2023 Offseason

[zima]

1 hour ago, zima said:

Is he in Calgary or back home?

 

Okay perhaps dumb question still summer why would he be here in Cal

 

[travel_dude]

31 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I am so conflicted lol.

 

I like the plan to upgrade the draft pick.    Personally I would take Michkov over Carlsson though.

And probably don't need a pick that high to get Michkov.

 

My other conflict:   If we're looking to build, you want another D at this stage.  You want Reinbacher.

Again, probably don't need a pick anywhere near this high to get him.

 

All that said, I like this plan a lot better than the downgrade plans.

 

 

My dream would be too extreme lol.   Do a Veteran dump.

 

Pick up say picks #2, #5, #10.   (upgrades, trades).

 

Carlsson, Michkov, Reinbacher.

 

There, you're 1/3 done your rebuild.

 

peace.

 

 

A dump cost you picks.

Smart trades could bring you a later 1st, since the teams ok with trading them have later picks.

No point in being conflicted, since it will never happen.

If we look at the players and not take BPA to get Reinbacher at 16, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to stay that high in the draft.  

[jjgallow]

36 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

A dump cost you picks.

Smart trades could bring you a later 1st, since the teams ok with trading them have later picks.

No point in being conflicted, since it will never happen.

If we look at the players and not take BPA to get Reinbacher at 16, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to stay that high in the draft.  

 

It's not going to happen, correct, and it's an awkward year because if we are building from the net out, we need a high end D and Reinbacher is the obvious choice in this draft.  Not the only choice but the obvious one.

 

Michkov only because it's extremely rare for a talent like that to not go #1.

 

You think Reinbacher will be available at 16? if he is, then yeah.  We just go the course.  But no downgrading imho.  Not getting Reinbacher if we downgrade.

 

IMHO those are the 2 players of interest with where we are at right now (at the start of a rebuild we're denying).

 

Both of them, you kinda want an upgrade but  don't necessarily need to be in the top 3 or even top 5.

 

I'd consider an upgrade around #10 and just see which one of them is there then.  unless we really think Reinbacher can fall to us.

[zima]

I love all these trades for top 3-10 picks but who in there right minds would do these trades?

[jjgallow]

15 minutes ago, zima said:

I love all these trades for top 3-10 picks but who in there right minds would do these trades?

 

[travel_dude]

35 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's not going to happen, correct, and it's an awkward year because if we are building from the net out, we need a high end D and Reinbacher is the obvious choice in this draft.  Not the only choice but the obvious one.

 

Michkov only because it's extremely rare for a talent like that to not go #1.

 

You think Reinbacher will be available at 16? if he is, then yeah.  We just go the course.  But no downgrading imho.  Not getting Reinbacher if we downgrade.

 

IMHO those are the 2 players of interest with where we are at right now (at the start of a rebuild we're denying).

 

Both of them, you kinda want an upgrade but  don't necessarily need to be in the top 3 or even top 5.

 

I'd consider an upgrade around #10 and just see which one of them is there then.  unless we really think Reinbacher can fall to us.

 

Reinbacher is one of the top 3 D available no doubt.

He is rated 8,9,10 then 15,16, then in the 20's.

Simashev is all over the map.

 

TBH, I would be looking at potential fallers from round 1.

Guys that fall into the 2nd.

Upgrade the 2nd pick.

Only if the guy you want is available.

[jjgallow]

9 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Reinbacher is one of the top 3 D available no doubt.

He is rated 8,9,10 then 15,16, then in the 20's.

Simashev is all over the map.

 

TBH, I would be looking at potential fallers from round 1.

Guys that fall into the 2nd.

Upgrade the 2nd pick.

Only if the guy you want is available.

 

I'm on board with that, but not at the cost of the first round pick.  Find another way to upgrade that 2nd rounder other than sacrificing the 1st.

 

Throw a player in, give up a 3rd rounder, etc.

 

Lots of ways to upgrade 2nd round picks without compromising pick #1.   

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm on board with that, but not at the cost of the first round pick.  Find another way to upgrade that 2nd rounder other than sacrificing the 1st.

 

Throw a player in, give up a 3rd rounder, etc.

 

Lots of ways to upgrade 2nd round picks without compromising pick #1.   

 

Did I say anything about downgrading the 1st?  But since you mentioned using the 3rd, we don't have a 3rd this year.  Columbus doesn't have a 2nd in 2024 but we do.  Big risk because we likely give up the 2024 1st in the Monahan deal and would have nothing until the 3rd round if we traded the 2nd for a 2024 2nd with CBJ.  We can possibly recoup a 2nd in the 2024 draft at a later date.

 

So, it comes back to what is trending to go late 1st or early 2nd.  Is 1st overall in the 2nd round worth it?  I think so, if we see certain picks available.  CBJ might do this because they have 2 x 3rd rounders, theirs being 1st in the 3rd round.  Next year they would have a 2nd and 2 x 3rds again.  A little better spaced out.  

[robrob74]

8 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

That isn't what he said. Never let an asset like Gaudreau walk again. 

 

Big difference there

I know Hanifin isn't a Gaudreau level player, but he is an asset I'd put in that you can't let walk for nothing. I thought the same when it came to Brodie. He was someone we needed to get something for. The same was with Giordano. 

[conundrumed]

9 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm on board with that, but not at the cost of the first round pick.  Find another way to upgrade that 2nd rounder other than sacrificing the 1st.

 

Throw a player in, give up a 3rd rounder, etc.

 

Lots of ways to upgrade 2nd round picks without compromising pick #1.   

Maxim Strbak would be a solid 2nd rder for a RHD. 6'2"/200lbs, KHL bloodlines.

Still transitioning to NA ice somewhat, but playing D is not an issue at all. One of the top all-around defenders in this class for my money.

I feel like puck-moving, O-driven dmen are becoming a dime-a-dozen while none of them can flourish without a D partner that is solid playing defence.

Hronek-Maatta vs Hronek-Chiarot was a huge difference, for example. Chiarot's been a mistake signing. They have to get Edvinsson away from him. Edvinsson was constantly trying to cover for him, same as Seider. Until they put Walman with him, Seider's season was looking disastrous.

Strbak has 1 year of USHL under his belt and is heading to a solid MSU program to continue developing. A mainstay on Slovak international teams.

Eventually, Kuznetsov and Strbak would be invaluable when Andersson, Kylington and Poirier decide it's time to go for a skate or a caution to the wind pinch. Solid LHD and RHD prospects that actually focus on defence.

[cross16]

10 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I know Hanifin isn't a Gaudreau level player, but he is an asset I'd put in that you can't let walk for nothing. I thought the same when it came to Brodie. He was someone we needed to get something for. The same was with Giordano. 

 

Perhaps, it depends on the situation. Giordano wasn't lost for "free" he was lost for cap space and in order to save Kylington and/or Dube. 

 

Not suggesting they let Hanifin walk for nothing just don't think it's a reasonable expectation to say the Flames will now no longer let UFAs walk for nothing.

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Maxim Strbak would be a solid 2nd rder for a RHD. 6'2"/200lbs, KHL bloodlines.

Still transitioning to NA ice somewhat, but playing D is not an issue at all. One of the top all-around defenders in this class for my money.

I feel like puck-moving, O-driven dmen are becoming a dime-a-dozen while none of them can flourish without a D partner that is solid playing defence.

Hronek-Maatta vs Hronek-Chiarot was a huge difference, for example. Chiarot's been a mistake signing. They have to get Edvinsson away from him. Edvinsson was constantly trying to cover for him, same as Seider. Until they put Walman with him, Seider's season was looking disastrous.

Strbak has 1 year of USHL under his belt and is heading to a solid MSU program to continue developing. A mainstay on Slovak international teams.

Eventually, Kuznetsov and Strbak would be invaluable when Andersson, Kylington and Poirier decide it's time to go for a skate or a caution to the wind pinch. Solid LHD and RHD prospects that actually focus on defence.

 

You look at FLA's success in the playoffs and see how a guy like Gudas impacts them.

Clears out the front of the net, slows down the zone entry, etc.

He does what Tanev does, but more sturdy and capable of removing the trash.

And with him being injured in game 1, you saw the impact.

 

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Perhaps, it depends on the situation. Giordano wasn't lost for "free" he was lost for cap space and in order to save Kylington and/or Dube. 

 

Not suggesting they let Hanifin walk for nothing just don't think it's a reasonable expectation to say the Flames will now no longer let UFAs walk for nothing. 

 

Well, Kylington wasn't protected.  The only way they protect either him or Gio was to expose three of the F including the likes of Mikael Backlund, Johnny Gaudreau, Matthew Tkachuk, Sean Monahan, Elias Lindholm, Dillon Dube and Andrew Mangiapane.

 

I get what you are saying though and don't really dispute it.  We will be letting a few UFA's go this summer.  If it makes sense, then we keep a pending UFA through that last year and try to re-sign them or let them go.  

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well, Kylington wasn't protected.  The only way they protect either him or Gio was to expose three of the F including the likes of Mikael Backlund, Johnny Gaudreau, Matthew Tkachuk, Sean Monahan, Elias Lindholm, Dillon Dube and Andrew Mangiapane.

 

I get what you are saying though and don't really dispute it.  We will be letting a few UFA's go this summer.  If it makes sense, then we keep a pending UFA through that last year and try to re-sign them or let them go.  

 

He wasn't but the Kraken wanted Gio. Once they made him available there wasn't anyone else as an option for them (as the story goes)

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

He wasn't but the Kraken wanted Gio. Once they made him available there wasn't anyone else as an option for them (as the story goes)

 

 

Oh for sure.  Kylington was an attractive option if they wanted a young D, but Gio had more trade value as a known quantity and reputational status.  The draft cost of protecting Gio by offering a premium to SEA was prohibitive for sure.  In an alternative universe where we trade Gio before the expansion, we lose another player, more likely Kylington.

 

It was a calculated move and the cost to protect Gio was a non starter.  We had traded Bennett before the draft, so he would have replaced Dube or Backlund or Mangiapane.

 

All of this to come back to the point that the Flames should not worry about UFA's unless they are important ones.  Letting Lewis and Lucic go isn't a big deal. 

[The_People1]

21 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Right, but what's Edwards saying?

Love.

 

I think Conroy just has to remind Edwards of the Gaudreau situation.  Rumours were Edwards called Gaudreau after Gaudreau made his decision and ripped into him.  All rumours of course but what if?

 

Regardless, Edwards felt the pain I'm sure.  Fresh wounds.  We shouldn't lose Hanifin for nothing.  He's not a Lucic or Lewis.  He can get something good in return.

 

21 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

That isn't what he said. Never let an asset like Gaudreau walk again. 

 

Big difference there

 

Yes fair.  I guess it depends if you would categorize Hanifin as an asset that is easily replaceable and has high trade value.  IMO, we shouldn't let him walk for nothing.  If Zadorov decides to walk, then who cares.   But Hanifin can get something good in return for us.

[jjgallow]

14 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Did I say anything about downgrading the 1st?  But since you mentioned using the 3rd, we don't have a 3rd this year.  Columbus doesn't have a 2nd in 2024 but we do.  Big risk because we likely give up the 2024 1st in the Monahan deal and would have nothing until the 3rd round if we traded the 2nd for a 2024 2nd with CBJ.  We can possibly recoup a 2nd in the 2024 draft at a later date.

 

So, it comes back to what is trending to go late 1st or early 2nd.  Is 1st overall in the 2nd round worth it?  I think so, if we see certain picks available.  CBJ might do this because they have 2 x 3rd rounders, theirs being 1st in the 3rd round.  Next year they would have a 2nd and 2 x 3rds again.  A little better spaced out.  

 

A Hanifin trade would fix a bunch of this and more.   And I'm big on defencemen.  But I don't really consider him to have a big impact defensively.  He's kind of like losing a winger 

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Maxim Strbak would be a solid 2nd rder for a RHD. 6'2"/200lbs, KHL bloodlines.

Still transitioning to NA ice somewhat, but playing D is not an issue at all. One of the top all-around defenders in this class for my money.

I feel like puck-moving, O-driven dmen are becoming a dime-a-dozen while none of them can flourish without a D partner that is solid playing defence.

Hronek-Maatta vs Hronek-Chiarot was a huge difference, for example. Chiarot's been a mistake signing. They have to get Edvinsson away from him. Edvinsson was constantly trying to cover for him, same as Seider. Until they put Walman with him, Seider's season was looking disastrous.

Strbak has 1 year of USHL under his belt and is heading to a solid MSU program to continue developing. A mainstay on Slovak international teams.

Eventually, Kuznetsov and Strbak would be invaluable when Andersson, Kylington and Poirier decide it's time to go for a skate or a caution to the wind pinch. Solid LHD and RHD prospects that actually focus on defence.

 

Strbak looks like a great option to me.

 

As much as I love BPA I would be totally down with a two D for our first two picks, especially if they are actual D.

 

And really, it does work with BPA because they tend to get passed over.

[sak22]

47 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes fair.  I guess it depends if you would categorize Hanifin as an asset that is easily replaceable and has high trade value.  IMO, we shouldn't let him walk for nothing.  If Zadorov decides to walk, then who cares.   But Hanifin can get something good in return for us.

I don't know if he's easily replaceable, but I don't think its a loss that will handcuff the organization.  Even after losing Gaudreau for nothing and having everything else go wrong for this team, it still barely missed the playoffs.  The Islanders didn't replace Tavares but got better, Carolina has been able to overcome Hamilton's loss.  I don't think anyone is getting at the thought that we'd be okay with losing him for nothing, I think the message should be to temper expectations on the return you get, and personally I think that applies to all the pending UFA's, its just hard to improve through trades.

[Sarasti]

21 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I know Hanifin isn't a Gaudreau level player, but he is an asset I'd put in that you can't let walk for nothing. I thought the same when it came to Brodie. He was someone we needed to get something for. The same was with Giordano. 

 

Especially as a deadline deal.

We got a great return at the time for Kris Russell.

May not look like much today but getting a 2nd, a prospect and an NHLer in return is great value for a guy thats not coming back anyway.

[cross16]

This is another good reason why i think the Flames should be weary of wanting to re sign Hanifin. I like Severson but that is a big contract for a player of his caliber and a very close to comp to what Hanifin is likely going to ask for and get. Pretty similar profiles. 

 

 

[JTech780]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

This is another good reason why i think the Flames should be weary of wanting to re sign Hanifin. I like Severson but that is a big contract for a player of his caliber and a very close to comp to what Hanifin is likely going to ask for and get. Pretty similar profiles. 

 

 

I agree, but on the same hand Kylington, Zadorov and Tanev are also set to leave after this year and Hanifin is far and away the best defenseman out of that bunch, especially if we are talking extension.

 

Everyone is saying Kylington can just be pencilled into the top 4, but he hasn’t played in over a year and he was barely a top 4 the last time he did play.

 

The blue line could go from an area of strength to an area of weakness in one offseason.

[cross16]

5 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I agree, but on the same hand Kylington, Zadorov and Tanev are also set to leave after this year and Hanifin is far and away the best defenseman out of that bunch, especially if we are talking extension.

 

Everyone is saying Kylington can just be pencilled into the top 4, but he hasn’t played in over a year and he was barely a top 4 the last time he did play.

 

The blue line could go from an area of strength to an area of weakness in one offseason.

 

 

I think i'd prefer that to having another anchor contract like this on the books. But admittedly I am not a big Hanifin fan. 

[The_People1]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

This is another good reason why i think the Flames should be weary of wanting to re sign Hanifin. I like Severson but that is a big contract for a player of his caliber and a very close to comp to what Hanifin is likely going to ask for and get. Pretty similar profiles. 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, JTech780 said:

I agree, but on the same hand Kylington, Zadorov and Tanev are also set to leave after this year and Hanifin is far and away the best defenseman out of that bunch, especially if we are talking extension.

 

Everyone is saying Kylington can just be pencilled into the top 4, but he hasn’t played in over a year and he was barely a top 4 the last time he did play.

 

The blue line could go from an area of strength to an area of weakness in one offseason.

 

I think Hanifin is a 2/3/4 on the depth chart of a good team.  You want to pay about $4/$5-mil for someone like that.  Hanifin is probably looking at high $6 to $7-mil x 8-years.

 

It's just spending too much on depth players.

[jjgallow]

8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I think i'd prefer that to having another anchor contract like this on the books. But admittedly I am not a big Hanifin fan. 

 

exactly