2022 Offseason

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, rickross said:

Hanifin definitely makes his gaffes but I honestly felt he cleaned a lot of that up under Sutter. It’s easy to forget Hanifin is one of the smoothest skating D out there , outside of Kylington he’s probably our best skating D. Hanifin isn’t scaring anyone but he’s solid and dependable, sure he has lapses but not enough to consider him a complete liability plus he’s on a great contract…not too many #1 D men under $5M. I’d say Zadarov is more a liability than Hanifin, plus Zado takes some poor ill timed penalties. I’m not against trading Hanifin just think think he gets more of a bad rep then he deserves. It’s easy to forget Hanifin is still only 25!! There aren’t many D men with his level of experience at that price point. Who exactly do we replace him with?

 

If we trade Hanifin then we replace him with Weegar.  Weegar can LD.

 

Weegar - Andersson

Kylington - Tanev

Valimaki - Zadorov

x: Meloche

[The_People1]

6 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Ras is untradeable at this point.  He was only ever tradeable in a total teardown, which I concede has been pushed out for now.

 

I don't want to trade Ras either.  But we also need a #1 RW.

[jjgallow]

22 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Tkachuk was our best asset to land a #1 D but we used it to get a LW.  Weegar is a nice top pair but Ekblad would've been better.

 

There isn't a #1 D available out there... No studs.  Some fringe 2/3/4.  And we don't have an elite player to get that #1 D.  No one is trading a bunch of tier 2 guys for a #1 D.  I don't think we'll be getting one.

 

Preaching to the choir,  but that doesn't change the need.    This is one of the reasons a rebuild would have been the move to make.  You gotta give to get.

 

But the reality is that Weegar is not enough to stop us from looking like fools defensively in the playoffs.   Hanifin was a big part of that problem.

 

If we don't shore it up then we are likely to repeat as regular season wonders and playoff flops.

 

So...yeah.   Since we're not rebuilding,  we could at least get another solid top 4 D, if not #1.   There are some available,  just have to pay up.   

 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Preaching to the choir,  but that doesn't change the need.    This is one of the reasons a rebuild would have been the move to make.  You gotta give to get.

 

But the reality is that Weegar is not enough to stop us from looking like fools defensively in the playoffs.   Hanifin was a big part of that problem.

 

If we don't shore it up then we are likely to repeat as regular season wonders and playoff flops.

 

So...yeah.   Since we're not rebuilding,  we could at least get another solid top 4 D, if not #1.   There are some available,  just have to pay up.   

 

 

Our D was not a joke last playoffs.  They got exposed when we had to play a couple of guys short.  Slower guys like Stone and Guddy had it tough againt the EDM F, since we weren't allowed to be mean to them.  The reffing was a joke and allowed EDM to exploit it.  I don't blame the reffing, just saying that for a playoff round, it was simply unbelievable.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, rickross said:

All I’m saying is unless it’s to close a blockbuster trade…there’s no immediate need to trade Hanifin. We get booted in the 2nd round and it’s essentially Hanifin fault? Oilers put up no less than 5 goals against us every game of that series, that’s on the team. I just don’t see him as this glaring liability that requires him to be traded immediately. Someone had just posted a GIF of some guy banging his head against a wall in reference to  our off season and the knee jerk reaction fans are having to just trade everyone….even Harvey the Hound. Regardless, the 48 pts he did provide won’t be easy to replace, that’s nothing to scoff at from a young defence man. Compare his value to say Darnell Nurse…prone to gaffes as well, isn’t putting up close to 50pts and is over $9M in cap…is Hanifin really that bad?

 

If you have to compare him to the worst D contract in the league then, that also says something.   I'm not upset about his contract as much as the fact that he can't really play D.   

 

We already did trade more than half the core this offseason so it's not really about that (and yes it was warranted), it's just that, like you say, if Edmonton can freely score 5 goals against us every game, that's not good.   Hanifan is a standout for his defensive lapses, he really is.   Blame the team all we want, most of the trades suggested on here are all about increasing our offense as if the 5 goals against per game is no big deal.

[jjgallow]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Our D was not a joke last playoffs.  They got exposed when we had to play a couple of guys short.  Slower guys like Stone and Guddy had it tough againt the EDM F, since we weren't allowed to be mean to them.  The reffing was a joke and allowed EDM to exploit it.  I don't blame the reffing, just saying that for a playoff round, it was simply unbelievable.

 

I'm not saying the reffing was perfect but this sounds an aweful lot like an excuse.  We're talking about getting blown away by a  team that got blown away.  and making it sound like we were close.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm not saying the reffing was perfect but this sounds an aweful lot like an excuse.  We're talking about getting blown away by a  team that got blown away.  and making it sound like we were close.

 

The reffing was far from perfect, not even close.  I'm not using it as an excuse, just saying that if we had the type of reffing the AVS-EDM series had we likely see different results.  The losses weren't blowouts by any stretch.  

 

 

[The_Tribal Chief]

And the series ender Coalman goal not count when have you heard of that ever

[LouCifer]

- Valimaki and Hanifin should be the only D considered for trade. No way I trade Andersson. 

- William Nylander’s playoff stats look good, but Matthews’ line gets the tough D assignments and if you watched Willie Nillie actually play in the playoffs, most of his goals came from the perimeter or a fortunate bounce to him in a non-threatening spot on the ice. I was pulling out my hair watching him stand behind the goal line during a shot from the point, the goalie catching only a piece of it and Willie getting a tap-in with his feet still behind the goal line. It was comical. He does have a good shot, but it has to be good to score from the outside. Big NO from me. Think “Phaneuf” ego. Very similar, very selfish player. 

- While I understand the want for a top 6 RW, I’d ask you to consider the non-trade route to acquire one. Rodrigues. C/RW. Scored a lot of PP goals, so he could help our PP. I also understand he carried his weight in PIT when Crosby or Malkin weren’t there (injury?) not an easy feat. The fact that he could play C or RW is pretty versatile and valuable. An alternative to Rodrigues would be Stastny for me. No assets going out in either case. Valimaki could be traded for a pick or prospect to be used at the TDL, etc. and make some room on D plus free up $1.55M cap. 

[travel_dude]

47 minutes ago, LouCifer said:

- While I understand the want for a top 6 RW, I’d ask you to consider the non-trade route to acquire one. Rodrigues. C/RW. Scored a lot of PP goals, so he could help our PP. I also understand he carried his weight in PIT when Crosby or Malkin weren’t there (injury?) not an easy feat. The fact that he could play C or RW is pretty versatile and valuable. An alternative to Rodrigues would be Stastny for me. No assets going out in either case. Valimaki could be traded for a pick or prospect to be used at the TDL, etc. and make some room on D plus free up $1.55M cap. 

 

It seems unlikely now.  Hard to trade away Monahan then tuen around and sign a 2nd guy.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

I would be okay with it, but it has to be a salary you can bury penalty free.

Pitlick and Simon were wasted dollars or trade assets.

 

We have to do something with the D.  We can't be carrying 8D.

Meloche is really the guy we brought in to replace Guddy.

He's 7th at worst.

Now we have Kyl or someone else playing with Zaddy.

Valimaki waived costs us $550k in cap or thereabouts.

Unlikely him or Mackey get claimed, but you never know.

Losing Valimaki to waivers would be a fail and I doubt BT coniders waiving him.

Choices are carrying him or trading him.

 

Hanifin for Willie makes so much sense it will never happen.

Helps TO, but puts them up to 8D.

Gets us a regular season scorer that Sutter would put the boots to.

We can afford the salary offset.

But is it a smart trade?

TO is not the best team for us to deal with.

NYI and NJ maybe.

Or trade Valimaki to NY for Kravtsov.

They have 2 D that don't have to pass through waivers.

[FueltheFlames1075]

To me there is no way that you trade Andersson over Hanifin. I think they’re close in skill and what they bring to the team, so you have to factor in other things.

 

From what I can piece together, Hanifin was/is close with Tkachuk. Andersson fits in with our Swedish contingent. So why trade a guy way more likely to stay, after we’ve watched two American leave this summer? Why chance it?

[phoenix66]

14 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm not saying the reffing was perfect but this sounds an aweful lot like an excuse.  We're talking about getting blown away by a  team that got blown away.  and making it sound like we were close.

Not an excuse , just an observation. Yes the D underperformed against Edmonton . Tanev missing did hurt .. you could see the difference when he came back even at 40%..

To me it started further out. They stopped playing their game . A blowout first game  and a great start to game 2 somehow convinced them they could play wide open. One of Johnnys cbj interviews he said they felt after game one " we got this" .. 

Oilers were getting in the zone way too easily.. we got caught in a game of trading chances .

Defense starts with the forwards and our "best line in the NHL" with an obscene +/- let the Oilers hit the flames zone at high speed too many times . How many times did an injured Leon park himself untouched at the point and never pay the price? 

That winning goal in game 5 should be framed as an example of what went wrong..

Tkachuk missing his man and caught out of position 

Johnny way back As an observer after a weak attempt at a stick check 

 

My point is we didn't lose because the defense broke down .the entire team broke down in panic .. they got in our heads .. they exploited the absence of Tanev, by far our best dman at limiting crease passes and traffic. 

I don't buy the negativity on Hanifin.. he's a legit 2-3 d man .. young on a great contract . The ONLY reason I'd discuss him in a trade wouid be the return. Personally I'd reunite him with Tanev and have Weegar with Anderson on the first pair .. 

 

 

[cross16]

18 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Our D is very well balanced.  I assume Zadorov-Weegar will be one pairing and that's looking very good because Zadorov can be the stay at home guy and Weegar can move the puck (because Zadorov can be wild moving the puck)... but since he was playing with Gudbranson, then he was forced to be the puck mover.

 

That said, we're missing that #1 game changing Dman.  That Norris-level blueliner.  

 

I don't know that you do. Sure if a Cale Makar is out there it be great (very much kidding of course) but I don't know that you need that type of blueliner to contend. I think in may cases you do because normally if you have that player you don't have the depth to back it up but Flames are built different. They are going to run, IMO at least, 2 number 1 type pairings out there and their 3rd pairing will be solid as well. They've got 2 players who have excelled in matching up well against top end players as well. 

 

You always want everything, but i'm not convinced that a game changing/norris style dman is a necessity to compete for a cup. 

[jjgallow]

16 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Our D was not a joke last playoffs.  They got exposed when we had to play a couple of guys short.  Slower guys like Stone and Guddy had it tough againt the EDM F, since we weren't allowed to be mean to them.  The reffing was a joke and allowed EDM to exploit it.  I don't blame the reffing, just saying that for a playoff round, it was simply unbelievable.

 

[jjgallow]

14 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't know that you do. Sure if a Cale Makar is out there it be great (very much kidding of course) but I don't know that you need that type of blueliner to contend. I think in may cases you do because normally if you have that player you don't have the depth to back it up but Flames are built different. They are going to run, IMO at least, 2 number 1 type pairings out there and their 3rd pairing will be solid as well. They've got 2 players who have excelled in matching up well against top end players as well. 

 

You always want everything, but i'm not convinced that a game changing/norris style dman is a necessity to compete for a cup. 

 

Ah, the old:   Yeah the other teams need top blueliners but we don't because we're different.

 

Been hearing that for about 10 years here.  Classic.

 

 

On wanting everything:  There are wants, and there are needs.   We filled in all the wants.  Did we fill any of the needs?

 

Needs are:

 

Goaltending  (does Markstrom really do this?)

Top D   (?)

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Not an excuse , just an observation. Yes the D underperformed against Edmonton . Tanev missing did hurt .. you could see the difference when he came back even at 40%..

To me it started further out. They stopped playing their game . A blowout first game  and a great start to game 2 somehow convinced them they could play wide open. One of Johnnys cbj interviews he said they felt after game one " we got this" .. 

Oilers were getting in the zone way too easily.. we got caught in a game of trading chances .

Defense starts with the forwards and our "best line in the NHL" with an obscene +/- let the Oilers hit the flames zone at high speed too many times . How many times did an injured Leon park himself untouched at the point and never pay the price? 

That winning goal in game 5 should be framed as an example of what went wrong..

Tkachuk missing his man and caught out of position 

Johnny way back As an observer after a weak attempt at a stick check 

 

My point is we didn't lose because the defense broke down .the entire team broke down in panic .. they got in our heads .. they exploited the absence of Tanev, by far our best dman at limiting crease passes and traffic. 

I don't buy the negativity on Hanifin.. he's a legit 2-3 d man .. young on a great contract . The ONLY reason I'd discuss him in a trade wouid be the return. Personally I'd reunite him with Tanev and have Weegar with Anderson on the first pair .. 

 

 

 

I will agree with you that Jonny and Tkachuk were a big problem in the playoffs and while I may be sorry to see Jonny go for nothing, I am not sorry to see them move on.  I would have preferred better return earlier but they weren't doing us any playoff favors.

 

"The entire team" is too broad imho.   It works as a good slogan/motivator for players, but at the management level it's just used as an excuse for inaction.   Let's be honest our playoff record pretty clearly shows our problems run deeper than current players.    

 

to say " the entire team " is simply not fair to players like Backlund, Mangiapane, Vladar, Tanev, Zadarov, etc.

 

So yeah.  You don't just give the guys a pep talk after that lol.  You make changes.

 

 

We made changes with our forwards.   From short-term perspective, they were good changes.   But they put all our eggs in next year's basket.

 

Ok.    So everyone loved the changes we made with our forward lines.

 

But when we talk about improving our D, our G, we're like "nah we're good", after getting totally and completely blown out defensively by a team that got totally and completely blown out defensively?   All of  a sudden the rules change and it was a "team thing" and we sit on our hands?  Huh.

 

How dat gonna go?

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't know that you do. Sure if a Cale Makar is out there it be great (very much kidding of course) but I don't know that you need that type of blueliner to contend. I think in may cases you do because normally if you have that player you don't have the depth to back it up but Flames are built different. They are going to run, IMO at least, 2 number 1 type pairings out there and their 3rd pairing will be solid as well. They've got 2 players who have excelled in matching up well against top end players as well. 

 

You always want everything, but i'm not convinced that a game changing/norris style dman is a necessity to compete for a cup. 

 

It's hard to get a #1D for sures... Like the #1 Center debate, there may only be 12 to 15 #1 Centers in the NHL.  There are arguably only 12 to 15 Norris-level Dmen out there.

 

I do think we need one.  Every Cup winning team has had one.

 

Thing with depth is, you can only play 5 players at a time.  You want those clutch minutes to have the best players on the ice.  Depth like 4th line and 3rd pair play 12 minutes a night and that's good enough to win a Cup.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's hard to get a #1D for sures... Like the #1 Center debate, there may only be 12 to 15 #1 Centers in the NHL.  There are arguably only 12 to 15 Norris-level Dmen out there.

 

I do think we need one.  Every Cup winning team has had one.

 

Thing with depth is, you can only play 5 players at a time.  You want those clutch minutes to have the best players on the ice.  Depth like 4th line and 3rd pair play 12 minutes a night and that's good enough to win a Cup.

 

 

I just think this is such flawed analysis/argument the "every cup winning team has X so we need one" argument. Winning a championship is so complex, and so much driven by luck too, that breaking it down to this binary of a level is flawed. 

 

Europeans weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

European captains weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

St Louis Blues didn't win their cup with a Norris caliber dmen (Pietrangello isn't it). I don't know that the Capitals did either considered that when they won the best Carlsson had ever finished was 5th. Weegar finished 14th last year. Pens in 09 didn't (and depending on where you fall on Letang they may never have). I'm not sure I'd argue that Letang is a massive upgrade over Weegar.

Canes didn't have a Norris level D.

 

I'm not even arguing the Flames should be in that conversation in terms of wining a cup, I just don't understand that level of analysis. 

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I just think this is such flawed analysis/argument the "every cup winning team has X so we need one" argument. Winning a championship is so complex, and so much driven by luck too, that breaking it down to this binary of a level is flawed. 

 

Europeans weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

European captains weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

St Louis Blues didn't win their cup with a Norris caliber dmen (Pietrangello isn't it). I don't know that the Capitals did either considered that when they won the best Carlsson had ever finished was 5th. Weegar finished 14th last year. Pens in 09 didn't (and depending on where you fall on Letang they may never have). I'm not sure I'd argue that Letang is a massive upgrade over Weegar.

Canes didn't have a Norris level D.

 

I'm not even arguing the Flames should be in that conversation in terms of wining a cup, I just don't understand that level of analysis. 

 

Letang, Pietrangelo, Carlson, etc were at least top 15 in their Cup years.  

 

Is Andersson top 15 in the NHL right now?

[jjgallow]

29 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I just think this is such flawed analysis/argument the "every cup winning team has X so we need one" argument. Winning a championship is so complex, and so much driven by luck too, that breaking it down to this binary of a level is flawed. 

 

Europeans weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

European captains weren't supposed to be able to win cups until they did. 

St Louis Blues didn't win their cup with a Norris caliber dmen (Pietrangello isn't it). I don't know that the Capitals did either considered that when they won the best Carlsson had ever finished was 5th. Weegar finished 14th last year. Pens in 09 didn't (and depending on where you fall on Letang they may never have). I'm not sure I'd argue that Letang is a massive upgrade over Weegar.

Canes didn't have a Norris level D.

 

I'm not even arguing the Flames should be in that conversation in terms of wining a cup, I just don't understand that level of analysis. 

 

Yes why would we look at basic requirements of teams that win cups, when we can just based it on luck?

 

 

[cross16]

39 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Letang, Pietrangelo, Carlson, etc were at least top 15 in their Cup years.  

 

Is Andersson top 15 in the NHL right now?

 

Weegar is and I think Andersson could be with some more consistency to his game. 

[sak22]

54 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Letang, Pietrangelo, Carlson, etc were at least top 15 in their Cup years.  

 

Is Andersson top 15 in the NHL right now?

Carlson was 28 and that season finished 5th in Norris and had only one other time in his career received votes.

Pietrangelo was 29 and didn't even receive a vote in the year he won.

Letang is you can argue won at 21, but he wasn't a top defenseman then and the back to backs he was 28 and 29.  Only once a finalist for the Norris

 

Andersson deserves to be measured with the same stick as the others.

[jjgallow]

31 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Weegar is and I think Andersson could be with some more consistency to his game. 

 

Beg to differ, neither are top 15.   Andersson was also dismal in the playoffs,

 

A more appropriate Positive perspective is that both have the potential to make the top 15.    This is very, very different from being in the top 15.

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Beg to differ, neither are top 15.   Andersson was also dismal in the playoffs,

 

A more appropriate Positive perspective is that both have the potential to make the top 15.    This is very, very different from being in the top 15.

Don't ever change.  Facts get in the way so often.

 

 

 

 

[jjgallow]

Just now, travel_dude said:

Don't ever change.  Facts get in the way so often.

 

So true.

 

On that note....the question is asked...what is a #1D?

 

Honest answer, 

 

I dunno.

 

But I like to think of it, roughly, as a defenceman with the realistic potential to win the Norris, who plays at, or near, this potential consistently.   So yes, probably about 15 D in this category give or take, at any given time.

 

Ras and Weegar do not have this potential IMHO, not at a level that we could call "likely".   They are a level underneath it, with the potential to be in that top 15 at their peak.

 

Gio, a true #1, had Norris potential and I would argue realized it for 2-3 years in his peak.  Some might say he should have won more than he did.   He was a #1 D.   But he always had a good 10-15 competitors in the conversation just slightly above or below him.  And sadly he did not elevate in the playoffs.

 

My definition could get slightly skewed given Makar winning the Norris for the next 10 years lol.  But it's an ok approximation.

 

The idea behind this definition is all about the ability to rise above your competitors which, in the playoffs,  will usually involve multiple Norris candidates.