2023 Offseason

[Thebrewcrew]

With Columbus picking 3rd and in the case of this hypothetical, acquiring Lindholm, it all of a sudden makes centre a strength for them. Lindholm/Carlsson/Jenner. Which is why I wouldn't be surprised if the Flames could get Sillinger. Yes, there's a possibility he could play LW for CBJ. I think though that Jarmo's seat might be getting hot though and he needs to have a big season. He's been there for a while, signed a record setting FA then finished 32nd. Lindholm makes CBJ better than Sillinger for the next couple years. Long term, I'm not sure Jarmo's level of concern as that's the next guys problem.

[sagacity7]

37 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

There is always the potential that I am wrong for sure. 

 

But I don't see this as the same thing for multiple reasons.

1. I don't' agree., he is not a legit #1 center and he showed that this year IMO. Very good player but I don't think he is the type that a team would go "all in" for. 

2. Based on point 1, Tkachuk was that player. This was talked about throughout the whole trade/saga, Tkachuk is a unicorn when it comes to the league. His ability to impact the game in all 3 zones at an elite level, combined with the fact he can mix it up physically, agitate, his attitude etc all makes him a very unique player. 

3. 24 vs 28. Your acquiring Tkachuk and paying him for all his prime years. You'll have to tack on some extra years on the back of Lindholm's age curve. so yes they were both pending UFAs, but what you were buying, and how long it should be good for is quite a bit different. 

4. While the talent level is that trade was crazy, the contract situation wasn't favorable to the Flames. I said this at the time and it's even stronger now but for all the flack he took, Zito did well to put pending UFAs in the deal.  Hard to find teams that have multiple pending UFAs like that they are willing to deal. 

 

Perhaps his value is higher than Horvat as you could pretty easily make the case he is the better player, I'm just not sure that matters much. I don't think the talent impact of the acquisition drives the offer as much as the years of control you get on the player, especially when it comes to giving up high end future assets. 

 

Think the Forsberg for Erat trade is what really set that off IMO. That was your case of a GM getting desperate and giving up a prime future asset for what he thought was the missing piece. It blew up and I think every since you'll seen a shift in the league. 

 

to be clear I think Lindholm is a very desirable asset and you'll get plenty of teams interested. Just think in terms of the price the return will be more lottery ticket based and not include more sure things. 

So 2 Pending UFA’s (good players) a first and a prospect for a unicorn. So Lindholm, Hanifin, a first and a prospect for Keller would be similar? The unicorn is better than Keller. Is that fair value?

[sagacity7]

If it is, why wouldn’t we do it? Heck we could even add Schmaltz and give up Mangiapane and a second. It is interesting to see where this all goes. Does it all really hinge on Lindholm if he’s willing to stay or go?

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, sagacity7 said:

So 2 Pending UFA’s (good players) a first and a prospect for a unicorn. So Lindholm, Hanifin, a first and a prospect for Keller would be similar? The unicorn is better than Keller. Is that fair value?

That would be horrendous and I love Keller. Now we have no C, D has taken a hit and the waning prospect pool gets worse.

As I said in the draft thread:

Detroit gets Lindholm.

Calgary gets 17thoa (the NJ to Van Horvat pick is Detroit's from the savvy Hronek trade), Veleno, Wallinder.

Why Detroit does it: it's the perfect fit. A D-responsible RHC that can snipe is ideal. He gets crafty young Jonny Burgers on his left and possession monster Perron on his right. Both can play either side. Moves Copp to 3C so Veleno, though young, runs out of real estate. Lots of LD prospects.

Why Calgary does it: Get a 23yo bonafide NHL C that plays a blue collar game to counter losing a C. Get a young, large, excellent skating puck-moving LD prospect for the pending Hanifin exit. Prop up the prospect pool as you now have 16 AND 17oa.

I'm also a Detroit fan. That is a very fair offer for both sides and matches the Horvat trade easy. Detroit also has Kasper coming up at C as Perron is reaching twilight. So the potential to move Lindholm to RW over time to help groom Kasper is also huge.

So if we're interviewing Tanguay, run this by him.lol

 

[Thebrewcrew]

PIT makes sense as a team that could have interest in Hanifin. They need a top 4 LHD.

 

The 14th pick is intriguing, but they have very few other picks. They've traded away so many picks (obviously) and are so thin in prospects. Owen Pickering is the most interesting, but I don't know if the Pens want to deal their 2022 1st. I'm not all that interested in Samuel Poulin, just such a similar player to what the Flames have. Pierre-Olivier Joseph maybe, would need to move some LD to the right side on the big club.

 

Might be a return of strictly picks. 14th, 2024 2nd+. Something like the Hampus Lindholm deal, PIT likely has a good chance at extending Hanifin.

[sagacity7]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

That would be horrendous and I love Keller. Now we have no C, D has taken a hit and the waning prospect pool gets worse.

As I said in the draft thread:

Detroit gets Lindholm.

Calgary gets 17thoa (the NJ to Van Horvat pick is Detroit's from the savvy Hronek trade), Veleno, Wallinder.

Why Detroit does it: it's the perfect fit. A D-responsible RHC that can snipe is ideal. He gets crafty young Jonny Burgers on his left and possession monster Perron on his right. Both can play either side. Moves Copp to 3C so Veleno, though young, runs out of real estate. Lots of LD prospects.

Why Calgary does it: Get a 23yo bonafide NHL C that plays a blue collar game to counter losing a C. Get a young, large, excellent skating puck-moving LD prospect for the pending Hanifin exit. Prop up the prospect pool as you now have 16 AND 17oa.

I'm also a Detroit fan. That is a very fair offer for both sides and matches the Horvat trade easy. Detroit also has Kasper coming up at C as Perron is reaching twilight. So the potential to move Lindholm to RW over time to help groom Kasper is also huge.

So if we're interviewing Tanguay, run this by him.lol

 

You’re correct. It would be horrendous. Do you see Calgary making the playoffs with this Detroit deal? I don’t see ownership doing this unless the Flames pick up another scoring centre somewhere else. Where would the close to Selke talent, scoring and playmaking come from losing Lindholm? I get the idea of stocking the shelves and deepening prospect pools but none of those players or picks are as good as Lindholm right now so it appears like taking a step backward in the near term. Good for the future yet not for this upcoming year.

 

This off-season Conroy has to get it correct. One of the r words (pick a direction) or you can move these UFA’s plus for star players and picks while letting younger players learn the game (like a kid line for your 3rd line. It will be interesting to see how it goes. As a Flames fan I would rather they try to make the playoffs every year.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

PIT makes sense as a team that could have interest in Hanifin. They need a top 4 LHD.

 

The 14th pick is intriguing, but they have very few other picks. They've traded away so many picks (obviously) and are so thin in prospects. Owen Pickering is the most interesting, but I don't know if the Pens want to deal their 2022 1st. I'm not all that interested in Samuel Poulin, just such a similar player to what the Flames have. Pierre-Olivier Joseph maybe, would need to move some LD to the right side on the big club.

 

Might be a return of strictly picks. 14th, 2024 2nd+. Something like the Hampus Lindholm deal, PIT likely has a good chance at extending Hanifin.

 

PITs would be a great target.  Hanifin for the 14th pick.  Crosby is signed for another 2 years and then he probably retires.  PITs might as well go for it for two more years.

 

If the Flames can't decide between Barlow or Danielson, well wouldn't it be great to have two picks so close to each other.

[tmac70]

Regardless of what happens someone has to be moved out to make any form a roster this year. Conroy has no option but to promote younger guys with minimal league contracts onto the roster. This isn't some master genius plan it's an absolute as this is the mess he inherited from the previous GM. 

 

For me, Hanifin is gone, should bring you something back in a first + but he is the odd man out IMHO. The next issue is Backlnd and Lindholm. Now both will want to know who is running the ship. Right now this organization is held hostage by the inmates, as they await who the new Warden is. If Backs has a goal of winning a cup, you trade him because that isn't happening here in his hockey life expectancy.  You need to retain one of Lindholm or Backs to even remain somewhat competitive, This team with Kadri in a 1st line center roll is a joke.  Stack on the great reminder we have ABSOLUTELY no one in the minors to fill Hanifin, Lindholm, or Backs spot if they are moved.  At this time Lindholm being moved presents a huge hole for the organization for years. If and it's a big if, CLB trades their 3rd to CGY you are drafting Carleson and or Smith and you HOPE they turn out to fill the role in 2+ years.  

 

[The_People1]

35 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Regardless of what happens someone has to be moved out to make any form a roster this year. Conroy has no option but to promote younger guys with minimal league contracts onto the roster. This isn't some master genius plan it's an absolute as this is the mess he inherited from the previous GM. 

 

For me, Hanifin is gone, should bring you something back in a first + but he is the odd man out IMHO. The next issue is Backlnd and Lindholm. Now both will want to know who is running the ship. Right now this organization is held hostage by the inmates, as they await who the new Warden is. If Backs has a goal of winning a cup, you trade him because that isn't happening here in his hockey life expectancy.  You need to retain one of Lindholm or Backs to even remain somewhat competitive, This team with Kadri in a 1st line center roll is a joke.  Stack on the great reminder we have ABSOLUTELY no one in the minors to fill Hanifin, Lindholm, or Backs spot if they are moved.  At this time Lindholm being moved presents a huge hole for the organization for years. If and it's a big if, CLB trades their 3rd to CGY you are drafting Carleson and or Smith and you HOPE they turn out to fill the role in 2+ years.  

 

 

Flames are in such a mess.  I don't know how we can trade Lindholm and return a playoff team next season.  If the Flames want the playoffs so badly then hand Lindholm a blank cheque.  Overpay.

[phoenix66]

On 5/24/2023 at 12:22 PM, The_People1 said:

.

 

Backlund and Tanev, keep them both unsigned and decide on their fate at TDL.  They could both fetch 1st round picks depending on their play.

 

 

Except if we are in a playoff spot in a buyer's position..those are 2 players you don't move at the deadline .regardless of the return ..

No.. you either extend them or trade them now 

[sak22]

I'd be in no rush to extend Tanev this offseason due to his health.  You also risk him not making it to the trade deadline, but this offseason I don't know if your going to get a premium for a 33 year old injury prone defenseman that can block 10 teams.  I think you are better off seeing if he is healthy at the deadline

[JTech780]

Backlund has a 10 team yes list.

Hanifin has a 8 team no list.

Tanev has a 10 team no list.

Lindholm, Toffoli and Zadorov don’t have trade protection.

 

You can’t go into the season without an extension for Lindholm or Hanifin, not after what happened the previous offseason. 
 

I am less worried about Backlund, Tanev, Toffoli and Zadorov.

 

I can see the merits of re-signing both Lindholm and Hanifin and I can also see the merits of trading them now before you have to shell out big dollars for them. I would say smart money would be to trade them because their next contracts are probably going to be problematic. Knowing the team and the ownership I believe they will look to re-sign both if it all possible.

[robrob74]

9 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Except if we are in a playoff spot in a buyer's position..those are 2 players you don't move at the deadline .regardless of the return ..

No.. you either extend them or trade them now 

 

I thought this way before. But I like what Nashville did last year. They understood they weren't close.  The years we spent on Gustafson and Forbert and others, I didn't think we were close, and buying at the deadline, I thought was stupid. I didn't see us as close at all. There were other years as well. 

 

One year we traded Glencross even though we were going to make it. That made sense. 

 

I think it depends more on where the team is at. If we are at the top of the division, I guess you go your root. If we are at the bottom wildcard, I'd venture to say the future should be where the mind is...

 

People always say, Look at LA (They were favourite to win the cup before the season started, and a. vezina caliber goalie). St. Louis (they were very decent and were supposed to be in the playoffs when the season started, just had a horrible start). Or look at Florida (They have a bunch of high 1st round draft picks in their lineup doing things and had injuries this year). 

 

All those years we were in, even when we won the division that first time with the previous core, I didn't think we had a team that could go all the way. Last year was the only time I was ok with the idea of "Going for it." 

 

For me, I do a trade depending on where they're at. If they're just teetering in, and the look doesn't look very good, I trade away, if they're looking strong, I would acquire.

[phoenix66]

6 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I'd be in no rush to extend Tanev this offseason due to his health.  You also risk him not making it to the trade deadline, but this offseason I don't know if your going to get a premium for a 33 year old injury prone defenseman that can block 10 teams.  I think you are better off seeing if he is healthy at the deadline

So you're ok with the possibility of losing Tanev for nothing ? 

Because again..if we're a playoff team at the deadline he's not getting traded ..even if he shouts from the mountain top he's not resigning 

5 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Backlund has a 10 team yes list.

Hanifin has a 8 team no list.

Tanev has a 10 team no list.

Lindholm, Toffoli and Zadorov don’t have trade protection.

 

You can’t go into the season without an extension for Lindholm or Hanifin, not after what happened the previous offseason. 
 

I am less worried about Backlund, Tanev, Toffoli and Zadorov.

 

I can see the merits of re-signing both Lindholm and Hanifin and I can also see the merits of trading them now before you have to shell out big dollars for them. I would say smart money would be to trade them because their next contracts are probably going to be problematic. Knowing the team and the ownership I believe they will look to re-sign both if it all possible.

I believe for Lindholm it comes down to the player ..If he wants to be here he will get extended , end of story .they won't shop him..

 

That to me would put hanifin on the block simply because he becomes our best trade chip for a top line winger .. 

[travel_dude]

46 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Backlund has a 10 team yes list.

Hanifin has a 8 team no list.

Tanev has a 10 team no list.

Lindholm, Toffoli and Zadorov don’t have trade protection.

 

You can’t go into the season without an extension for Lindholm or Hanifin, not after what happened the previous offseason. 
 

I am less worried about Backlund, Tanev, Toffoli and Zadorov.

 

I can see the merits of re-signing both Lindholm and Hanifin and I can also see the merits of trading them now before you have to shell out big dollars for them. I would say smart money would be to trade them because their next contracts are probably going to be problematic. Knowing the team and the ownership I believe they will look to re-sign both if it all possible.

 

Trading Lindholm sets us back more than any other trade unless it's an improvement of both age and ceiling.  For instance, if you were to trade him for say Necas, I think that would be a win and a smart move for now and the future.  Or for a projected #1C in a draft.  Otherwise, it's a signal that we are good in going backwards for the foreseeable future.  

 

I prefer to go into the season without signing Tanev and Zadorov.  Tanev is something we should be considering as a trade asset, should we end up as a bubble team.  If we are a near contender, then keep him and re-sign him to one or two year deal in the summer prior to UFA.  Zadorov is a guy that will have a monster season or similar to less than he did last year.  We can re-sign him during the season, as he likes it in Calgary.  

 

Backlund is a risk, but I don't think you want to handcuff the team or future team should they trade him.  Keep your options open.  Toffoli is an easy re-sign.  He's not going to get long term and not break the bank.  His play suggests he can continue at the same level even given some slowing down.  

 

Hanifin is a trade chip.  Of the players we can use to improve the F, he is the one that has results that can net a decent return.  I would argue that he is the easiest to replace what he brings.  Stecher and Kylington are both cheaper versions, and Kylington's ceiling likely hasn't been reached.  His defensive game is prbably also able to improve a bit more than Hanifin's.  

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Except if we are in a playoff spot in a buyer's position..those are 2 players you don't move at the deadline .regardless of the return ..

No.. you either extend them or trade them now 

 

We did the same to Glencross that one year.  Moved him at TDL while we were in a playoff spot.  We could do that same here.

 

I don't think their values will drop as we approach TDL because that's when buyers need healthy bodies expecting a long playoff run.

 

Not to mention, we are probably not going to be in a playoff spot by TDL next year.

[sak22]

5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

So you're ok with the possibility of losing Tanev for nothing ? 

Because again..if we're a playoff team at the deadline he's not getting traded ..even if he shouts from the mountain top he's not resigning 

I believe for Lindholm it comes down to the player ..If he wants to be here he will get extended , end of story .they won't shop him..

 

That to me would put hanifin on the block simply because he becomes our best trade chip for a top line winger .. 

I don't like it, but compared to Lindholm, Hanifin, Toffoli, Backlund and even Zadorov It's not the end of the world.  Its a case where I think we view Tanev in a different light because of how our defence has played the last few years with him vs. without him.  I don't believe he gets more than a 3rd this summer, sure plenty of good players come out of the 3rd but half never make it in most years (right now we have 2 that are a couple days away from losing their rights).  I think we need to add the Kylington factor, also a UFA at the end of the next year, probably low trade value because of his year away, I think Tanev provides more value in easing Kylington back into the league, as he is also a player that a decision will need to be made on this season.

[tmac70]

IMHO as a GM if they will not sign now then you trade them end of the story. There are some you're going to ride the season out with possible trade deadline moves and some that are instant answers. 

 

Hanifin to me is gone, I trade him now. The most important asset we have right now is Lindy, if he is unwilling to sign an extension then he needs to be moved to the highest bidder. If Lindy fails to sign I see Backs wanting out which now puts this club into instant retooling mode. You may as well trade off all your current UFAs to hopefully get some 1st and prospects as its going to be lean for 2-3 years moving forward. This should make Kadri and Hubie happy lol

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

IMHO as a GM if they will not sign now then you trade them end of the story. There are some you're going to ride the season out with possible trade deadline moves and some that are instant answers. 

 

Hanifin to me is gone, I trade him now. The most important asset we have right now is Lindy, if he is unwilling to sign an extension then he needs to be moved to the highest bidder. If Lindy fails to sign I see Backs wanting out which now puts this club into instant retooling mode. You may as well trade off all your current UFAs to hopefully get some 1st and prospects as its going to be lean for 2-3 years moving forward. This should make Kadri and Hubie happy lol

 

Not that there's a market for Kadri and Huberdeau because of their contracts, but I would also ask them both to waive their NMC this summer if Lindholm decides to leave.

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I don't like it, but compared to Lindholm, Hanifin, Toffoli, Backlund and even Zadorov It's not the end of the world.  Its a case where I think we view Tanev in a different light because of how our defence has played the last few years with him vs. without him.  I don't believe he gets more than a 3rd this summer, sure plenty of good players come out of the 3rd but half never make it in most years (right now we have 2 that are a couple days away from losing their rights).  I think we need to add the Kylington factor, also a UFA at the end of the next year, probably low trade value because of his year away, I think Tanev provides more value in easing Kylington back into the league, as he is also a player that a decision will need to be made on this season.

I hear ya ..  based on his history I don't see him getting more than 2..Maybe 3 year deal .. we need him for all those reasons you mentioned .. If he wants to be here he will sign ..

 

Listening to Kypreos this morning he hit the nail on the head .  Tkachuk changed the game ..stars like Matthews , etc can't expect to coast to the end again.. GM's will lock them down or move them out .. 

 

Another thing I'm not sure many picked up on ..when Conroy said " we want players that t want to be Calgary flames ..if you're just looking for a paycheck we don't want you'

That means hometown discounts ..were not giving you the rich deal just to get you here .. players  that want to win leave room for the team to sign good players ..  look at Sid..signed less than he deserves so they can keep signing Malkins and others ..

As much as it pains me to say it , Conner did it too ..  don't get me wrong , well pay fair but not fight a bidding war 

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, phoenix66 said:

I hear ya ..  based on his history I don't see him getting more than 2..Maybe 3 year deal .. we need him for all those reasons you mentioned .. If he wants to be here he will sign ..

 

Listening to Kypreos this morning he hit the nail on the head .  Tkachuk changed the game ..stars like Matthews , etc can't expect to coast to the end again.. GM's will lock them down or move them out .. 

 

Another thing I'm not sure many picked up on ..when Conroy said " we want players that t want to be Calgary flames ..if you're just looking for a paycheck we don't want you'

That means hometown discounts ..were not giving you the rich deal just to get you here .. players  that want to win leave room for the team to sign good players ..  look at Sid..signed less than he deserves so they can keep signing Malkins and others ..

As much as it pains me to say it , Conner did it too ..  don't get me wrong , well pay fair but not fight a bidding war 

 

I wonder if that was Conroy taking a swing at Kadri who never really wanted to be a Calgary Flames.  He once veto'd a trade here back in the day.  He also wanted to return to COL and only in the final hours before training camp started, he reluctantly took the Flames offer.  It wasn't even a home town discount of any sort. Felt like an overpay by us.

 

We are paying for his retirement now and that's what Conroy wants to avoid.  I hope Conroy can trade him.

 

In a perfect world, we keep Lindholm and trade Kadri.

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

I wonder if that was Conroy taking a swing at Kadri who never really wanted to be a Calgary Flames.  He once veto'd a trade here back in the day.  He also wanted to return to COL and only in the final hours before training camp started, he reluctantly took the Flames offer.  It wasn't even a home town discount of any sort. Felt like an overpay by us.

 

We are paying for his retirement now and that's what Conroy wants to avoid.  I hope Conroy can trade him.

 

In a perfect world, we keep Lindholm and trade Kadri.

There's a lot of misinformation there ... First he only vetod the first trade to stay in Toronto.. got bad advice they weren't actually shopping him. So they traded him where he couldnt say no ...  Yes he wanted to go back to Colorado of course he would..but they had literally no room ..  he actually had more money on the table from the islanders 

Our offer was on the table early and he had interest..but we had to figure out Hubie and weegaar ..and move cap in Monahan 

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I wonder if that was Conroy taking a swing at Kadri who never really wanted to be a Calgary Flames.  He once veto'd a trade here back in the day.  He also wanted to return to COL and only in the final hours before training camp started, he reluctantly took the Flames offer.  It wasn't even a home town discount of any sort. Felt like an overpay by us.

 

We are paying for his retirement now and that's what Conroy wants to avoid.  I hope Conroy can trade him.

 

In a perfect world, we keep Lindholm and trade Kadri.

 

I dunno, I think it was a comment about any of the players who expressed wanting out. They said they want to win the cup and wasn't sure Calgary was a place to do it. We don't know who else expressed it, as that was all behind closed doors for others maybe?

 

It sounded like Conroy had some work to do on convincing some things will get better. 

 

I really hope he means it when he said it's best to build from within. I agree as we are only going to pay high prices for UFA's and good players via trade. 

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

There's a lot of misinformation there ... First he only vetod the first trade to stay in Toronto.. got bad advice they weren't actually shopping him. So they traded him where he couldnt say no ...  Yes he wanted to go back to Colorado of course he would..but they had literally no room ..  he actually had more money on the table from the islanders 

Our offer was on the table early and he had interest..but we had to figure out Hubie and weegaar ..and move cap in Monahan 

 

We were his plan B, exactly like you are saying.  Maybe we were his Plan C even because I'm sure Kadri had many offers early into UFA but as time went on, teams moved on and went another way.   Flames were the final team remaining who could make cap space in the final moments to sign him.

 

It wasn't like he really wanted to be here but rather, we were the best of what few options were left.  So, I guess we may not have been his very last choice but we definitely wasn't his first.  If he had it his way then he wouldn't be here at all.

[cross16]

55 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I hear ya ..  based on his history I don't see him getting more than 2..Maybe 3 year deal .. we need him for all those reasons you mentioned .. If he wants to be here he will sign ..

 

Listening to Kypreos this morning he hit the nail on the head .  Tkachuk changed the game ..stars like Matthews , etc can't expect to coast to the end again.. GM's will lock them down or move them out .. 

 

Another thing I'm not sure many picked up on ..when Conroy said " we want players that t want to be Calgary flames ..if you're just looking for a paycheck we don't want you'

That means hometown discounts ..were not giving you the rich deal just to get you here .. players  that want to win leave room for the team to sign good players ..  look at Sid..signed less than he deserves so they can keep signing Malkins and others ..

As much as it pains me to say it , Conner did it too ..  don't get me wrong , well pay fair but not fight a bidding war 

 

Good luck with that. It sounds great in theory and I get what Conroy is trying to say but It will be interesting to see what happens when they miss the playoffs and pressure starts mounting to get back in. 

 

I actually don't think he was speaking to anyone player or individual he was just speaking generally about what his philosophy is and how he plans to build the team. If he was thinking of any specific player it was likely James Neal. 

 

And we need to stop this narrative that Crosby took less, he did not. He signed, a now illegal, back diving contract that at the time was the richest contract in NHL history (by quite a bit).