2022 Offseason

[sak22]

11 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

Would you guys agree that since there are 32 teams in the NHL, then the top 32 Centers in the NHL are #1 Centers?  

Technically yes, but the whole #1 C for me is like having an Ace in you pitching rotation in baseball and a QB1 in football, where technically every team has one, but there aren't enough quality ones (ones that you can win with) to fit all teams in the league, and very hard to win without one of each, and in some cases other teams have better #2's than some teams #1's

[JTech780]

As Cross said there isn’t 32 number 1 centers or goalies in the league. Personally I think the talent pool is too diluted at this point.

 

Lindholm is a very good player, I just don’t know if he is a guy who can run a line on his own or if he is just a guy who compliments guys like Gaudreau and Tkachuk who are more play drivers.

 

I think what he does best is he allows the more offensively skilled guys to do what they do best, something I think he will do for Huberdeau as well. He also has one of the best releases in the league.

 

I am just not sure that he can run a line on his own and be as impactful, to me that’s something I want a true number 1 center to do.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

i would agree that Dvorak for Hanifin is a big loss for the Flames. Hanifin should have quite a  bit more value than that. 

 

I still like Dvorak as a player but he comes with a bunch of risk. He really struggles to stay healthy, he can't seem to find a defined role in a lineup and I think you can only talk about "potential" for so long before you realize that a player just may be what he is. He's cost controlled yes but at a number that makes him closer to cap dump territory than it does asset territory. 

I'd still have some interest because he is the type of transition center the Flames need but he isn't a player i'd be aggressive in getting, more of a you get him if the price makes sense type of move. 

 

Ok, so here's a thought, knowing that Vegas no longer is in cap hell.

Nick Roy.

Is he better than Dvorak or worse?

Would that be closer to value or would we need them to add Patrick?

[JTech780]

Honestly at this point I think I would rather just sign Stastny or Rodrigues as opposed to giving up assets for Dvorak or Roy.

 

Neither are long term options, but all they cost is a contract and probably only cost under $3.5m on a short term deal.

 

I think you get similar results from either of those guys as you would with Dvorak or Roy.

 

I think the hold up is waiting to see where Kadri goes, I wouldn't be surprised if we sign one of Stastny or Rodrigues if we miss out on Kadri.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

This is the Daymond Langkow debate all over again but for me it's the same. 2 very good players that are not number one centers because they are more the products of who they play with and now what they can do on their own. A number one center is a play-driving, do everything player and that isn't Lindholm for me. That is NOT meant as an insult in the slightest as I recognize he is an excellent player but IMO the standard of what a number one center is high. 

 

Not something i'm going to debate vigorously but this profile is not one of a number one center for me

 

 

Being with JG his entire time in Calgary hes never needed to be the play driver. Other than that he is everything else and there is reason hes nominated for selke awards regardless of what twitter thinks. Hes been on a dominating line as a RW and C, hes trusted on special teams and danced away with the +/-. What else does a guy need to do to do?

 

Every player is a product of who they play with.

[travel_dude]

9 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Honestly at this point I think I would rather just sign Stastny or Rodrigues as opposed to giving up assets for Dvorak or Roy.

 

Neither are long term options, but all they cost is a contract and probably only cost under $3.5m on a short term deal.

 

I think you get similar results from either of those guys as you would with Dvorak or Roy.

 

I think the hold up is waiting to see where Kadri goes, I wouldn't be surprised if we sign one of Stastny or Rodrigues if we miss out on Kadri.

 

Got no issue with Rodriguez.  If the cost was right, I might even do 2 years, though it's a bit risky.

As long as it's less than the amount you could send to AHL, fine.

One year, I think he stays and does well.

The 2nd year would be the risk.

 

Not really sure how Kadri even fits into the decision making process.  He's signing for too much for too long somewhere.  I don't have much belief in him signing here.

[cross16]

1 minute ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Being with JG his entire time in Calgary hes never needed to be the play driver. Other than that he is everything else and there is reason hes nominated for selke awards regardless of what twitter thinks. Hes been on a dominating line as a RW and C, hes trusted on special teams and danced away with the +/-. What else does a guy need to do to do?

 

Every player is a product of who they play with.

 

He will have a chance to prove me wrong but so far in his career he's never been the play driver and he has not spent his entire career with Gaudreau. Huberdeau is not the puck carrier Gaudreau is so we are going to find out pretty quickly IMO if Lindholm is capable of adding this to his game, but so far it's not something we have seen in his career. 

 

There is also nothing wrong with being a high end complementary player either. 

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Being with JG his entire time in Calgary hes never needed to be the play driver. Other than that he is everything else and there is reason hes nominated for selke awards regardless of what twitter thinks. Hes been on a dominating line as a RW and C, hes trusted on special teams and danced away with the +/-. What else does a guy need to do to do?

 

Every player is a product of who they play with.

 

I don't even think it matters.  I would love to have two Lindholms over just a top C.  

Our depth is not elite, which is a bigger issue than what Lindholm is in ranking.

[JTech780]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

Got no issue with Rodriguez.  If the cost was right, I might even do 2 years, though it's a bit risky.

As long as it's less than the amount you could send to AHL, fine.

One year, I think he stays and does well.

The 2nd year would be the risk.

 

Not really sure how Kadri even fits into the decision making process.  He's signing for too much for too long somewhere.  I don't have much belief in him signing here.

 

Well Calgary keeps popping up in regards to Kadri, so we shall see.

 

I think Rodrigues is better than being sent to the AHL at this point, he is a guy who can play and contribute. I wouldn't be opposed to giving him a shot at the 2nd line center job.

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Well Calgary keeps popping up in regards to Kadri, so we shall see.

 

I think Rodrigues is better than being sent to the AHL at this point, he is a guy who can play and contribute. I wouldn't be opposed to giving him a shot at the 2nd line center job.

 

I would expect him to be fighting for a top 6 spot...This year.  I was just saying that a two year deal would be fine if the cost was still low enough that you could send him to the AHL.  Not should.  

[Thebrewcrew]

Really like the fit of Rodrigues. Makes the top 9 look much better. 

 

High volume shooter. Easy to say that his 19 goal season was a product of Crosby, but that's not entirely the case. 

Rodrigues only had a shooting percentage of 4.8% at 5 on 5 he was unlikely, easily could have been in that 25 goal range. 

 

At the very least, he's a solid complimentary piece. Playing with skilled players is a skill. Could slot him beside Huberdeau and Lindholm and then keep Mang-Backlund-Coleman together.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

He will have a chance to prove me wrong but so far in his career he's never been the play driver and he has not spent his entire career with Gaudreau. Huberdeau is not the puck carrier Gaudreau is so we are going to find out pretty quickly IMO if Lindholm is capable of adding this to his game, but so far it's not something we have seen in his career. 

 

There is also nothing wrong with being a high end complementary player either. 

didnt Lindholm do well with Tkachuk before Johnny being added to the line? I know they were next level after Gaudreau, but decent before that. Not 100 point but 70 - 80 points ish? Still decent. 

[robrob74]

44 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Really like the fit of Rodrigues. Makes the top 9 look much better. 

 

High volume shooter. Easy to say that his 19 goal season was a product of Crosby, but that's not entirely the case. 

Rodrigues only had a shooting percentage of 4.8% at 5 on 5 he was unlikely, easily could have been in that 25 goal range. 

 

At the very least, he's a solid complimentary piece. Playing with skilled players is a skill. Could slot him beside Huberdeau and Lindholm and then keep Mang-Backlund-Coleman together.

 

ya, 

 

I think it'll be good to have something like 

 

Lindholm 

Backlund 

rodrigues

ruzicka 

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't even think it matters.  I would love to have two Lindholms over just a top C.  

Our depth is not elite, which is a bigger issue than what Lindholm is in ranking.

i think we could use two Backlund's and one with slightly better passing, plus Lindholm and a good 4th line C

 

[Thebrewcrew]

8 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

i think we could use two Backlund's and one with slightly better passing, plus Lindholm and a good 4th line C

 

I don't know if C is his best position, but he can certainly do it. Little bit like Jarnkrok, he was primarily a winger before coming to the Flames. 

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I don't know if C is his best position, but he can certainly do it. Little bit like Jarnkrok, he was primarily a winger before coming to the Flames. 

i think he's been great!

 

it's like he said when they asked him to play C, keep me there for awhile. 
 

i think it takes awhile to catch up to the speed and rhythm it takes to play C in the nhl. It's why it's such a coveted position. I prefer him as a C.

 

we are down a RW, but while he's not a true #1 but i view him in a Brendan Morrison kind of player. A very good at what needs to be done for the the wingers and can prop up guys like Johnny and Tkachuk. While he might not do the same for a Mangiapane, I think he can get him to a 60-65 point player, maybe 70 points. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

i think we could use two Backlund's and one with slightly better passing, plus Lindholm and a good 4th line C

 

Backlund was out best C in the playoffs, but not during the regular season.

A better passing Backlund is a different player.

Then again, you don't need two shutdown C's.

So, give me another Lindholm.

Almost equal in passing and scoring. 

[robrob74]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Backlund was out best C in the playoffs, but not during the regular season.

A better passing Backlund is a different player.

Then again, you don't need two shutdown C's.

So, give me another Lindholm.

Almost equal in passing and scoring. 

the thing is, I sometimes wonder if Backlund was used in a different situation he could gain a few more points. I'm thinking more an up and coming younger player of Backlund's I'll.
 

Have Backlund play the hard minutes, then a similar younger player to play similar but not as hard of minutes. Lindholm is a better offensive version of Backlund. So in essence, we'd have three good C's. 

 

i think we mean the same thing.

[robrob74]

I think a young C with potential would be good. Do we have that in the system? Is Zary that? He was billed that before his injury. 

[Thebrewcrew]

15 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I think a young C with potential would be good. Do we have that in the system? Is Zary that? He was billed that before his injury. 

I think the injury hurt Zary's season. The reports were that the staff had him really focused in on his complete game. It's not easy playing C as a rookie in the AHL. That being said, this is a very important year for him, need to see a leap in production.

 

Cole Schwindt has some potential. Same birth year as Zary and had a very impressive rookie season. I'd imagine he's the first recall if a C goes down

[LouCifer]

I believe Backlund will get more points playing a 3rd line role. The opposition will try to get their star players away from Backlund and he’ll get opportunities against weaker competition. If we get a bonified 2C, Backlund may find himself playing against 3rd pairing defensemen at times. 

[robrob74]

9 minutes ago, LouCifer said:

I believe Backlund will get more points playing a 3rd line role. The opposition will try to get their star players away from Backlund and he’ll get opportunities against weaker competition. If we get a bonified 2C, Backlund may find himself playing against 3rd pairing defensemen at times. 

I'd like us to go for a young C that Backlund and Lindholm can help mentor. Hanifin for a mid first rounder that can become that... and maybe a pick go go with it. 

[The_People1]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

No because it's based on skill set and not circumstance. The number can go up and down depending on the level of talent in the league but for me it's all about talent and not about circumstance. 

 

No different than goalies. plenty of goalies are "starters" for teams but you'd never want them starting for your team. 

 

11 hours ago, sak22 said:

Technically yes, but the whole #1 C for me is like having an Ace in you pitching rotation in baseball and a QB1 in football, where technically every team has one, but there aren't enough quality ones (ones that you can win with) to fit all teams in the league, and very hard to win without one of each, and in some cases other teams have better #2's than some teams #1's

 

11 hours ago, JTech780 said:

As Cross said there isn’t 32 number 1 centers or goalies in the league. Personally I think the talent pool is too diluted at this point.

 

Lindholm is a very good player, I just don’t know if he is a guy who can run a line on his own or if he is just a guy who compliments guys like Gaudreau and Tkachuk who are more play drivers.

 

I think what he does best is he allows the more offensively skilled guys to do what they do best, something I think he will do for Huberdeau as well. He also has one of the best releases in the league.

 

I am just not sure that he can run a line on his own and be as impactful, to me that’s something I want a true number 1 center to do.

 

Ya I mean, if we base it on the Top 32, then for sures Lindholm is a #1 Center.

 

McDavid, Matthews, and Mackinnon are in a class of their own. 

 

Right behind them are arguably, 

Barkov, Crosby, Draisaitl, and Aho.

 

Very close behind...

Eichel, Point, Hughes, Scheifele,... Pettersson?  Then it gets a bit murky... Zibanejad?  Barzal?  OReilly?  Thomas?  ...Lindholm?  Miller?  Larkin?  Kadri?  Kuznetsov?

 

What about the ageless ones... Malkin?  Tavares?  Stamkos (C?RW?)?  Kopitar?  Toews?

 

So by this count, maybe 12 to 15 true #1 Centers?

[travel_dude]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

 

Ya I mean, if we base it on the Top 32, then for sures Lindholm is a #1 Center.

 

McDavid, Matthews, and Mackinnon are in a class of their own. 

 

Right behind them are arguably, 

Barkov, Crosby, Draisaitl, and Aho.

 

Very close behind...

Eichel, Point, Hughes, Scheifele,... Pettersson?  Then it gets a bit murky... Zibanejad?  Barzal?  OReilly?  Thomas?  ...Lindholm?  Miller?  Larkin?  Kadri?  Kuznetsov?

 

What about the ageless ones... Malkin?  Tavares?  Stamkos (C?RW?)?  Kopitar?  Toews?

 

So by this count, maybe 12 to 15 true #1 Centers?

 

Not that it makes a big difference, but I wouldn't put a one way C like Draisaitl in a tier above Lindholm.  When your PPP make up almost half your goals and 1/3 of your points, and your even points are 68 while you are +17...

 

Anyway, it really doesn't matter.  We won't truly know until EL is away from JG and MT.  Top C's that are the defensive conscience of a line rarely get recognized as elite.  

 

[cross16]

13 hours ago, robrob74 said:

didnt Lindholm do well with Tkachuk before Johnny being added to the line? I know they were next level after Gaudreau, but decent before that. Not 100 point but 70 - 80 points ish? Still decent. 

 

He did just fine but again it just wasn't number one center. At 5 on 5 prior to being put on the big line Lindholm was not in the top 30 for points production for centers (based on 5 on 5 point rates/60mins). Even if you include his season last year he's barely in the top 30 over the last 3 years at 5 on 5. Also even with Tkachuk the numbers would support that it was Tkachuk driving play and not Lindholm. 

 

Again it's still very good and there is nothing wrong with what Lindholm does. I just don't think Lindholm is a true number one center because he has never really been a play driving/puck carrying center in his career and I expect that out of someone who is a number one center. 

 

I'm also not of the opinion that the Flame are going to add a number one center anytime soon so this debate isn't really that important. Unless you get lucky via trade (Eichel, Joe Thornton, Zibanajed) you have to draft them so the focus should really be on increasing center depth and in particular getting a center that can rush/carry the puck.