff.

Still need a real 3rd line and perhaps another top 6 C and a #1D.

One of the top players would need to be sacrificed to do it.

[robrob74]

On 6/29/2021 at 2:38 PM, travel_dude said:

 

Let me attack this another way.

We have a flat cap right now.

If we were able to say sign a top D today, it will be cheaper than in 3 years.

 

I wasn't sure what you meant about re-signing values hindering.

If you mean re-signing Gio or Ryan?

If you mean UFA's that a different story.

 

I think what I see is a team that can't do much to improve in it's present state.

I don't think we need to blow up, but we need to move on from a couple of core players.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Lucic, Backlund, Gio, Hanifin.

Maybe two of the first three should be kept, but at least 2 of the last 4 need to be moved.

 

 

i don’t know if I already responded. It has been a few days.

 

I think I meant the re-signing of Tkachuk and players that will cost a lot. 

[Sarasti]

Of the backups listed I really like Halak, and Dreidger.

Issues would be age for Jaro, and potential salary for Dreidger.

[travel_dude]

20 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

i don’t know if I already responded. It has been a few days.

 

I think I meant the re-signing of Tkachuk and players that will cost a lot. 

 

I think it hinders every team.

We have problems with Lucic and Gio right now, but we could do longer term for less doll-hairs on Tkachuk and Johnny.

There should be no reason why we can't have two players earning $8m.

Are they worth it?

To us, yes.

 

Our biggest problem right now (salary wise that is) is Lucic, Gio and Backlund, who are on the back 9 of the course.

You can't have that much tied up unless they are near tops on the team.

 

[MP5029]

44 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think it hinders every team.

We have problems with Lucic and Gio right now, but we could do longer term for less doll-hairs on Tkachuk and Johnny.

There should be no reason why we can't have two players earning $8m.

Are they worth it?

To us, yes.

 

Our biggest problem right now (salary wise that is) is Lucic, Gio and Backlund, who are on the back 9 of the course.

You can't have that much tied up unless they are near tops on the team.

 

100% agreed and well said 

[Thebrewcrew]

With the RNH and Eriksson-Ek extension being done, I think what we will see in the next few years is players sacrificing dollars if teams are willing to give term.

 

I don't think nor expect Gaudreau to be taking a paycut like RNH, but I think you offer him 7x8 for 56 mill with an NMC and see if he takes it. If not, then you deal him. 

[The_People1]

On 7/2/2021 at 5:32 PM, Thebrewcrew said:

With the RNH and Eriksson-Ek extension being done, I think what we will see in the next few years is players sacrificing dollars if teams are willing to give term.

 

I don't think nor expect Gaudreau to be taking a paycut like RNH, but I think you offer him 7x8 for 56 mill with an NMC and see if he takes it. If not, then you deal him. 

 

With so much cap uncertainty in the immediate few years, I could see Gaudreau and "star" players take short term bridge deals.  Once everything returns to normal, that's when they want to cash in big time.  The mid-tier guys like RNH and Eriksson-Ek, ya they want to score contract security for as long as possible.

[travel_dude]

18 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

With so much cap uncertainty in the immediate few years, I could see Gaudreau and "star" players take short term bridge deals.  Once everything returns to normal, that's when they want to cash in big time.  The mid-tier guys like RNH and Eriksson-Ek, ya they want to score contract security for as long as possible.

 

If Ek can get $5.25m for 8 years, what the heck is Mangiapane worth?

 

[cross16]

38 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

If Ek can get $5.25m for 8 years, what the heck is Mangiapane worth?

 

 

Eriksson Ek is basically Mangiapane at the center ice position. So if he's worth than, then Mang is worth less.

 

EK is very underrated, possibly one of the more underrated players in the league. 8 year term is always risky, but that's a calculated gamble by the Wild on a player who is trending toward a number one center. 

[travel_dude]

22 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Eriksson Ek is basically Mangiapane at the center ice position. So if he's worth than, then Mang is worth less.

 

EK is very underrated, possibly one of the more underrated players in the league. 8 year term is always risky, but that's a calculated gamble by the Wild on a player who is trending toward a number one center. 

 

It wasn't a slight to EE.

EE's contract could well be a steal for them if he is trending to be a #1.

But Mangiapane has two straight years of 17+ goals in a shortened season(s).

Evolving Hockey predicts the value for Mangiapane as being $4.4m x 4 years, so 8 years would no doubt be higher than EE's. 

I doubt they go 8 years on Mangiapane though.

Would I rather spend $5.2m x 8 on Nuge or Mangiapane, both being wingers?

Pretty simple answer for me.

[cross16]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It wasn't a slight to EE.

EE's contract could well be a steal for them if he is trending to be a #1.

But Mangiapane has two straight years of 17+ goals in a shortened season(s).

Evolving Hockey predicts the value for Mangiapane as being $4.4m x 4 years, so 8 years would no doubt be higher than EE's. 

I doubt they go 8 years on Mangiapane though.

Would I rather spend $5.2m x 8 on Nuge or Mangiapane, both being wingers?

Pretty simple answer for me.

 

Well Nuge is not a winger.

 

I doubt they'd do that either but my point was I don't see how Mang can argue he's more valuable because Erikson Ek does similar things at a more important and harder to play position. 

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Well Nuge is not a winger.

 

I doubt they'd do that either but my point was I don't see how Mang can argue he's more valuable because Erikson Ek does similar things at a more important and harder to play position. 

 

Nuge may be considered a C, but a career 44% and playing on the wing of Draisaitl or McDavid or McLeod or Turris or other isn't a real C.

Last season he averaged 3.1 FO's per game with Draisaitl and McD paired up most of the season.

The previous season 6.2, and a lot of that was when they played Darisaitl with McD.

 

[cross16]

9 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Nuge may be considered a C, but a career 44% and playing on the wing of Draisaitl or McDavid or McLeod or Turris or other isn't a real C.

Last season he averaged 3.1 FO's per game with Draisaitl and McD paired up most of the season.

The previous season 6.2, and a lot of that was when they played Darisaitl with McD.

 

 

He's both, but the fact that he can do both well should have value placed on it and for comparison sake doesn't make sense to treat him as a winger. 

[travel_dude]

57 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

He's both, but the fact that he can do both well should have value placed on it and for comparison sake doesn't make sense to treat him as a winger. 

 

I get the argument, but effectively he's a winger.

If he plays with McD, he's a winger.

If they move Draisaitl to 2nd line, he's a winger.

If they load up the top line and he plays 2nd line, he's still a winger.

It's not like he's taking even Khaira levels in faceoffs.

Less than Turris (27 games).

[jjgallow]

On 7/2/2021 at 9:20 AM, travel_dude said:

 

I think it hinders every team.

We have problems with Lucic and Gio right now, but we could do longer term for less doll-hairs on Tkachuk and Johnny.

There should be no reason why we can't have two players earning $8m.

Are they worth it?

To us, yes.

 

Our biggest problem right now (salary wise that is) is Lucic, Gio and Backlund, who are on the back 9 of the course.

You can't have that much tied up unless they are near tops on the team.

 

 

I would interpret this as our biggest problem being whoever created the Lucic, Gio, and Backlund situation.

 

Our biggest problem thus being BT.

 

I do worry that your proposal could contribute further to that problem, although I like Tkachuk's potential.   Ultimately they are both playing the least valuable position in hockey so I do not see how they are worth it to us, definitely not both of them on the same team.

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

If Ek can get $5.25m for 8 years, what the heck is Mangiapane worth?

 

 

I think he's going to cost Kevin Labanc money.  $4.725-mil x 4-years... if we go longer then we are looking at buying more of his prime UFA years so, it could get pricey.  If the Flames trade Tkachuk and/or Gaudreau and give Mangiapane top 6 minutes and 1st unit PP time, then I think Mangiapane could be looking at 25-to-30-goals consistently.  

[travel_dude]

58 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I would interpret this as our biggest problem being whoever created the Lucic, Gio, and Backlund situation.

 

Our biggest problem thus being BT.

 

I do worry that your proposal could contribute further to that problem, although I like Tkachuk's potential.   Ultimately they are both playing the least valuable position in hockey so I do not see how they are worth it to us, definitely not both of them on the same team.

 

Honestly, Gio's deal was envisioned as possibly being a buyout of the last year(s).  Who would have expected him to be the top D on the team.

Would have made sense to trade him 2 years ago.  A given.

Neal's deal was envisioned as being a buyout in the last year.

That begat Lucic which was buyout-proof, which was a poor trade from that perspective.

Backlund was par value at the time, though the years seem to be the issue right now.

 

Sorry, what proposal are you talking about?  I was responding to RobRob about something.  The last things I was talking about was trading for Dumba and then trading Gio.

Target a decent backup goalie in FA.  Not doing a rebuild but possibly trading a LW to help out the forwards.