2023 Offseason

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ah I see.  It's a bit confusing when you suggest to keep Sutter and let the players who want to leave, leave.  We're talking Lindholm and Backlund potentially.  Our two best Centers.  Also potentially Hanifin, our #1 LD.  These are franchise altering changes.  It's not going to be the same team then.

 

But regardless, I think that's actually what the team will do.  They will try their best to never do a Young Guns sequel.  They will try to put together a playoff team next season.  If the pending UFAs want to leave, the team will trade them for players in the same age or older to compete right away.

 

So all that's said, I disagree this is a legit Cup contending team.  You yourself said we overachieved two seasons ago and I agree.  I think we are only something in between two seasons ago and this season.  And that's only good for a round or two of playoffs.  If that's all you want, then sure.

 

Yet, last time we did Young Guns, we came 1-goal away from winning the Cup.  I have no hesitation going through 9-years of that again if that's what it takes (and if we sell our assets strategically this summer, we could add 6 young pieces to accelerate the rebuild so it would only take 4 or 5-years).  I'll take that over doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Stuck in mediocrity in a never ending loop.

 

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Also, I don't have a huge problem with Sutter.  I felt he won the Jack Adams and then over-coached this season.  Got too arrogant.  Same coach and same team, the results should be better next season.

 

However, if we are getting new faces again in key positions like top two Centers and #1 LD, then ouch, that's another lost year.

 

We had the Dougie trade, which was essentially a move of a disgruntled player and a pending UFA (Ferland).  We ended up getting younger and a bit cheaper.  Was for sure franchise altering.  Should we end up trading Backlund, Lindholm and Hanifin, I think you see something similar.  Package deal of Hanifin and Backlund, while Lindholm for a younger C.

 

But honestly, if the coach is the reason to trade players, then we are backing the wrong horse.  Not because we end up better, but because we are chasing away talent.  Huberdeau and Kadri and Weegar aren't in a position to demand a trade, because they have just signed deals.  They want to build up their value so they could have a choice of teams to go to.  

 

As a coach, Sutter probably got about as much as should be expected from the group he iced.  He left areas of weakness out there.  He put together lines that should struggle.  He left goalies out there instead of pulling them or calling a time out.  Took him half a season to understand that a LW should play LW.  He put out a fighter to aid in possession far too long for any team.  During losing streaks, he kept things the same.  If he didn't like the way we won a game, he would make changes.

 

The team has to change due to natural turnover and cap issues.  Bringing back Lucic and Lewis is not really an option.  You could say that they are known to what they bring, but with the same coach the same problems are there.  You can't have guys out there with negative goals for/goals against differentials.  It means too much is on the goalies and the team needing to score at least 2 more goals in a game.  If all we do is more dumpster diving for players, then we find the same or worse.  

 

If the coach was open to a 4th line of speed over grit, then we might see something different.  Still need a trade of Backlund or Hanifin or Mangiapane to survive.

[cross16]

I'm not against a rebuild but I don't think it's what I would advocate for at this time. I think a rebuild here would be very long and painful because there is a lot of work to be done just to pull this roster/contracts apart. I think even being cautiously optimistic you are looking at 7 years before your back to being in the playoffs, not even a contender just a playoff team. Completely fair that there are fans wiling to do that, i'm just not one of them at this point. I don't think the Flames would get enough future assets, and they'd have to include future assets to get out from some of their deals, to put them in the spot you'd want to be in. 

 

i think this team can be a consistent playoff team and even have a run in them for the next 2-3 years so I would run with that. I think a few things need to happen though:

1- Part of why I am in favor of trying to compete is Dustin Wolf. I truly believe he is going to be a good NHL goalie. Maybe not Saros good but good so the priority needs to be to get him in the NHL next year. If you can trade Markstrom do it (i'm skeptical) but if takes Vladar then fine too. You just need him in the NHL and you need him playing a minimum of 30 games. 

2- Need to get younger. I think the "Flames are slow narrative" has more to do with style of play than talent on the roster but it doesn't change this point. Flames need more energy. Ruzicka, Coronato, Pelletier and Zary are all contenders for the roster and IMO at least 3 of them should be part of this roster next year. That will likely require moving someone in the top 6 but i'm good with that. Also could use youth on D. 

3- Need to change the mix on D. Flames have too many of the same player on D. The transition the puck, skate well, move it but a little up and down in their own zone. Hanifin, Anderson, Kylington, Weegar Stetcher are all in this mold and I think the flames need someone who is a little more stout, good at ending cycles and passing it up.

4- Goes without saying that Lindholm needs to be retained. I don't think Lindhom is a number one center but he is a very good center and I think without him, unless they can pull off some miracle trade, this plan falls apart because the center ice position won't be good enough. 

 

How I would get there:

1. Coach. Personally I want to see a change here but I would give Sutter a choice. Points 1 and 2 he has direct influence over so I would want it in writing from him that Wolf/kids are going to play. I'm not brining back his guys or his vets and i'm not going to replace them in fA either. If you don't like it, there's the door and I'll get another coach but if he wants to stay this is how he needs to operate. 

2- The 2024 UFAs. It would be completely irresponsible of the Flames to head into next year with 6 UFAs (almost of which are high profile). Decision had to be made here and I'm not saying all of them have to be retained or shipped out for picks, you just need to make some calls. As I mentioned I think the mix on the Flames D and i've long been a fan of trading Hanifin but I would dangle all of the 24 UFAs and see what I can get. I would pursue extensions with Lindholm look to move 1 or 2 and then see how the rest play out. I'd use the future assets acquired in those potential deals to try and add some pieces to this club. I'd shop Zadorov the hardest probably and try and cash in on what I think was a career year. 

[travel_dude]

^^^^^

Too many good points to agree with individually.

Wolf in the NHL is a necessity I think.  I wonder if Ottawa is interested, seeing as they are moving on from Talbot.  That leaves us with a young crew in nets, but it's not like Vladar was any worse than Markstrom.  He as liable to improve as Markstrom and less chance of injuries (IMHO).  

 

Although Mangiapane is still fairly young, I think he might be a player we may need to move on from.  Maybe a bit too much like Dube to keep both.  

 

If we have too many of the same D, we perhaps should be moving Hanifin or Zadorov.  I tend to like Zadorov a bit more, just because he I think he's not a finished product.  Unlike Hanifin, I think he has room to grow.  Hanifin has a bit higher trade value too, I believe.

 

So, here some crazy trade ideas.  

 

Target Debrincat.  There is some speculation that he may be on the outs in Ottawa.  I'm not sure what the package going the other way would need to look like.  Mangiapane and a minor prospect?  Markstrom and a prospect?  I like the player because I think he would be a great top 6 replacement on RW.  

[The_People1]

12 hours ago, cross16 said:

I'm not against a rebuild but I don't think it's what I would advocate for at this time. I think a rebuild here would be very long and painful because there is a lot of work to be done just to pull this roster/contracts apart. I think even being cautiously optimistic you are looking at 7 years before your back to being in the playoffs, not even a contender just a playoff team. Completely fair that there are fans wiling to do that, i'm just not one of them at this point. I don't think the Flames would get enough future assets, and they'd have to include future assets to get out from some of their deals, to put them in the spot you'd want to be in. 

 

i think this team can be a consistent playoff team and even have a run in them for the next 2-3 years so I would run with that. I think a few things need to happen though:

1- Part of why I am in favor of trying to compete is Dustin Wolf. I truly believe he is going to be a good NHL goalie. Maybe not Saros good but good so the priority needs to be to get him in the NHL next year. If you can trade Markstrom do it (i'm skeptical) but if takes Vladar then fine too. You just need him in the NHL and you need him playing a minimum of 30 games. 

2- Need to get younger. I think the "Flames are slow narrative" has more to do with style of play than talent on the roster but it doesn't change this point. Flames need more energy. Ruzicka, Coronato, Pelletier and Zary are all contenders for the roster and IMO at least 3 of them should be part of this roster next year. That will likely require moving someone in the top 6 but i'm good with that. Also could use youth on D. 

3- Need to change the mix on D. Flames have too many of the same player on D. The transition the puck, skate well, move it but a little up and down in their own zone. Hanifin, Anderson, Kylington, Weegar Stetcher are all in this mold and I think the flames need someone who is a little more stout, good at ending cycles and passing it up.

4- Goes without saying that Lindholm needs to be retained. I don't think Lindhom is a number one center but he is a very good center and I think without him, unless they can pull off some miracle trade, this plan falls apart because the center ice position won't be good enough. 

 

How I would get there:

1. Coach. Personally I want to see a change here but I would give Sutter a choice. Points 1 and 2 he has direct influence over so I would want it in writing from him that Wolf/kids are going to play. I'm not brining back his guys or his vets and i'm not going to replace them in fA either. If you don't like it, there's the door and I'll get another coach but if he wants to stay this is how he needs to operate. 

2- The 2024 UFAs. It would be completely irresponsible of the Flames to head into next year with 6 UFAs (almost of which are high profile). Decision had to be made here and I'm not saying all of them have to be retained or shipped out for picks, you just need to make some calls. As I mentioned I think the mix on the Flames D and i've long been a fan of trading Hanifin but I would dangle all of the 24 UFAs and see what I can get. I would pursue extensions with Lindholm look to move 1 or 2 and then see how the rest play out. I'd use the future assets acquired in those potential deals to try and add some pieces to this club. I'd shop Zadorov the hardest probably and try and cash in on what I think was a career year. 

 

Lindholm is the key.  If he stays then it's worth staying the course for one more year because we are primed for a bounce back season.  So many pending UFAs means career years are on the menu.  But Lindholm must be extended long term because he's too valuable to let walk for nothing.

 

If Lindholm refuses to extend, then you take the Horvat returns and go into the season prepared to move your 5 other pending UFAs at the appropriate time.  Pretty confident with Kadri/Backlund as a 1/2 down the middle, the Flames are looking at a top 10 pick next season regardless of how strongly others perform.  Our Centers can't compete with the best in the Conference even with Lindholm.  Let alone without him.

 

I get the enthusiasm behind Wolf and I believe with stud goaltending, the Flames may be able to overcome the loss of Lindholm.  But since we won't be contenders with a lack of Center depth, I say forget about it.

 

Wolf is actually one reason why I believe a rebuild won't take 7 years.  He has game breaking talent.

 

The aim of a rebuild is to eventually come out with 2 stud C, 1 stud D, 1 stud G... It looks like we've got our stud G already.  So we need 3 big drafts to land two stud C and 1 stud D.

 

We have supporting staff/complementary pieces galore.  Pelletier, Dube, Ruzicka, Duehr, Coronato, Zary, Kuznetsov, Poirier, and Solovyov.  We have the young second tier guys for the next 10 years.  Just need the elite players.

[phoenix66]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Lindholm is the key.  If he stays then it's worth staying the course for one more year because we are primed for a bounce back season.  So many pending UFAs means career years are on the menu.  But Lindholm must be extended long term because he's too valuable to let walk for nothing.

 

If Lindholm refuses to extend, then you take the Horvat returns and go into the season prepared to move your 5 other pending UFAs at the appropriate time.  Pretty confident with Kadri/Backlund as a 1/2 down the middle, the Flames are looking at a top 10 pick next season regardless of how strongly others perform.  Our Centers can't compete with the best in the Conference even with Lindholm.  Let alone without him.

 

I get the enthusiasm behind Wolf and I believe with stud goaltending, the Flames may be able to overcome the loss of Lindholm.  But since we won't be contenders with a lack of Center depth, I say forget about it.

 

Wolf is actually one reason why I believe a rebuild won't take 7 years.  He has game breaking talent.

 

The aim of a rebuild is to eventually come out with 2 stud C, 1 stud D, 1 stud G... It looks like we've got our stud G already.  So we need 3 big drafts to land two stud C and 1 stud D.

 

We have supporting staff/complementary pieces galore.  Pelletier, Dube, Ruzicka, Duehr, Coronato, Zary, Kuznetsov, Poirier, and Solovyov.  We have the young second tier guys for the next 10 years.  Just need the elite players.

Some great points..

Big thing to keep in mind, knowing what we know now..which is BT knew the Wednesday he was leaving, told Maloney.. he was also at practice talking to players (which he never does) so was obviously saying some goodbyes.

Those players did their final interviews knowing a new GM was coming.

So for players like backs and Lindholm to be non committal now makes a ton of sense . Backs is to old for a rebuild.. I'm sure Lindholm doesn't want to go through one either .. so I don't put a lot of stock in those comments now other than them needing to see the new direction from the new GM ..

Hearing them talk yesterday should start to show that's not happening.

 

 

And as a side note ..all those saying we should have tanked for Bedard?  We had way too many decent pieces left even if we had just taken futures for chucky to be as bad as we would have had to be ...

[cross16]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Lindholm is the key.  If he stays then it's worth staying the course for one more year because we are primed for a bounce back season.  So many pending UFAs means career years are on the menu.  But Lindholm must be extended long term because he's too valuable to let walk for nothing.

 

If Lindholm refuses to extend, then you take the Horvat returns and go into the season prepared to move your 5 other pending UFAs at the appropriate time.  Pretty confident with Kadri/Backlund as a 1/2 down the middle, the Flames are looking at a top 10 pick next season regardless of how strongly others perform.  Our Centers can't compete with the best in the Conference even with Lindholm.  Let alone without him.

 

I get the enthusiasm behind Wolf and I believe with stud goaltending, the Flames may be able to overcome the loss of Lindholm.  But since we won't be contenders with a lack of Center depth, I say forget about it.

 

Wolf is actually one reason why I believe a rebuild won't take 7 years.  He has game breaking talent.

 

The aim of a rebuild is to eventually come out with 2 stud C, 1 stud D, 1 stud G... It looks like we've got our stud G already.  So we need 3 big drafts to land two stud C and 1 stud D.

 

We have supporting staff/complementary pieces galore.  Pelletier, Dube, Ruzicka, Duehr, Coronato, Zary, Kuznetsov, Poirier, and Solovyov.  We have the young second tier guys for the next 10 years.  Just need the elite players.

 

Catch 22 there though. If he's a game breaking talent he's going to keep them out of the bottom 3 picks. I'm not as convinced he is that good. we need to see, but I do think he'll play but he does throw a potential wrinkle into a rebuild if he is the next Saros. I mean look at the Preds. They sold pieces at the deadline and Saros almost single handily got them into the playoffs.  

 

I get your point I just think it's overly optimistic. Sure if everything goes perfect maybe they could do it in 4-5 years but they'd have to have everything to their way. Draft class lines up, no bad luck in the lottery etc. Not to mention how are you clearing some of these contracts the Flames have?

 

So sure if everything lines up perfectly and they got all the breaks I could see this maybe getting done in 4-5 years but I just don't see that as probable. 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Some great points..

Big thing to keep in mind, knowing what we know now..which is BT knew the Wednesday he was leaving, told Maloney.. he was also at practice talking to players (which he never does) so was obviously saying some goodbyes.

Those players did their final interviews knowing a new GM was coming.

So for players like backs and Lindholm to be non committal now makes a ton of sense . Backs is to old for a rebuild.. I'm sure Lindholm doesn't want to go through one either .. so I don't put a lot of stock in those comments now other than them needing to see the new direction from the new GM ..

Hearing them talk yesterday should start to show that's not happening.

 

 

And as a side note ..all those saying we should have tanked for Bedard?  We had way too many decent pieces left even if we had just taken futures for chucky to be as bad as we would have had to be ...

 

Yes, players uncertain about the team's direction will generate the type of response we got from Backlund and Lindholm.  But that's just half of it.  The other part is the players looking around the room and not seeing help coming.  Players not believing in each other.  Not seeing a championship level team.

 

Even if the team is not rebuilding, they need to make the right moves this summer to convince pending UFAs that this is the group to get it done.  Backlund saying he wants to win the Cup.  Lindholm likely as well.  But they all know this team is so average.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Some great points..

Big thing to keep in mind, knowing what we know now..which is BT knew the Wednesday he was leaving, told Maloney.. he was also at practice talking to players (which he never does) so was obviously saying some goodbyes.

Those players did their final interviews knowing a new GM was coming.

So for players like backs and Lindholm to be non committal now makes a ton of sense . Backs is to old for a rebuild.. I'm sure Lindholm doesn't want to go through one either .. so I don't put a lot of stock in those comments now other than them needing to see the new direction from the new GM ..

Hearing them talk yesterday should start to show that's not happening.

 

 

And as a side note ..all those saying we should have tanked for Bedard?  We had way too many decent pieces left even if we had just taken futures for chucky to be as bad as we would have had to be ...

 

Rumors were last year Backlund asked for a trade. During his 900 game he gave a similar non committal answer about getting to 1000 games as a Flame. 

 

I'm not saying we need to believe them word for word but I don't think their non committal stance is tied directly to the GM change. 

[travel_dude]

36 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Rumors were last year Backlund asked for a trade. During his 900 game he gave a similar non committal answer about getting to 1000 games as a Flame. 

 

I'm not saying we need to believe them word for word but I don't think their non committal stance is tied directly to the GM change. 

 

I would hazard a guess that several players do not like playing this brand of hockey or for this coach.

It's taxing on the body, especially if you constantly have to defend one goal games.

We have a couple of players that love playing for the coach, and two (hopefully) never come back.

We have players that said they love playing in the city, but I doubt that's a coaching thing.

Then we have a bunch that either don't like the game plan, the coach or the strategy. 

 

When it works, players are less critical.  When they decide their future, they consider it.

 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Catch 22 there though. If he's a game breaking talent he's going to keep them out of the bottom 3 picks. I'm not as convinced he is that good. we need to see, but I do think he'll play but he does throw a potential wrinkle into a rebuild if he is the next Saros. I mean look at the Preds. They sold pieces at the deadline and Saros almost single handily got them into the playoffs.  

 

I get your point I just think it's overly optimistic. Sure if everything goes perfect maybe they could do it in 4-5 years but they'd have to have everything to their way. Draft class lines up, no bad luck in the lottery etc. Not to mention how are you clearing some of these contracts the Flames have?

 

So sure if everything lines up perfectly and they got all the breaks I could see this maybe getting done in 4-5 years but I just don't see that as probable. 

 

3-years minimum.  Just need 3 pieces (which could be had in 1 draft if we nail it).

 

But of course after that, time is required for growing pains and maturing.  These high picks won't be true impact players until 22/23 years old.

[jjgallow]

On 4/15/2023 at 10:13 AM, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

So heres the thing........... if Sutter is let go, and everyone has to redo their end year pressers, does anyones comments/feelings change? No one outright says it but the players must see and feel the same things as the fans. Personally regardless of what moves are made during the off season I already have a half hearted expectation of the next season if DS is still at the helm.

 

The track record on firing Sutter as coach is a 20-game winning streak followed by  a downward spiral to rock bottom.

 

I'm not saying Sutter is helping or hurting us, I am saying, we have other issues and would likely follow this path.

 

 

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

The track record on firing Sutter as coach is a 20-game winning streak followed by  a downward spiral to rock bottom.

 

I'm not saying Sutter is helping or hurting us, I am saying, we have other issues and would likely follow this path.

 

 

 

Isn't it more like you fire a coach after a win and he manages to still not get to the playoffs.

Followed by a year of uptick.

Followed by a year of failure?

 

In every coach hired and fired there is a common theme.

Coach pushes the team to win.

They win and then fail in the playoffs for a variety of reasons.

Coach decides that he needs to push more the start of the next season.

Or changes from things that worked.

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

The track record on firing Sutter as coach is a 20-game winning streak followed by  a downward spiral to rock bottom.

 

I'm not saying Sutter is helping or hurting us, I am saying, we have other issues and would likely follow this path.

 

 

 

Isn't it more like you fire a coach after a win and he manages to still not get to the playoffs.

Followed by a year of uptick.

Followed by a year of failure?

 

In every coach hired and fired there is a common theme.

Coach pushes the team to win.

They win and then fail in the playoffs for a variety of reasons.

Coach decides that he needs to push more the start of the next season.

Or changes from things that worked.

[jjgallow]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Isn't it more like you fire a coach after a win and he manages to still not get to the playoffs.

Followed by a year of uptick.

Followed by a year of failure?

 

In every coach hired and fired there is a common theme.

Coach pushes the team to win.

They win and then fail in the playoffs for a variety of reasons.

Coach decides that he needs to push more the start of the next season.

Or changes from things that worked.

 

Yeah, that is the trend.  Totally agree.  To a point, and for a certain number of coaches lol.    I think we're approaching the end of that pattern though, where it basically happens a lot faster.

[travel_dude]

40 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Yeah, that is the trend.  Totally agree.  To a point, and for a certain number of coaches lol.    I think we're approaching the end of that pattern though, where it basically happens a lot faster.

 

Well, the belief is that if you make a right choice, then you don't end up firing them because they were the wrong one.  Sutter is about the most we have ever spent on a coach.  Most are cheap.  You get what you pay for.  Not sure why we would spend $4M on Sutter.  Has been that had a good run when he was younger.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

3-years minimum.  Just need 3 pieces (which could be had in 1 draft if we nail it).

 

But of course after that, time is required for growing pains and maturing.  These high picks won't be true impact players until 22/23 years old.

 

 

So basically this rests on having a historic run of drafting. Possible sure, but not realistic IMO. 

 

Tampa probably is the biggest successor story for a rebuild and it took them 5 drafts to assemble, Stamkos, Hedman, Kucherov and Vasilevsky. More if you want to throw Point in there.

 

I think selling anyone on less than that is selling a wish and a prayer IMO. Doesn't mean it can't be done or that people shouldn't want a rebuild I just if you are advocating for that we should be more realistic as to what we are looking at. Still arguments both ways of course. 

[jjgallow]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well, the belief is that if you make a right choice, then you don't end up firing them because they were the wrong one.  Sutter is about the most we have ever spent on a coach.  Most are cheap.  You get what you pay for.  Not sure why we would spend $4M on Sutter.  Has been that had a good run when he was younger.

 

Well, we have time to think about it this 2023-2027 offseason.

[jjgallow]

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

So basically this rests on having a historic run of drafting. Possible sure, but not realistic IMO. 

 

Tampa probably is the biggest successor story for a rebuild and it took them 5 drafts to assemble, Hedman, Kucherov and Vasilevsky. More if you want to throw Point in there.

 

I think selling anyone on less than that is selling a wish and a prayer IMO. 

 

I was gonna say.   5 drafts 5 bluechips.   that is the most optimistic you can expect.   

 

IF you want a cup.

 

Just wanna toy around with being okay, then sure you can do it in less like we have in the past.

 

I know there are exceptions, but yeah it's 5 imho, and included in that should be a G,D,C, and RW.  In that order.  

 

Hedman Stamkos Kicherov Point Vasilevsky.

 

Plus a strong supporting cast, not just filler.  Built around the bluechips with homegrown chemistry, ideally.

 

 

Winning cups is hard.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

 

So basically this rests on having a historic run of drafting. Possible sure, but not realistic IMO. 

 

Tampa probably is the biggest successor story for a rebuild and it took them 5 drafts to assemble, Stamkos, Hedman, Kucherov and Vasilevsky. More if you want to throw Point in there.

 

I think selling anyone on less than that is selling a wish and a prayer IMO. Doesn't mean it can't be done or that people shouldn't want a rebuild I just if you are advocating for that we should be more realistic as to what we are looking at. Still arguments both ways of course. 

 

Trues for sures the more time we spend in the basement, the better.  But if we are talking a perfect world, then 3 stud pieces in 3 years.  Realistically, 3 pieces in 5 years.  This assumes Wolf becomes a stud G so we don't have to worry about G for a decade.

 

It usually takes 7-years because teams don't admit they need to go hard rebuild until they've missed the playoffs for 3-years.  Then they do a 4-year rebuild and come back strong.  But fans look at the whole thing like it took 7.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

I was gonna say.   5 drafts 5 bluechips.   that is the most optimistic you can expect.   

 

IF you want a cup.

 

Just wanna toy around with being okay, then sure you can do it in less like we have in the past.

 

I know there are exceptions, but yeah it's 5 imho, and included in that should be a G,D,C, and RW.  In that order.  

 

Hedman Stamkos Kicherov Point Vasilevsky.

 

Plus a strong supporting cast, not just filler.  Built around the bluechips with homegrown chemistry, ideally.

 

 

Winning cups is hard.

 

5 bluechip pieces would be a dream and don't think it's possible with so many teams tanking at the same time these days.  That basement spot has a lot of competition (because teams know that's what it takes).

 

I think 4 stud pieces is minimum.  2 stud C.  1 stud D.  1 stud G.

[jjgallow]

8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

5 bluechip pieces would be a dream and don't think it's possible with so many teams tanking at the same time these days.  That basement spot has a lot of competition (because teams know that's what it takes).

 

I think 4 stud pieces is minimum.  2 stud C.  1 stud D.  1 stud G.

 

It's all subjective.   But sure if we get to 4 bluechips and we need that 5th to win it all, even I'll support trading draft picks.    Maybe.

 

It's the only goal worth having imho.  And yes it's hard.

 

Quit it with the $4m coach, triple the size of your scouting staff, make a few painful sells this summer, get back some of those picks....There are some strong drafts ahead.    Just gotta get those Wranglers season tickets for a bit.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's all subjective.   But sure if we get to 4 bluechips and we need that 5th to win it all, even I'll support trading draft picks.    Maybe.

 

It's the only goal worth having imho.  And yes it's hard.

 

Quit it with the $4m coach, triple the size of your scouting staff, make a few painful sells this summer, get back some of those picks....There are some strong drafts ahead.    Just gotta get those Wranglers season tickets for a bit.

 

Really what's missing right now is a top 6 C and a top pair D.

You can get both of them by making smart trades and by drafting smart.

Has to be a C ready for the NHL within a year.

And the D has to be young enough to be really good now. and better in a year

You graduate the top prospects this year and next year we have replaced the has beens.

 

I am optimistic that Wolf can get there in a year (1b) and our current prospects in a year.

So we use a guy like Mange (or Dube "cringe") and Backlund to get a 2D.

We draft the best available C.

Has to be NHL ready or very close.

Trade Hanifin to replace Backlund at a younger age.

 

Seems easy.

Oh yeah, turf the coach and find one that know how to use players.

[jjgallow]

14 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Really what's missing right now is a top 6 C and a top pair D.

You can get both of them by making smart trades and by drafting smart.

Has to be a C ready for the NHL within a year.

And the D has to be young enough to be really good now. and better in a year

You graduate the top prospects this year and next year we have replaced the has beens.

 

I am optimistic that Wolf can get there in a year (1b) and our current prospects in a year.

So we use a guy like Mange (or Dube "cringe") and Backlund to get a 2D.

We draft the best available C.

Has to be NHL ready or very close.

Trade Hanifin to replace Backlund at a younger age.

 

Seems easy.

Oh yeah, turf the coach and find one that know how to use players.

 

You wanna go for the cup in a few years I think you have to put the big 4 names out there.  Your Lindholm, Rasmus, Toffoli and Hanifin. 

 

Not saying trade all 4, but I mean ya can't do a rebuild with no 1st in 2024.  As an example.

 

2025 has some 1A Centers.   IMHO you build from the net out, Goalies/Defencemen.

 

Successfully develop too many?  That's like never happened, but if it does, any team will trade for them.

 

I would not personally rush on the forwards or they will be past their prime and wanting boat anchor contracts before the team is even built up.  And most of them would end up becoming LWs lol.

 

You develop a Bad RHS D, you can trade them for assets.   You do that with a center, you're stuck with a LW that goes through waivers untouched.

 

On Wolf I think you used the perfect word:  "Optimistic"..

 

We need the word "Confident".   For that, I don't think we're done in net.   We need another Wolf.   If they both turn out, which they won't, well pretty easy trade.

[Heartbreaker]

27 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

Not saying trade all 4, but I mean ya can't do a rebuild with no 1st in 2024.  As an example.

 

To be clear, we do have a 1st in 2024 - I don't have any idea if it's ours, or FLA's, or what the terms are, but we do have a pick, and given the complexities of said terms, it's probably not possible to trade it, even if they wanted to.

 

Love.

[Thebrewcrew]

There’s a rebuild coming. Whether or not the organization wants it or not.

 

Fortunately, there’s some decent young pieces in the pipeline. It doesn’t have to be 10 years out of the playoffs. But it’s gonna be a couple down years.

 

 

The biggest thing they need to do is be honest with themselves. If they run it back next year they are likely a better team, but not a contender. They absolutely can not lose Lindholm for nothing. But they probably will and that’s really disappointing.