2023 Offseason

[travel_dude]

On 6/9/2023 at 5:41 PM, 420since1974 said:

I've been following the Flames since they arrived in Calgary and have seen them win a Stanley Cup, so I'm good.

At this point in time, I just want to be entertained.

What I'd like to see stop happening is:

1. Trading draft picks. Rebuild our dismal prospect pool.

2. Allowing top 6 forwards and top 4 defence-men walk for nothing at UFA. Trade them for draft picks if they show the slightest hesitation in re-signing.

3. Giving out long term anchor contracts to players over 28 who are nearing the back end of their careers.

 

It will take 5 - 7 years for this to rectify itself, but I'm ready for the pain, as opposed to re-living the past 20 years.

 

Unfortunately, #2 and #3 collide.  Gaudreau was in the #3 list but turned into #2.  Bennett was turned into a bottom 6 player and we got a little for him.

 

We wasted an entire draft and decised to not bother signing them.  Poor asset management.  Not that they were great players, but losing a young player before they even leave junior is dumb.  We make decent draft choices, so when we have picks we do okay.  

 

Sutter lead the GM to believe we were closer to contender than not.  Our pro scouting is suspect IMHO.  Whether the coaching and chosen targets are on the same page, won't know which is the problem.  Who decided that Neal and Brouwer were the right players?  When we got Huberdeau, how did we determine that he should play on the 2nd line and develop his defensive game, on the RW?  

 

We have several impact players on their last year.  I'm okay with Lindholm because he will have 5 years that are near top of his game.  Longer than that is riskier.  Backlund may have 2 years left that is similar.  Hanifin hasn't really improved, and his value may be higher in trade.  Tanev is a beast but not Gudas beast level.  Tanev will normally suffer one moderate to serious injury per season.  He's the best defensive D-man we have, but still has issues clearing the front of the net.  All of these players have to be considered assets and not "forever Flames".  

[Thebrewcrew]

https://flamesnation.ca/news/friedman-teams-asking-the-calgary-flames-about-noah-hanifin
 

 

The Flames have to decide if they want to pay Hanifin 6.25-7 on an 8yr deal, or if the player even wants to stick around. If not, sounds like there’s quite a bit of interest.

[sak22]

6 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

https://flamesnation.ca/news/friedman-teams-asking-the-calgary-flames-about-noah-hanifin
 

 

The Flames have to decide if they want to pay Hanifin 6.25-7 on an 8yr deal, or if the player even wants to stick around. If not, sounds like there’s quite a bit of interest.

Before we expect a bidding war, teams are inquiring how many we don't know could literally be 2, but past moves (Chychrun for example) show that teams aren't desperate to pay the prices.

[JTech780]

So I am on the side that we should at least consider keeping Hanifin long term, but if he doesn’t want to sign here long term and teams are calling, then I wonder if NJ is a team to look at for a trade possibility.

 

Does a Bratt for Hanifin trade make sense for both teams? It sounds like Bratt could be the add man out in NJ as they want to keep Meier and it sounds like they can’t keep both.

 

Bratt seems like he would be a great fit with Huberdeau. NJ could use a veteran defensemen to help transition to their younger defensemen that are up and coming, Hanifin is an east coast guy so it makes some sense.

 

Bratt would add speed, skill and goal scoring to the team and from everything Conroy said that’s what he is looking for.

 

I think we would have to move a forward for a 2nd pairing defenseman or hopefully find someone on the free agent market at a reasonable price.

[Thebrewcrew]

Not a great UFA D class. Especially for players under 30. 
 

Makes sense that teams would inquire on Hanifin, with Provorov and Severson off the board.

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

https://flamesnation.ca/news/friedman-teams-asking-the-calgary-flames-about-noah-hanifin
 

 

The Flames have to decide if they want to pay Hanifin 6.25-7 on an 8yr deal, or if the player even wants to stick around. If not, sounds like there’s quite a bit of interest.

 

It all depends on Lindholm again.  If Lindholm doesn't extend then we must trade him.  Good luck winning a hockey trade when we don't have leverage.  Best option at that point would be to take the picks and prospects.  At which point, it's a fire sale.  After trading Lindholm, then I would look to trade Hanifin to PIT for the 14th overall.

[jjgallow]

On 6/9/2023 at 2:41 PM, 420since1974 said:

I've been following the Flames since they arrived in Calgary and have seen them win a Stanley Cup, so I'm good.

At this point in time, I just want to be entertained.

What I'd like to see stop happening is:

1. Trading draft picks. Rebuild our dismal prospect pool.

2. Allowing top 6 forwards and top 4 defence-men walk for nothing at UFA. Trade them for draft picks if they show the slightest hesitation in re-signing.

3. Giving out long term anchor contracts to players over 28 who are nearing the back end of their careers.

 

It will take 5 - 7 years for this to rectify itself, but I'm ready for the pain, as opposed to re-living the past 20 years.

 

Very well said.   

 

Your points #1-3 would give me hope.  Hope is all i need, I don't mind some losses if i see a plan.

[conundrumed]

18 hours ago, JTech780 said:

So I am on the side that we should at least consider keeping Hanifin long term, but if he doesn’t want to sign here long term and teams are calling, then I wonder if NJ is a team to look at for a trade possibility.

 

Does a Bratt for Hanifin trade make sense for both teams? It sounds like Bratt could be the add man out in NJ as they want to keep Meier and it sounds like they can’t keep both.

 

Bratt seems like he would be a great fit with Huberdeau. NJ could use a veteran defensemen to help transition to their younger defensemen that are up and coming, Hanifin is an east coast guy so it makes some sense.

 

Bratt would add speed, skill and goal scoring to the team and from everything Conroy said that’s what he is looking for.

 

I think we would have to move a forward for a 2nd pairing defenseman or hopefully find someone on the free agent market at a reasonable price.

I have to agree that moving Hanifin isn't the greatest idea without having any competent 23mins/game dman to replace him.

Sure we can get decent return, but what about the gaping hole that it leaves?

That's one Tanev injury away from having zero competent 2nd pair dmen.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I have to agree that moving Hanifin isn't the greatest idea without having any competent 23mins/game dman to replace him.

Sure we can get decent return, but what about the gaping hole that it leaves?

That's one Tanev injury away from having zero competent 2nd pair dmen.

 

Kylington.

 

Tanev is damaged goods now.  Final season of his career.  3rd pair load managed.  Top 4 will be Weegar, Andersson, Kylington, and Zadorov.

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Kylington.

 

Tanev is damaged goods now.  Final season of his career.  3rd pair load managed.  Top 4 will be Weegar, Andersson, Kylington, and Zadorov.

 

I feel like Tanev needs almost a whole year off to recoup. That was his exit interview, the need to just get healthy. 

[JTech780]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Kylington.

 

Tanev is damaged goods now.  Final season of his career.  3rd pair load managed.  Top 4 will be Weegar, Andersson, Kylington, and Zadorov.

Kylington isn’t a top 4 defenseman IMO, neither is Zadorov. Both are guys who can fill in in the top 4 short term, but neither are full time top 4 defensemen.

[The_People1]

10 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I feel like Tanev needs almost a whole year off to recoup. That was his exit interview, the need to just get healthy. 

 

Tanev is 33 and needs more surgeries.  The body simply doesn't recover that fast at that age.  He should sit out until December or just retire.  This is probably his final season in the NHL regardless.

 

Maybe BT wants him in TOR and we can get something for him.

[The_People1]

8 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Kylington isn’t a top 4 defenseman IMO, neither is Zadorov. Both are guys who can fill in in the top 4 short term, but neither are full time top 4 defensemen.

 

The gap between Hanifin and Kylington was not too far.  We don't know if Kylington will come back the same player or not.  Maybe regressed.  But maybe he doesn't miss a beat.

 

Use Weegar to carry one of the two.  Andersson carries the other.

 

Tanev should play 3rd pair in a limited role this season.

[JTech780]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

The gap between Hanifin and Kylington was not too far.  We don't know if Kylington will come back the same player or not.  Maybe regressed.  But maybe he doesn't miss a beat.

 

Use Weegar to carry one of the two.  Andersson carries the other.

 

Tanev should play 3rd pair in a limited role this season.

I guess that’s where I disagree, I think the gap between Hanifin and Kylington has been pretty wide and I don’t think missing hockey for over a year is going to help close that gap.

 

Not to mention that Kylington, Zadorov and Tanev are all gone after this season. Hanifin is far away better than all 3 of those players.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I have to agree that moving Hanifin isn't the greatest idea without having any competent 23mins/game dman to replace him.

Sure we can get decent return, but what about the gaping hole that it leaves?

That's one Tanev injury away from having zero competent 2nd pair dmen.

 

You should always makes moves that work together.Move Backlund to get a decent D.

Use Hanifin to get a decent top 6 player.

We don't have pending un-signed players that could get ugly.

 

Whether you believe Kylington can replace Hanifin, we bring in a player that can add by committee.

[Thebrewcrew]

I wonder about Seattle with Hanifin. Ron Francis drafted him in Carolina.

 

It's not the "sexiest" name but Daniel Sprong would be an interesting target from Seattle. It looks like he's found himself as an NHLer. Scored 21-25=46 this season. RHS scoring winger.

 

Seattle is coming off a really positive season, expectations will be heightened. Whether they like it or not, they will be forever tied to Vegas, who are likely to win the Cup. As a result, I'd try to get the 20th pick and Sprong. 

 

To replace Hanifin, the Flames would likely have to look at a UFA. Or do they gamble and bet on Kylington or Zadorov to be a top 4 D.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

To replace Hanifin, the Flames would likely have to look at a UFA. Or do they gamble and bet on Kylington or Zadorov to be a top 4 D.

Then the problem with UFA is that there isn't really anything there at Hanifin's price that is close to him. Kylington seems like a big gamble imho. If Hanifin wants out that's one thing, but moving him creates another hole where we may need to move someone else to cover. After big changes last year, all of a sudden I think we'd be chasing our tail again.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I wonder about Seattle with Hanifin. Ron Francis drafted him in Carolina.

 

It's not the "sexiest" name but Daniel Sprong would be an interesting target from Seattle. It looks like he's found himself as an NHLer. Scored 21-25=46 this season. RHS scoring winger.

 

Seattle is coming off a really positive season, expectations will be heightened. Whether they like it or not, they will be forever tied to Vegas, who are likely to win the Cup. As a result, I'd try to get the 20th pick and Sprong. 

 

To replace Hanifin, the Flames would likely have to look at a UFA. Or do they gamble and bet on Kylington or Zadorov to be a top 4 D.

 

Well they both have been top 4 D.  Kylington for a season and Zaddy for a bot longer elsewhere.

The bigger question is whether they both can improve their play away from the puck.

Kylington is great ay puck moving and hustling back and close pursuit.

Zaddy is good at puck moving and getting shots on net.

Both of them get beat in front of the net, no different than Hanifin.

Hanifin has a better first pass.

 

The advantage Hanifin has is that he can play 22+ minutes.

But, I think that Weegar is far better overall on the top pair.

Can't say I have seen Hanifin-Weegar, but I think too much overlap.

Hanifin-Tanev wasn;t as good last year as Kylington-Tanev.

Perhaps that's a bit on Tanev.

 

If you could swap Tanev for a bigger version, younger, then we would be fine.

I wouldn't concern myself with Hanifin at all.

If Zaddy could be that guy, I would care if never scored another goal.

He has the size to clear out the bigger F in front of the net.

He just doesn't do it enough or at the right time.

[tmac70]

I am on the fence with Hanifin currently. For years I was for trading him but we have to look at the intangibles. He is 25 plays 22+ minutes, 30+ point guy, and is a top-four D man. We don't have anyone in the system that can fill those shoes and the UFA market as mentioned is dismal. Now could we get a haul for him you bet we could. In any trade, you're going to need a roster Dman back and at least a top 6 forward or projected top 6 players in any trade with Hanifin. Based on ager minutes and points I think we regress further by moving him than resigning him 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, tmac70 said:

I am on the fence with Hanifin currently. For years I was for trading him but we have to look at the intangibles. He is 25 plays 22+ minutes, 30+ point guy, and is a top-four D man. We don't have anyone in the system that can fill those shoes and the UFA market as mentioned is dismal. Now could we get a haul for him you bet we could. In any trade, you're going to need a roster Dman back and at least a top 6 forward or projected top 6 players in any trade with Hanifin. Based on ager minutes and points I think we regress further by moving him than resigning him 

 

I don't think Hanifin is even that good.  He logs minutes but it's all mid-curve IQ stuff.  He can be replaced if not entirely by Kylington then by committee.

 

Also, we have Poirier coming in 2 years.  Maybe even Kuznetsov.  So trade Hanifin.  Take a small hit this season but future pieces we get back should help us in the long run.

[conundrumed]

Well, fans seem to go full attack-mode on Hanifin's defense, but completely give a pass to his partner that is likely worse defensively and riskier offensively. He just has better memes I guess.

[travel_dude]

33 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Well, fans seem to go full attack-mode on Hanifin's defense, but completely give a pass to his partner that is likely worse defensively and riskier offensively. He just has better memes I guess.

 

I guess the difference is that one player is at his peak and hasn't really improved in the last couple years and the other potentially has some improvement yet.  I don't think that either is untradeable.  If you were to trade Hanifin or Tanev or Ras, then you have to replace a top 4 D.  We currently have 5, top 4 D, based on most recent performance.  Top 4 on this team that is.

 

I think the problem we have is too many of the same type of D.  Weegar is a bit more of a hybrid.  Tanev is the give it up for the team player.  Ras does block a lot of shots, but doesn;t have the same accumen as Tanev for D-zone.  Hanifin is just a high value asset that you can use, whether you disparage his play or love him.  The contract situation makes it more important to deal with before the season.  A return to top scoring D could set his contract way over value.  

 

Whatever the best choice for D pairs, best D-men to keep for their play value and what C's we should run this year, the bottom line is the cap won't let us run back the same team.  10F with 1.2M left.  Doesn't include Duehr or Pelletier to have 4 full lines.  Sure, we can possibly deal Mange or Coleman or Backlund to gain some space.  Might have to do that anyway.  D is the only place where we have the full complement of player.  Weegar is the only one paid like a top 2.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Well, fans seem to go full attack-mode on Hanifin's defense, but completely give a pass to his partner that is likely worse defensively and riskier offensively. He just has better memes I guess.

 

Because his partner is making $4.45-mil x 3 more.  Hanifin is final year.

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Well, fans seem to go full attack-mode on Hanifin's defense, but completely give a pass to his partner that is likely worse defensively and riskier offensively. He just has better memes I guess.

 

Earlier in his career, I don't think this was in the least bit controversial, his defence was aweful.

 

Is it possible that I've just been reluctant to see his defensive improvement?   Possible.

 

Ultimately I do think we need a rebuild so admittedly I don't give it that much thought at this point.   Even if he was strong defensively I'd still be in favor of trading him based on his age and contract situation.

 

That said, I'm also in favor of trading Toffoli.  And Lindholm.    I only support the Hanifin speculation over the Toffoli/Lindholm speculation in an effort to find some common ground with people.  

 

I don't think most on here want to trade him because he's bad at defence.  I think most want to trade him because of a forwards-only approach that makes them think we are somehow close to being competitive again if we can just keep our forwards in tact.

 

It doesn't work like that.

 

 

If you're coming from the "retool" perspective, I don't know why trading a D would be on the top of your list.   I'll say that much.  But then again I don't see why a retool would even be worth attempting, looking at the math.   

 

 

[robrob74]

I think with Hanifin he is steady but doesn't wow. He is being touted as a guy who has more ceiling than he's shown. Maybe something clicks from 26-30 that we aren't seeing. 
 

I think it's hard to justify 6.5 for what he does. While he does everything ok-good, he doesn't have good-great hockey IQ. 
 

Ultimately, I still see a player that has to think before he does something. He's gotten better at that, but it doesn't mean he does it well still. 
 

I can see how we might look at him through a critical bias though, because we want more.
 

He reminds me a lot of Bouwmeester but at a lesser level. Bouw would carry it more, and without Bouwmeester we couldn't get it out of our own zone ...