2021 Offseason Thread

[The_People1]

I would go as high as $8.25 x 8-years...

 

My biggest issue is paying a LW that kind of money.  Optimally, you want to lock up stud Centers and D long term at that price.  Not wingers.  Especially not LW.

 

I know talent is still talent regardless of position and yet, Gaudreau is not a top 10 player in the league... Arguably not even top 25.  Was it TSN or Sportsnet that did the top 50 and no Flames were on it?  I know, that's not the best measure but still.  Just saying.

 

I have a tough time extending Tkachuk at $9-mil-per.  In a cap world, we can't be spending the most on two LWs.

[pikey7883]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

I would go as high as $8.25 x 8-years...

 

My biggest issue is paying a LW that kind of money.  Optimally, you want to lock up stud Centers and D long term at that price.  Not wingers.  Especially not LW.

 

I know talent is still talent regardless of position and yet, Gaudreau is not a top 10 player in the league... Arguably not even top 25.  Was it TSN or Sportsnet that did the top 50 and no Flames were on it?  I know, that's not the best measure but still.  Just saying.

 

I have a tough time extending Tkachuk at $9-mil-per.  In a cap world, we can't be spending the most on two LWs.

Recently I asked a question in regards to Tkachuk’s qualifying offer, and this was a response that I got.

 

“You are correct, Tkachuk's Qualifying Offer for the Flames to retain his RFA rights in the 2022 off-season is $9M. That is equal to 100% of his final year Base Salary. Note that the new rules and calculations regarding Qualifying Offers in the 2020 CBA do not apply to Tkachuk's contract because it was signed prior to that CBA.

 

The Flames don't have to pay him $9M. They can agree to terms with him on a new contract (for any amount that he agrees to) prior to the Qualifying period in the 2022 off-season.  If they haven't agreed to terms prior to the qualifying period in the 2022 off-season, they can qualify him, but unless Tkachuk accepts the 1 years $9M offer, they are still free to negotiate and agree to any contract terms.”

 

That being said, I think it’s crucial (if we’re not trading him for Eichel) that we work out a long term extension this year. Because I agree with you peeps that Tkachuk at $9 is as much of an anchor for this team as Lucic at $6 is. They both are way too much for where they slot into the lineup. 

[robrob74]

22 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

While I would be in favour of a rebuild, a return to the Pacific Division may nullify that.

 

Vegas and Edmonton are the two best teams on paper.

The Flames are better than the Canucks

Anaheim and SJ are rebuilders.

LA could be a surprise team

Seattle is an unknown.

 

Not all that hard to see the Flames being a top 3 team in the Pacific and that's more an indictment on the Pacific than it is a compliment to the Flames.

 

I think the Pacific being what it is will be a driving force behind the moves the Flames make this offseason 

 

BT did say that if you get a ticket to the dance, anything can happen. While I think that can be true, I worry about that logic because teams that have done a lot, might have been better situated to go deep. We’ve never had a team that rolled on all cylinders. We have always been a one or two line team and tend to take turns on one line going. That’s not good enough to win a round in the playoffs, but good enough to win in the regular season.

[Thebrewcrew]

6 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

BT did say that if you get a ticket to the dance, anything can happen. While I think that can be true, I worry about that logic because teams that have done a lot, might have been better situated to go deep. We’ve never had a team that rolled on all cylinders. We have always been a one or two line team and tend to take turns on one line going. That’s not good enough to win a round in the playoffs, but good enough to win in the regular season.

There's a belief that ownership has little tolerance for missing the playoffs in consecutive years. So I think the focus for management is getting to the playoffs in 21/22. That saves their jobs. 

 

The Pacific is likely going to benefit the Flames and should have them making the playoffs next year. Vegas is the only team thats definitively better than Calgary. If ownership is getting playoff revenue in 21/22, I think they are happy. 

[LouCifer]

19 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The most I'd do is 7.75x6 with Gaudreau. I doubt he'd accept though. The fact that this hypothetical extension would happen a couple years after the likes of Kuch and Stone would make it harder for me to give him max term.

 

Even then, many of us have had this conversation, Gaudreau isn't necessarily the guy to build a winner around. He's an incredible talent, but a lot like Phil Kessel. If he's your 3rd or 4th best player, you have an incredible team. If the Flames are paying him 8+, like a franchise player, that's too much for me. 

Sign and trade? 🤔

[The_People1]

10 hours ago, pikey7883 said:

Recently I asked a question in regards to Tkachuk’s qualifying offer, and this was a response that I got.

 

“You are correct, Tkachuk's Qualifying Offer for the Flames to retain his RFA rights in the 2022 off-season is $9M. That is equal to 100% of his final year Base Salary. Note that the new rules and calculations regarding Qualifying Offers in the 2020 CBA do not apply to Tkachuk's contract because it was signed prior to that CBA.

 

The Flames don't have to pay him $9M. They can agree to terms with him on a new contract (for any amount that he agrees to) prior to the Qualifying period in the 2022 off-season.  If they haven't agreed to terms prior to the qualifying period in the 2022 off-season, they can qualify him, but unless Tkachuk accepts the 1 years $9M offer, they are still free to negotiate and agree to any contract terms.”

 

That being said, I think it’s crucial (if we’re not trading him for Eichel) that we work out a long term extension this year. Because I agree with you peeps that Tkachuk at $9 is as much of an anchor for this team as Lucic at $6 is. They both are way too much for where they slot into the lineup. 

 

Ya our cap situation is in trouble and trending in a very bad way.  If we can't win with Tkachuk and Gaudreau at their current rates, then how do we expect to win after we give them both raises?  AND we still have to go find a #1 Center which might be the most difficult thing to acquire in a trade... Eichel costs $10-mil-per for example.  There's no room cap wise to put together a contender when you have two LWs making this kind of money.

 

Someone has to go.  In my opinion, both have to go.  We already have their replacements Mangiapane and Dube waiting and ready.  Even Pelletier is close.

[Thebrewcrew]

18 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya our cap situation is in trouble and trending in a very bad way.  If we can't win with Tkachuk and Gaudreau at their current rates, then how do we expect to win after we give them both raises?  AND we still have to go find a #1 Center which might be the most difficult thing to acquire in a trade... Eichel costs $10-mil-per for example.  There's no room cap wise to put together a contender when you have two LWs making this kind of money.

 

Someone has to go.  In my opinion, both have to go.  We already have their replacements Mangiapane and Dube waiting and ready.  Even Pelletier is close.

I don't see a scenario where Gaudreau and Tkachuk are Flames in 22/23. Both players will be seeking big money extension. Hard to build a winning team when you have 20 mill tied up in LW. Neither are pt/g players at this point, but will be paid like it. 

 

That's why I think it makes too much sense to include Tkachuk in an Eichel offer. I might be more optimistic than most, but I think the Pegula's would have a hard time rejecting an offer that includes Tkachuk. I love Tkachuk's game but his next contract also really concerns me. If he can help you get Eichel, do it

 

Edit- Had another thought. Look back to PLD for Laine, the best player CBJ was offered from any team was Laine. If the Flames offer Tkachuk, it could be tough to beat in terms of a better young NHLer. 

[jjgallow]

On 5/22/2021 at 6:05 PM, rocketdoctor said:

JJ it's not going to happen as much as you want it to.  Pacific is too weak for us to bottom out.

 

Monahan is not going to grab you much in return having a down year or two and being injured.

Gio is not going anywhere unless he wants to move.

Gaudreau wants to stay apparently but do the managment want him?

You should not move Lindholm when he is on such a good contract in a flat cap world.

The only real trade chip you have in the forwards to get anything half decent back is Chucky.

I agree you do not move Mangeipane.

 

I can see them standing still with the D.  Would not surprise me to see Stone back on a minimum contract 1 way as 5/6D

Is Mackey good enough to cement a spot next year so you can move one of Valimaki, Andersson or Hanifin?  Not saying I want to just looking at what trade chips we might have from the players.

 

I would agree with you that not much here happens that I want to lol, so I'm used to that.

 

But I think this is different.   Why?

 

Because even if we keep all those players (and by the way I agree with you that our organisation is likely to pull a titanic and stay on the ship),

 

We're still going to get those high picks.   These players themselves are in decline, and they would kill our cap to the point that the only option we have is to get worse.  It's all but baked in at this point and you could see it on paper three years ago.   But we did nothing.

 

We can keep Gaudreau, and Monahan, and Gio, and Lindholm, and Mangiapane, and Markstrom, and even Chucky.  It won't make a lick of difference we're going to pick top 10 in every draft for the foreseeable future until our ownership figures out that this is a trend and does something meaninful about it.    And that's fine by me when you look at the upcoming quality in those drafts.

 

It would be better, though, if we do get something for those players.

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya our cap situation is in trouble and trending in a very bad way.  If we can't win with Tkachuk and Gaudreau at their current rates, then how do we expect to win after we give them both raises?  AND we still have to go find a #1 Center which might be the most difficult thing to acquire in a trade... Eichel costs $10-mil-per for example.  There's no room cap wise to put together a contender when you have two LWs making this kind of money.

 

Someone has to go.  In my opinion, both have to go.  We already have their replacements Mangiapane and Dube waiting and ready.  Even Pelletier is close.

 

 

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I don't see a scenario where Gaudreau and Tkachuk are Flames in 22/23. Both players will be seeking big money extension. Hard to build a winning team when you have 20 mill tied up in LW. Neither are pt/g players at this point, but will be paid like it. 

 

That's why I think it makes too much sense to include Tkachuk in an Eichel offer. I might be more optimistic than most, but I think the Pegula's would have a hard time rejecting an offer that includes Tkachuk. I love Tkachuk's game but his next contract also really concerns me. If he can help you get Eichel, do it

 

Edit- Had another thought. Look back to PLD for Laine, the best player CBJ was offered from any team was Laine. If the Flames offer Tkachuk, it could be tough to beat in terms of a better young NHLer. 

 

Tkachuk + Zary + 2022 1st round pick for Eichel is a very competitive offer.

 

But if I had it my way, I would keep the 2022 1st round pick and just trade Tkachuk for futures (very good futures of course)... and in essence, manufacture a "full retool" gunning for Wright or Bedard in the coming two years.  Again, next year's draft appears to have 3 franchise Centers so maybe we can get one of them.  2023 has Bedard and a few others as well.  Target 2025/26 as the year we come out of the retool as a powerhouse team.

 

We won't... so the next best thing is to go for Eichel.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I would agree with you that not much here happens that I want to lol, so I'm used to that.

 

But I think this is different.   Why?

 

Because even if we keep all those players (and by the way I agree with you that our organisation is likely to pull a titanic and stay on the ship),

 

We're still going to get those high picks.   These players themselves are in decline, and they would kill our cap to the point that the only option we have is to get worse.  It's all but baked in at this point and you could see it on paper three years ago.   But we did nothing.

 

We can keep Gaudreau, and Monahan, and Gio, and Lindholm, and Mangiapane, and Markstrom, and even Chucky.  It won't make a lick of difference we're going to pick top 10 in every draft for the foreseeable future until our ownership figures out that this is a trend and does something meaninful about it.    And that's fine by me when you look at the upcoming quality in those drafts.

 

It would be better, though, if we do get something for those players.

 

this is why I don’t think, especially now, that the cap hits work. McD and Drys will continue to kill the cap and Edm hasn’t been the best at finding young talent to fill in in ELC’s. The Flames have a worse problem because we don’t have any elite players to supplement a team to have those ELC’s to fill needs and build a winner. 
 

the other problem is this team isn’t willing to use ELC players until their 2nd contracts because we only find players to grow slowly... 

 

I just hate that players need to get 10+M and I just can’t see JG being worth it considering he’s so 1Dimensional. And if he can’t generate 5v5 regularly then that’s bad too. He’s a PP specialist. I think he should be 7m. I don’t even think Tkachuk is worth what he gets now. I hate giving these guys huge deals when they’ve not accomplished anything, nor deserve it... 

 

 

i know I will be told it’s the current NHL and that it’s the trend. 
 

some think the Flames aren’t that bad off, but I am with you and feel we are somewhere between what they think and where you’re at.

[robrob74]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I would agree with you that not much here happens that I want to lol, so I'm used to that.

 

But I think this is different.   Why?

 

Because even if we keep all those players (and by the way I agree with you that our organisation is likely to pull a titanic and stay on the ship),

 

We're still going to get those high picks.   These players themselves are in decline, and they would kill our cap to the point that the only option we have is to get worse.  It's all but baked in at this point and you could see it on paper three years ago.   But we did nothing.

 

We can keep Gaudreau, and Monahan, and Gio, and Lindholm, and Mangiapane, and Markstrom, and even Chucky.  It won't make a lick of difference we're going to pick top 10 in every draft for the foreseeable future until our ownership figures out that this is a trend and does something meaninful about it.    And that's fine by me when you look at the upcoming quality in those drafts.

 

It would be better, though, if we do get something for those players.

I actually think if we kept them, we will be perpetually drafting between 12th and 18th. Good enough to get in every other year, but not enough to do anything other than first round exits, or a point or two out of the playoffs.

 

we will always say, if we had average goaltending we could have had better records.

[rocketdoctor]

 

Probably why we will not be a bottom feeder next year with the current roster.  

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Probably why we will not be a bottom feeder next year with the current roster.  

 

Darren seems a little-one sided in his descriptor there, do we have a list of those teams yet or do we know?

 

Vegas will be ahead of us

I don't like saying this but Edmonton will be ahead of us despite blowing up in the playoffs.

If this new team comes in anything like Vegas did, they will be ahead of us

Of those 5 teams that didn't make the playoffs, I am willing to bet literally all of them are younger than us and trending better than us.

 

Bottom line I don't see any reason at all why we don't finish dead last in that group.     Don't mean to be a debbie downer but...   yeah.   Would be good to confirm if there is a list of teams yet.

 

In my view, it's not going to matter what division or anything else we're in, and I'm basing that on our player and prospects on paper considering salary, age, health, position.         I'm not considering coaching or divisions because what I see on the paper is such that none of those things will matter.   A week division might move you one spot.  Maybe two spots.  Or no spots.   Not 10 spots.  not when you're on the extreme end of it.

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Darren seems a little-one sided in his descriptor there, do we have a list of those teams yet or do we know?

 

Vegas will be ahead of us

I don't like saying this but Edmonton will be ahead of us despite blowing up in the playoffs.

If this new team comes in anything like Vegas did, they will be ahead of us

Of those 5 teams that didn't make the playoffs, I am willing to bet literally all of them are younger than us and trending better than us.

 

Bottom line I don't see any reason at all why we don't finish dead last in that group.     Don't mean to be a debbie downer but...   yeah.   Would be good to confirm if there is a list of teams yet.

 

In my view, it's not going to matter what division or anything else we're in, and I'm basing that on our player and prospects on paper considering salary, age, health, position.         I'm not considering coaching or divisions because what I see on the paper is such that none of those things will matter.   A week division might move you one spot.  Maybe two spots.  Or no spots.   Not 10 spots.  not when you're on the extreme end of it.

just a guess:

 

Vegas

Edmonton

Seattle

Vancouver 

Los Angeles 
Calgary

San Jose

Anaheim

[Thebrewcrew]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

just a guess:

 

Vegas

Edmonton

Seattle

Vancouver 

Los Angeles 
Calgary

San Jose

Anaheim

Here's how I see the Pacific

Vegas is the class of the division and one of the best teams in the league. That's stating the obvious.

Edmonton has put together two consecutive solid regular seasons, carried by 29 and 97. Kinda like the Flames of the past few years, haven't done well in playoffs

Vancouver has skill but is handcuffed with a ton of bad deals. The Flames have done very well against them in recent years and that's likely to continue next year.

LA they could be a frisky team next year. Like Ottawa, they are loaded with young talent and still have key players that have won. If there's a team that could make a jump next year, it's them

San Jose they are old and slow and have a ton of bad deals. Like Detroit, they are in for a long overhaul

Anaheim they aren't quite LA, but they aren't quite SJ either. They have some good young players, but that roster has a lot of holes aside from the goalie.

Seattle who knows. Probably better than ANA or SJ at minimum.

 

It isn't crazy to look at the Pacific, arguably the worst division in hockey and see a way where ownership/management see a path to the playoffs. 

[jjgallow]

 

3 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Here's how I see the Pacific

Vegas is the class of the division and one of the best teams in the league. That's stating the obvious.

Edmonton has put together two consecutive solid regular seasons, carried by 29 and 97. Kinda like the Flames of the past few years, haven't done well in playoffs

Vancouver has skill but is handcuffed with a ton of bad deals. The Flames have done very well against them in recent years and that's likely to continue next year.

LA they could be a frisky team next year. Like Ottawa, they are loaded with young talent and still have key players that have won. If there's a team that could make a jump next year, it's them

San Jose they are old and slow and have a ton of bad deals. Like Detroit, they are in for a long overhaul

Anaheim they aren't quite LA, but they aren't quite SJ either. They have some good young players, but that roster has a lot of holes aside from the goalie.

Seattle who knows. Probably better than ANA or SJ at minimum.

 

It isn't crazy to look at the Pacific, arguably the worst division in hockey and see a way where ownership/management see a path to the playoffs. 

 

Thank you very much for that @robrob74.

 

@Thebrewcrew thanks,  I agree with a lot of that,

 

Vegas obvious 

Edmonton - imho obvious.  in ...the ...regular season.  lol.

Vancouver - they don't just have talent they have young talent.  imho they will blow by us. 

LA - also blowing by us with young talent and on uptrend

San Jose - agreed old and slow.

Anaheim - wildcard but willing to agree they will struggle

Seattle - thinking with the new way the NHL handles expansion they will be a decent team yes.

 

Basically I see Flames in a race for bottom three (sorry I know that sounds aweful), with San Jose and Anaheim.   And if I'm a betting man I'd say they'd be in the middle of those three.  Putting them 2nd last in the Pacific.     

 

The following year, I suspect last.   San Jose will pull a rabbit out of their hat some how although I don't know how.

 

Here's the thing.   Even when we look at the worst teams in that list...   Anaheim, San Jose....   they got prospects and young players miles and miles ahead of us.   truth.

[Thebrewcrew]

Vancouver just has so much bad money, it's hard to see them really improving their team this offseason. They also have to pay Pettersson and Hughes big money.

 

Here's a list of bottom end players they are paying 3 million or more

Roussel 3mill

Beagle 3mill

Eriksson 6mill

Holtby 4.3mill

That's 16.3mill tied up role players. All have some form of a NTC as well so they can't just ship them to Detroit. Sure, they could buyout some of those guys, but they also ahve a 3mill penalty for Luongo retiring. Not sure how much dead money they want.

 

I like the young players Vancouver has, but they have really hurt themselves in free agency.

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Probably why we will not be a bottom feeder next year with the current roster.  

 

Or probably our retool will be very deep this summer.

[cross16]

On 5/22/2021 at 11:33 AM, robrob74 said:

 

we hear that every year. If the Flames get average or above average goaltending they’d win. It’s frustrating. I get that numbers say differently. But for me the eye test still doesn’t cut it. Not saying markstrom wasn’t bad, but also saying it can’t be just get the save% down and you get better results... I get you didn’t say that fully. This team has tendencies to leave goalies out to dry and then have great D percentages, then it looks like it is all on the goalies. 

 

Because you can say it for every team not just the Flames. 

 

But yes its not at all what i'm saying because Markstrom was fantastic to start the season and the Flames didn't take advantage of it and there were games down the stretch where he was excellent and the Flames couldn't score. 

 

I only comment on the save % because it sticks out. The Flames were excellent defensively under Sutter and unfortunately Markstrom wasn't as good as you would have thought, but plenty of logical reasons for it too IMO. 

[travel_dude]

On 5/24/2021 at 12:21 PM, Thebrewcrew said:

Vancouver just has so much bad money, it's hard to see them really improving their team this offseason. They also have to pay Pettersson and Hughes big money.

 

Here's a list of bottom end players they are paying 3 million or more

Roussel 3mill

Beagle 3mill

Eriksson 6mill

Holtby 4.3mill

That's 16.3mill tied up role players. All have some form of a NTC as well so they can't just ship them to Detroit. Sure, they could buyout some of those guys, but they also ahve a 3mill penalty for Luongo retiring. Not sure how much dead money they want.

 

I like the young players Vancouver has, but they have really hurt themselves in free agency.

 

Benning has said they will be busy this summer, with (yes he said that) buyouts, trades and signings.

Probably similar to what Capmaster Kenny does in EDM.

[cross16]

On 5/23/2021 at 5:24 PM, The_People1 said:

 

Ya our cap situation is in trouble and trending in a very bad way.  If we can't win with Tkachuk and Gaudreau at their current rates, then how do we expect to win after we give them both raises?  AND we still have to go find a #1 Center which might be the most difficult thing to acquire in a trade... Eichel costs $10-mil-per for example.  There's no room cap wise to put together a contender when you have two LWs making this kind of money.

 

Someone has to go.  In my opinion, both have to go.  We already have their replacements Mangiapane and Dube waiting and ready.  Even Pelletier is close.

 

 

It is really not. 13 mill this offseason with no tough re signs (Dube and Valimaki as RFAs but both not getting long term deals) and really only Derek Ryan as a UFA. Gio is up next offseason so 6.75 off the books and Lucic is done in 2 years. 

 

I don't think the cap is your hindrance in acquiring a number one center, it's actually finding a team willing to deal you that player. The Flames can make it work with the cap for sure. 

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

 

It is really not. 13 mill this offseason with no tough re signs (Dube and Valimaki as RFAs but both not getting long term deals) and really only Derek Ryan as a UFA. Gio is up next offseason so 6.75 off the books and Lucic is done in 2 years. 

 

I don't think the cap is your hindrance in acquiring a number one center, it's actually finding a team willing to deal you that player. The Flames can make it work with the cap for sure. 

 

It's not great.  We are a capped team that cannot make the playoffs and our two best players need raises after 1 more season. 

[robrob74]

21 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's not great.  We are a capped team that cannot make the playoffs and our two best players need raises after 1 more season. 

 

I agree. I think it is terrible that we are a cap team that can’t make the playoffs. I get it, a lot of teams are against the cap, so it is normalized. I just don’t think it makes it right, especially when there are so many holes in the lineup as it is. It means they’d not have been able to fill them anyways.

[Thebrewcrew]

If Seattle selects Gio it leaves a massive hole in the top 4, I don't think that's discussed enough.

 

The UFA market for D isn't good, especially LHD.

Alec Martinez is the best, but he's 33 and coming off a career year, warning signs there. 

If I was to bet on a player developing into a solid top 4, I would take a chance on Jamie Oleksiak

 

Might have to look at the trade market. Maybe Monahan can net you a 2nd pairing D

 

Backup goalie is another interesting need. I wouldn't be spending much on a backup as they will only be starting 20 times at most, under Sutter.

Ideally I'd only be spending 750k-1mill on a backup. It's not a great year for UFA goalies though.