Jack Beck- 2021 6th rounder

[cross16]

Beck to join Stockton.

Good for him although i wondered if maybe they would want him to rest. Be good for him to keep skating though. 

 

 

[travel_dude]

58 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Beck to join Stockton.

Good for him although i wondered if maybe they would want him to rest. Be good for him to keep skating though. 

 

 

 

Can he play in the playoffs as an ATO?

[sak22]

47 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Can he play in the playoffs as an ATO?

I think so, I believe Matthew Phillips played a couple in the playoffs in 2017 on an ATO.

[travel_dude]

Heat get a bye past the first round, so no idea how they will set up the lines.

I doubt they want to throw Beck in for his first pro experience.

[cross16]

18 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Can he play in the playoffs as an ATO?

 

I don't have a rule that clarifies either way, but I've seen multiple players on ATO's play in the playoffs so I'm pretty confident the answer is Yes. 

[travel_dude]

He's been invited to the Nation dev camp this summer.  Good chance for him to turn some heads.

[conundrumed]

Vs the Sting Sunday afternoon.

Figure out why Beck's scoring has completely dried up.

The 67s are 5th nationally I believe. The Sting are going to hammer them for hopefully their 7th W in a row.

The beehive will be packed.

[conundrumed]

Well damn.It turns out Ottawa is exceptional defensively, goaltending and on the forecheck. F/O were even, shots were even 4-3 Ottawa. Missed an open net late. Sarnia struggled with both zone entries and getting in hot on the forecheck was their downfall. They played pretty tentative.

As for Beck, there are no worries. He has moved to LW fulltime due to TDL acquisitions so the timeline makes sense to his points coming down. He's noticeable every shift and effective on the left side PP. Distributes the puck well, 2 1st assists. Had 2 high danger scoring chances. Just missed on a wrister top-shelf with little to shoot at.

He was good defensively and back-checked aggressively.

A couple goals Gaudreau would want back, that's usual. A penalty shot turned out to be the winner. Great game but Sarnia couldn't afford to be so flat for most of the 2nd period.

 

Brady Stonehouse from Ottawa is worth keeping an eye on. Undrafted last year, will be drafted this year. Annoying af in the Tkachuk mold. He had the PS winner and was being Tkachuk-annoying all game.

He's worth a later round swing as a 19yo this year.

[conundrumed]

Am I correct in thinking that we have to sign Beck to his ELC now or he's out?

[cross16]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Am I correct in thinking that we have to sign Beck to his ELC now or he's out?

 

They lose their exclusive rights June 1st and if unsigned he'd go back into the draft. 

[zima]

We are going to lose a few players in the A next yr so don't we need to get as many players as we can are we not losing Phillips? I highly doubt he will resign with a team that didn't even give him a fair chance to play in the NHL?

[conundrumed]

Beck is having a good playoffs with 7 games played, 5g/6a/11pts. 9 of his pts, 5g/4a, are 5v5.

Ottawa (1) is currently tied at a game apiece in their Eastern Conference Semi-final vs Peterborough (4).

The clock is ticking for the Flames to ink Beck and there's no reason not to.

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Beck is having a good playoffs with 7 games played, 5g/6a/11pts. 9 of his pts, 5g/4a, are 5v5.

Ottawa (1) is currently tied at a game apiece in their Eastern Conference Semi-final vs Peterborough (4).

The clock is ticking for the Flames to ink Beck and there's no reason not to.

 

Just need a GM that isn't out in left field doing other things.  Like looking for a GM.

[conundrumed]

The countdown is on with both Beck and Cole Huckins. June 1st coming quickly.

[cross16]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

The countdown is on with both Beck and Cole Huckins. June 1st coming quickly.

 

I think Beck is worth a contract. Can see a path where they pass but it be a bit disappointing if they do. 

 

I would be surprised if Huckins is signed though. Cole Jordan and Cam Whynot are also in that bunch too. 

[jjgallow]

 

Ho-hum, but I see little reason not to sign him.  For what the Flames have in his age range, he's up there.

 

I'd like to see the Flames bring in more prospects, even on PTO or through trades.   But outside of that tangent, he's got a shot at the NHL and the Flames don't have a reason not to sign him right now.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Ho-hum, but I see little reason not to sign him.  For what the Flames have in his age range, he's up there.

 

I'd like to see the Flames bring in more prospects, even on PTO or through trades.   But outside of that tangent, he's got a shot at the NHL and the Flames don't have a reason not to sign him right now.

 

Plus, if he can be an AHLer, they need players who are AHL lifers to progress as well. That's not a terrible career.

[jjgallow]

8 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Plus, if he can be an AHLer, they need players who are AHL lifers to progress as well. That's not a terrible career.

 

oh, i meant NHL ho-hum, I think he has a shot. I don't think I'd sign a player with a known AHL ceiling, but you're right, it could turn out that way and often does.

[robrob74]

30 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

oh, i meant NHL ho-hum, I think he has a shot. I don't think I'd sign a player with a known AHL ceiling, but you're right, it could turn out that way and often does.

ya I get it. Ultimately the same for me. I don't want anyone to take a spot from a prospect when they're older. But can we have a 22 man roster of prospects in the AHL that can be NHL ready? That would be amazing!

[jjgallow]

20 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

ya I get it. Ultimately the same for me. I don't want anyone to take a spot from a prospect when they're older. But can we have a 22 man roster of prospects in the AHL that can be NHL ready? That would be amazing!

 

I think it's possible to have a 22 man AHL roster of prospects with NHL potential, yes.  In theory.

 

I've never seen it done before and there's probably issues with contracts, but, I think it's possible.

 

There's undrafted players, which is a real thing after covid,   https://nhlentrydraft.com/news/top-undrafted-players-2022-nhl-draft/

 

US College players, players in obscure leagues, the NHL waiver,

 

Isn't really any reason the whole AHL team couldn't have NHL potential imho, but it would require a lot of work and planning and contract magic

[cross16]

Not really possible. 
 

contract limit is 50 and your NHL team will take up almost half of that. Also included are any players that sign but get assigned to CHL. Plus there is the added risk of almost all entry level contracts are 3 years. So at some point your going to walk yourself your into a corner with the contract limit. 
 

I think the smarter approach is branching into all Leagues and the international system. Letting prospects develop overseas and bring them over when they are a little older. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Not really possible. 
 

contract limit is 50 and your NHL team will take up almost half of that. Also included are any players that sign but get assigned to CHL. Plus there is the added risk of almost all entry level contracts are 3 years. So at some point your going to walk yourself your into a corner with the contract limit. 
 

I think the smarter approach is branching into all Leagues and the international system. Letting prospects develop overseas and bring them over when they are a little older. 

 

Can it be both, case by case?

 

LW's go to Europe, RW's go to Wranglers lol.  Something a bit more complex than that.

 

You've told me before that it's not possible ( I think about 8 years ago ).  I don't deny my contract disability.

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0092072023.html

 

Quick high-level glance of the roster tells me about half these players have NHL potential, half do not.

 

Brett Sutter stands out like a sore thumb, ok maybe a special case.    

 

Here's the thing imho:  I feel like teams have a choice between walking yourself into a corner with the contract limit, or walk yourself into a corner with the cap limit.  Flames usually get nailed to the wall on cap, leading them to make poor decisions (Monahan etc etc, ...half of Florida's roster...)

 

So instead of walking oneself into a corner on cap, why not intentionally max out those contracts with ELCs in the AHL?

 

So the Wranglers have, let's say, 12 drifters on their roster right now.    Let's just say those were 12 players with NHL potential.   Every year, you'd ... probably, get one NHLer out of that.  Maybe sort of.   

 

That means one less Aweful, aweful free agent contract each year for the Flames.

 

Could it lead to buyouts?  yes I agree.     But, say it leads to like 3 buyouts  a year.  Me jotting rough calcs.

      That's like $1m lol.  Maybe $1.5 million.    Look what we just did with Sutter, and all the other gaffs. 

             That's nothing.  It's a rounding error.

 

So:

 

1..  Do all players with NHL potential have to be on ELC?    I've seen some teams start them off without it for a year.
Maybe each year you have 4-5 younger players not on ELC, with a promise to ELC them in the summer if they pan out?

       I mean we're doing that now anyway, but with guys way to old to make it.

          Why not just do that, taking a chance on some kids?

 

2.   Maybe just some yearly buyouts?   We do them anyway, but only after we get walked into a corner on massive Lucic-style mistakes.     Why not manage that risk by maximizing the return out of the Wranglers?

   $1m in scheduled buyouts at the AHL level, leading to more NHLers on decent ELCs and less need for expensive NHL buyouts/trades?   Also keep in mind, players would love this.  Nobody wants to stick around when it's not working.
      They get paid, they get a fresh start somewhere else.

 

I will admit, it's better now than it has been at some other times.   It was scary-bad in the Baertschi era and before.   

    But anyway, all of the above is...a question...not an arguement, of why they can't maximize.  

    Because there are loads of young prospects out there right now with NHL potential and no home.
      Sure, 5-10% success rate.  Isn't that enough though?

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

^^^^^^

So, just some thought.

Can't do 3 buyouts a year.

Neal was a buyout candidate that we traded for a non buyout player.

Should have just kept him the 2nd year and bought him out then.

Ahem, maybe not.  EDM is still paying the 1.9M in buyout cap.

 

Sutter was brought in as a leader.

You need those guys to fill out the AHL roster, not a bunch but one or two.

We kind of wasted the AHL as a place to go and spoil.

Mostly the last coach who refused to use them.

We had injuries and used the fringe NHL'ers instead of the prospects.

And we drove some away, maybe we can save a couple now.

 

[cross16]

On 5/7/2023 at 10:37 AM, jjgallow said:

 

 

1..  Do all players with NHL potential have to be on ELC?    I've seen some teams start them off without it for a year.
Maybe each year you have 4-5 younger players not on ELC, with a promise to ELC them in the summer if they pan out?

       I mean we're doing that now anyway, but with guys way to old to make it.

          Why not just do that, taking a chance on some kids?

 

 

 

Anyone with an NHL contract has to be on an ELC yes. Possible it's less than 3 years but that would depend on how old they are when they sign the contract. I'd argue if you are giving someone 23-24 a 2 year ELC they likely don't have much NHL potential. 

You are likely referring to AHL deals or try outs. Something that players with NHL potential don't usually sign. 

On 5/7/2023 at 10:37 AM, jjgallow said:

 

 

2.   Maybe just some yearly buyouts?   We do them anyway, but only after we get walked into a corner on massive Lucic-style mistakes.     Why not manage that risk by maximizing the return out of the Wranglers?

   $1m in scheduled buyouts at the AHL level, leading to more NHLers on decent ELCs and less need for expensive NHL buyouts/trades?   Also keep in mind, players would love this.  Nobody wants to stick around when it's not working.
      They get paid, they get a fresh start somewhere else.

 

 

Players would hate it actually, it will cost them money. Under age 26 a buyout is only 1/3 of the contract. So the players misses out on 2/3 of the money they are owed with no guarantees they can make it back (especially if it's not working)

[travel_dude]

Looks like we are losing Beck.

Not sure what the justiifcation is for this.