The Re-signing Thread

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Plus how far are you willing to go on Mangiapane? He's a career 0.5ppg player shooting at a 20% clip.

Buch just signed the $5.4. No way Mange gets more for 1 flash season.

 

In the end, the hardest thing to do in the NHL is score goals.  All that other hockey stuff is great but scoring is the hardest thing to do.

 

I don't get this "law of averages" having to apply to every player in the league because every player has different levels of finishing skills.  For example, give Backlund 10 chances point blank in the slot and he will sail 4 of them over the net and another 4 will go right into the goalies chest.  1 will hit the post.  There is no law of averages here.  That's simply the story of Backlund's career.

 

Mangiapane is a sneaky smart finisher with a great shot and high end patience.  20% shooting percentage is the story of his career moving forward.

 

Bushnevich is turning out to be a great player but signed his deal before this year's breakout.  It's similar to Lindholm who should be worth $8-mil right now but signed his deal before he was good.  Bushnevich is looking like a $8-mil player right now.

[tmac70]

For me you have to look at this as what we have versus what you lose. There are players under this system that thrive some who don't and some who are neutral. If you remove whats the cost or long term effect to regain what you have. Sometimes its better to dance with the devil you know. Here is where I rank players on a +, - N in terms of what the contribute to the team right now. IMHO the Neutral or - players are ones that can be removed and subsituted with similar products at a lesser value. I love Kylington but he is a player you can trade high as is Hanifin. The facts are by removing any + player currently on the team, yes you may get something of quailty but I do not think you get back what we have. I am sorry but simply removing JG, MT or Mags are players you just can't replace in a trade or draft choice. We have players that are coing up in the AHL that could fill in for Dube,Kylington, Hanifin at a lesser rate. Replacing Backs or Mony wound be a little tougher at the C position.  Plus we all have to admit that Zadrov and Gubranson are a force on the backend, that is something that is not easily replaced as well. 

FORWARD

JG +

MT +

LINDY +

MONY N

BACKS N

TOFFEE +

DUBE N

COLEMAN +

MAGS +

RITCHIE -

LOOCH N

RICHARDSON N

LEWIS N

RIZIE N

 

DMAN

kYLINGTON N

TANEV +

GUBRANSON +

ZAD +

ANDERSON +

HANIFIN N

STONE N 

 

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

In the end, the hardest thing to do in the NHL is score goals.  All that other hockey stuff is great but scoring is the hardest thing to do.

 

I don't get this "law of averages" having to apply to every player in the league because every player has different levels of finishing skills.  For example, give Backlund 10 chances point blank in the slot and he will sail 4 of them over the net and another 4 will go right into the goalies chest.  1 will hit the post.  There is no law of averages here.  That's simply the story of Backlund's career.

 

Mangiapane is a sneaky smart finisher with a great shot and high end patience.  20% shooting percentage is the story of his career moving forward.

 

Bushnevich is turning out to be a great player but signed his deal before this year's breakout.  It's similar to Lindholm who should be worth $8-mil right now but signed his deal before he was good.  Bushnevich is looking like a $8-mil player right now.

Which is fine, but I'm just trying to put things into perspective. If he scores 35 this year, will he hit 35 every year? I'm just not sure is all I'm saying. Paying for a 35 goal scorer that potentially falls back to 22 goals is worrying. He isn't really a playmaker so I don't see a huge point getter. But yes, finishing is hardest.

[JTech780]

The more I think about it, the more I think that both Mangiapane and Kylington are the type of players who will bet on themselves. My bet is that both players are looking for 1 year deals on their next contracts.

[conundrumed]

10 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

The more I think about it, the more I think that both Mangiapane and Kylington are the type of players who will bet on themselves. My bet is that both players are looking for 1 year deals on their next contracts.

I'm leaning towards hoping so. Then we free up Mony and Lucic salaries for a bit of breathing room.

Then hopefully we can have a prospect or 2 to graduate every year to help negotiate the cap.

 

Sorry to get everyone considering this so early, but the conversation was kind of staggered around in different threads.

I would clearly hate to be a GM. I think my head would explode.

[cross16]

15 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

So like I said in my post, it comes down to keeping Monahan or Gudbranson.  If we keep Monahan, then Gudbranson is gone.

 

Monahan could be replaced by Rucizka depending on Rucizka's progression.  I feel Rucizka is close to legit.  He could play 3rd line Center next season 18 to 20 minutes a night.  There is however, no one to replace Gudbranson from within.  The RHS RD with size and good defending.  I would keep Gudbranson.

 

And who replaces Rucizka on 4th line C?  Sutter wants another RHS C so that would come in the summer.  Maybe a Veteran or maybe we graduate Matthew Phillips who is the farm team's leading scorer.  Phillips is RHS C.

 

I know Phillips lacks size and we know Sutter wants size in the bottom 6.  Which, coincidentally goes back to Zadorov and Gudbranson.  Those two were certainly personal requests by Sutter to BT.   Don't be surprised if BT and Sutter chooses Gudbranson over Monahan this summer.

 

I already think Monahan is gone this offseason, they need that cap space and he is the most obvious candidate because his pay isn't close to the level of his play. 

 

All i'm saying and demonstrating is that buying out Monahan doesn't open up cap space for Gudbranson unless he is willing to stay for 2 or less. If Gudbranson wants 3 or more (never mind the fact that the Flames should RUN if that's what he wants) they can't afford him without making moves in addition to Monahan. 

 

[cross16]

57 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Which is fine, but I'm just trying to put things into perspective. If he scores 35 this year, will he hit 35 every year? I'm just not sure is all I'm saying. Paying for a 35 goal scorer that potentially falls back to 22 goals is worrying. He isn't really a playmaker so I don't see a huge point getter. But yes, finishing is hardest.

 

Thing is with Mang is you could see this coming, at least if you look at different statistics. He's been on of the better 5 on 5 wingers, not just for the Flames but in the league, and I think the production you are seeing now is not as much as a surprise as it should be. Here are his last 3 seasons for Goals/60, Assists/60, First assets/60, 2nd assists/60 Total Points?60

 

1.04  0.98  0.77 0.21 2.02

1.24  0.91  0.91 0      2.15

1.79  0.56  0.28  0.28 2.35

 

His PP numbers have jumped quite a bit are not likely sustainable but he only averages 1:46 so now a huge swing on the numbers. Could point to his shooting % for food for thought he shot 15.31% 2 years ago, 19.48% last year and now is shooting 19.79 this year. he's average almost 3 shots more /game which just points to the fit with Sutter's style IMO. 

 

I can understand the discussion around moving him at peak value and in certain context it makes sense but at the same time we should be prepared that we will very likely lose that trade and it will leave a large hole.  The cap forces decisions like that so it is a worthy discussion to be had I just don't think the could find a player that comes close to impacting the game to the level Mang does. 

 

for me, he is worth every penny of an extension as long as the number doesn't run past 6 million which i'm not sure it will. 

 

[The_Tribal Chief]

The thing that i find Troubling is the last few years Johhny hasnt been the greatest now im worried if we sign him is this production from him gonna continue or once he has signed is he gonna drop off again cause he is a expensive player iif he isnt playing at his best all the time

[conundrumed]

22 minutes ago, The_Snowbear said:

The thing that i find Troubling is the last few years Johhny hasnt been the greatest now im worried if we sign him is this production from him gonna continue or once he has signed is he gonna drop off again cause he is a expensive player iif he isnt playing at his best all the time

I think he's always been this player. Consistent high level linemates and him getting far too frustrated far too often have been a problem.

For my money, he is still the best skater in the league, sees and thinks the game as well as anybody. I'm not really worried about that.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

31 minutes ago, The_Snowbear said:

The thing that i find Troubling is the last few years Johhny hasnt been the greatest now im worried if we sign him is this production from him gonna continue or once he has signed is he gonna drop off again cause he is a expensive player iif he isnt playing at his best all the time

I think all the players doing well now will continue to do so under Sutter. That leaves next season and then what?  If this seasons playoffs are successful (minimun 3rd round IMO) then obviously we know what type of game this roster is built for.  A big issue that will need to be addressed is who replaces Sutter when the time comes?  A sutter style team is what we see now, would it thrive under a new non-Sutter type coach?

[The_Tribal Chief]

Well it depends if Kirk Muller Could coach like Sutter as the associate coach to sutter

[conundrumed]

@cross16

 

Yeah I know that stuff. Plus he's a pita to play against, you can see opponents do not like him. For me, it's cap-related and how to stagger contracts so we avoid the scenario of this year. So does it make more sense to do a 1 year risk that he only gets more expensive, but gives a bit more flexibility?

[cross16]

17 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

@cross16

 

Yeah I know that stuff. Plus he's a pita to play against, you can see opponents do not like him. For me, it's cap-related and how to stagger contracts so we avoid the scenario of this year. So does it make more sense to do a 1 year risk that he only gets more expensive, but gives a bit more flexibility?

 

Because a one year deal walks him right to UFA I don't see that as a viable option. I think the risk of him walking for nothing or getting more expensive is greater than the flexibility you would maybe gain. perhaps, as his agent indicated, they won't have an option but if Mang and his camp are reluctant to do term I'd be very willing to listen to what offers were on him. Would not like the idea of him walking for nothing. 

 

Kylington is fine because you have 2 more years before UFA. 

[sak22]

38 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I think he's always been this player. Consistent high level linemates and him getting far too frustrated far too often have been a problem.

For my money, he is still the best skater in the league, sees and thinks the game as well as anybody. I'm not really worried about that.

I think he had a battle in his head after the Colorado series, he took on most of the criticism which maybe he isn't used to.  Didn't look like he was having much fun the next year even when things were going well.  Not uncommon for elite players to go through stretches like that, sometimes something simple like getting married or having kids get players out of their ruts.

[robrob74]

6 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I think he had a battle in his head after the Colorado series, he took on most of the criticism which maybe he isn't used to.  Didn't look like he was having much fun the next year even when things were going well.  Not uncommon for elite players to go through stretches like that, sometimes something simple like getting married or having kids get players out of their ruts.

 

When you think of the last few years, the teams just didn't play that well. They had good possession, but the overall team game was lacking, and I wonder how much of it came down to you play because you're the best chance to score goals? Whereas now, if you're not playing well, even though they could be the best chance to score, they might not be getting the call. 

 

Plus, when we were giving up a goal on the first or second shot and then possibly one that was fluky, it wears on the team and morale. 

 

So, I think it's a bit of that, and it's also great to see him very relaxed this year. The whole team is. 

[The_People1]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I already think Monahan is gone this offseason, they need that cap space and he is the most obvious candidate because his pay isn't close to the level of his play. 

 

All i'm saying and demonstrating is that buying out Monahan doesn't open up cap space for Gudbranson unless he is willing to stay for 2 or less. If Gudbranson wants 3 or more (never mind the fact that the Flames should RUN if that's what he wants) they can't afford him without making moves in addition to Monahan. 

 

 

My current chopping block order is,

 

1. Monahan

2. Zadorov

3. Lucic

4. Toffoli

5. Gudbranson

6. Dube

 

Hopefully we don't have to buyout Monahan so we don't retain cap hit.  The raises to Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Mangiapane should take a bit more than $6.375-mil.  Then there's Kylington who you believe could be had back on a 1-year cheap.  I just value the RHS RD with size and can play second pairing in case Tanev goes down for any length of time.  Having RHS RD helps balance the D pairings.  It's not easy to find a replacement... Zadorov, on the other hand, LHS LD can be easily had.

 

It depends on the price of course.  I'm okay going as high as $3.5-mil x 3 on Gudbranson.

[The_People1]

8 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Which is fine, but I'm just trying to put things into perspective. If he scores 35 this year, will he hit 35 every year? I'm just not sure is all I'm saying. Paying for a 35 goal scorer that potentially falls back to 22 goals is worrying. He isn't really a playmaker so I don't see a huge point getter. But yes, finishing is hardest.

 

He's 25/26 years old so the next 3 years should be his best.  No worries in the short term, in my opinion.  Give him a legit #1 Center and I think he can even score 45-goals.  He's found a way to create his own chances from nothing.  When you play with Backlund, then you pretty much have to create your own chances because he won't find you in the open with much consistency.  When you play with Monahan, then he's too slow to drive play for you.  I feel like Mangiapane has persevered despite the roadblocks in front of him... he was the 3rd/4th LW on the depth chart but forced his way up the ladder allowing Tkachuk to move to RW permanently.

 

Anyways, not worried about a production drop on a 3 or 4 year deal.

[sak22]

21 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

He's 25/26 years old so the next 3 years should be his best.  No worries in the short term, in my opinion.  Give him a legit #1 Center and I think he can even score 45-goals.  He's found a way to create his own chances from nothing.  When you play with Backlund, then you pretty much have to create your own chances because he won't find you in the open with much consistency.  When you play with Monahan, then he's too slow to drive play for you.  I feel like Mangiapane has persevered despite the roadblocks in front of him... he was the 3rd/4th LW on the depth chart but forced his way up the ladder allowing Tkachuk to move to RW permanently.

 

Anyways, not worried about a production drop on a 3 or 4 year deal.

I don't know, seems to score a lot on rebounds, one timers in close and deflections.  Not a one man show that your suggesting, he's good at putting himself in position to be rewarded, but he can't do it without linemates that are keeping the play in the opponents zone.  Put Mang with Richardson and Ritchie and see if he gets 28 in 52 games.

[robrob74]

I think people don’t give Backlund enough credit. 

[cross16]

15 hours ago, sak22 said:

I don't know, seems to score a lot on rebounds, one timers in close and deflections.  Not a one man show that your suggesting, he's good at putting himself in position to be rewarded, but he can't do it without linemates that are keeping the play in the opponents zone.  Put Mang with Richardson and Ritchie and see if he gets 28 in 52 games.

 

 

Looking at LW over the last 2 seasons at 5 on 5 Mang is:

12th in individual expected goals/60

32nd in Individual Corsi chances for/60

11th in scoring chances for/60

7th in individual high danger chances for/60

 

That's in the entire league. Also have a look at his history at 5 on 5 (photo below). His individual numbers are actual very consistent despite who his linemates have been. 

 

Mang does not get enough credit for how much plays he drives at 5 on 5. Almost since his first year in the league the Flames have tilted the ice in their favor whenever he is on the ice. Is he putting the puck in the net more because of better linemates now? of course he is but who wouldn't? The list isn't very long of players who are going to put the puck in the net at a high rate playing with poor linemates. 

 

 

11 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I think people don’t give Backlund enough credit. 

 

While I do agree with this I don't think Backlund can take credit for what Mang has done. I'm with Peeps a lot of Mang's success is do to his play and not the play of others. He is extremely good at creating opportunities for himself. 

[travel_dude]

Mangiapane is a good defensive player.  He added to Tkachuk and Backlund's games when they were mostly defensive line.  He's easily top line talent.  If we had a good 2nd line scoring C, he would be even higher in points.  

 

To do that, we either need Monahan to be much better and trade Backlund for a cheaper, younger, C or move Monahan and get a better, cheaper 2nd line C.

 

Buying out Monahan saves us $4m, but leaves us with a hole and no money to replace him.  Need the savings to use on signing guys to new deals.  

 

What we should be doing is moving Monahan and Backlund out somehow, bring in a 2nd a 3rd line C or just a 2nd line C and move up Ruzie.  We lose a bit of Backlund's defensive game, but you need that spread out on all lines.  

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

Mangiapane is a good defensive player.  He added to Tkachuk and Backlund's games when they were mostly defensive line.  He's easily top line talent.  If we had a good 2nd line scoring C, he would be even higher in points.  

 

To do that, we either need Monahan to be much better and trade Backlund for a cheaper, younger, C or move Monahan and get a better, cheaper 2nd line C.

 

Buying out Monahan saves us $4m, but leaves us with a hole and no money to replace him.  Need the savings to use on signing guys to new deals.  

 

What we should be doing is moving Monahan and Backlund out somehow, bring in a 2nd a 3rd line C or just a 2nd line C and move up Ruzie.  We lose a bit of Backlund's defensive game, but you need that spread out on all lines.  

 

 

I can get behind this for Monahan but not Backlund. I think you will be extremely hard pressed to replace what Backlund does for much cheaper than he gets paid. 

 

Trading Backlund makes no sense to me. I'm not sure people realize that the Flames center depth is a bit of a wasteland in this organization right now. If you don't have internal replacement and you don't have cap space I think your making a mistake moving on from 2 of your top 9 centers in one off season. 

 

[LouCifer]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I can get behind this for Monahan but not Backlund. I think you will be extremely hard pressed to replace what Backlund does for much cheaper than he gets paid. 

 

Trading Backlund makes no sense to me. I'm not sure people realize that the Flames center depth is a bit of a wasteland in this organization right now. If you don't have internal replacement and you don't have cap space I think your making a mistake moving on from 2 of your top 9 centers in one off season. 

 

 

True. Which is why a replacement for Mony that pushes Backlund down to 3C is really the first (and potentially ONLY) center move we need to make. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I can get behind this for Monahan but not Backlund. I think you will be extremely hard pressed to replace what Backlund does for much cheaper than he gets paid. 

 

Trading Backlund makes no sense to me. I'm not sure people realize that the Flames center depth is a bit of a wasteland in this organization right now. If you don't have internal replacement and you don't have cap space I think your making a mistake moving on from 2 of your top 9 centers in one off season. 

 

 

Don't get me wrong.  I am saying we can't afford to replace Monahan if we trade for cap space or buy him out.

So that leaves us with an aging (possibly regressing) Backlund and little depth.

 

In an ideal world, we trade Monahan and Lucic.

We use some of the new cap on a replacement for Monahan.

That replacement ideally becomes our future #2C and we move Backlund to 3C.

It's apparent we don't need Backlund with Mangiapane.

Maybe Mange-New C-Toffoli and Coleman-Backlund-Dube is good enough.

 

The transition to next year's roster is going to be tough due to the cap.

The roster is mostly working the way it is, but won't know for sure until we hit the playoffs.

[Horsman1]

On 3/3/2022 at 7:48 AM, tmac70 said:

For me you have to look at this as what we have versus what you lose. There are players under this system that thrive some who don't and some who are neutral. If you remove whats the cost or long term effect to regain what you have. Sometimes its better to dance with the devil you know. Here is where I rank players on a +, - N in terms of what the contribute to the team right now. IMHO the Neutral or - players are ones that can be removed and subsituted with similar products at a lesser value. I love Kylington but he is a player you can trade high as is Hanifin. The facts are by removing any + player currently on the team, yes you may get something of quailty but I do not think you get back what we have. I am sorry but simply removing JG, MT or Mags are players you just can't replace in a trade or draft choice. We have players that are coing up in the AHL that could fill in for Dube,Kylington, Hanifin at a lesser rate. Replacing Backs or Mony wound be a little tougher at the C position.  Plus we all have to admit that Zadrov and Gubranson are a force on the backend, that is something that is not easily replaced as well. 

FORWARD

JG +

MT +

LINDY +

MONY N

BACKS N

TOFFEE +

DUBE N

COLEMAN +

MAGS +

RITCHIE -

LOOCH N

RICHARDSON N

LEWIS N

RIZIE N

 

DMAN

kYLINGTON N

TANEV +

GUBRANSON +

ZAD +

ANDERSON +

HANIFIN N

STONE N 

 

thats a lot of words and stats and well thought out.. Thanks for the edjacatred read   but.. what if the Flames win the cup this Year and Sutter walks away as has been said is his plan.. then what??