2023 Offseason

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

sorry for focused quote,

 

The question imho isn't whether we might keep the wrong goalie.

 

The question is whether we're going to keep 2 wrong goalies, or just 1 wrong goalie.

 

If I thought that trading Markstrom was an option, I would be on your side of the argument.

 

I don't know really.  Not happy this year with either.  Trading both would solve the quandry.  Then we have to either trade for or sign another UFA.  The UFA list looks ugly at first glance.  I would be interested in Gibson, who I think is one of the best out there.  Costly trade.  Lots of Markstrom aged guys and older.  How about Talbot.

 

So, what is the solution?

Keep the guy you can't trade and only give Wolf 15 starts because Sutter?

Pay a team to take Markstrom and trade Vladar for an asset?

Then sign a 1b type goalie at a cheaper cost?

[travel_dude]

On second glance, Korpisalo, Jary, Nedeljovik are younger.

Freddie Andersson was decent but getting up there.

Maybe none of them are available to us.

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't know really.  Not happy this year with either.  Trading both would solve the quandry.  Then we have to either trade for or sign another UFA.  The UFA list looks ugly at first glance.  I would be interested in Gibson, who I think is one of the best out there.  Costly trade.  Lots of Markstrom aged guys and older.  How about Talbot.

 

So, what is the solution?

Keep the guy you can't trade and only give Wolf 15 starts because Sutter?

Pay a team to take Markstrom and trade Vladar for an asset?

Then sign a 1b type goalie at a cheaper cost?

 

well,  I would really love it if it was that complicated.  Maybe I'm wrong and it is.

 

How I see it:         (goaltending coaches aside)

 

You obviously move Markstrom on.   But then realize you can't, without doing something Monahan-like.

            So unless we want to lose more picks we're probably stuck with him.

               If I'm wrong here, hey that would be very cool.

 

So, that leaves Vladar.   Should be able to get an asset back from a team willing to gamble on him.

     Trade him, open that spot up for Wolf.

 

 

If we have more options than that with Markstrom, then oh yeah totally different ball game.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, jjgallow said:

 

well,  I would really love it if it was that complicated.  Maybe I'm wrong and it is.

 

How I see it:         (goaltending coaches aside)

 

You obviously move Markstrom on.   But then realize you can't, without doing something Monahan-like.

            So unless we want to lose more picks we're probably stuck with him.

               If I'm wrong here, hey that would be very cool.

 

So, that leaves Vladar.   Should be able to get an asset back from a team willing to gamble on him.

     Trade him, open that spot up for Wolf.

 

 

If we have more options than that with Markstrom, then oh yeah totally different ball game.

 

Really the problem is the coaches.  Keeping Markstrom isn't the worst option we have.

He sucked but can play enough games to ease in Wolfie.

He is a good team mate.

The coaches though.

Are they more the problem than the goalies were?

Knowing when to sit a guy, when to give him the hook, when to call a time out.

This year, it seemed that when we fans were saying start the backup, we saw Markstrom.

When we were cursing the results in a first period, he stayed in and played the next game.

How much of it falls on the goalie coach.

 

I don't know if we would have made the playoffs with a 2:1 or 3:1 start ratio, but what we used didn't work the last month.  He's my guy is not a fact based decision.

 

Here's the funny thing.  Markstrom sucked against the Ducks.  Doesn't matter how good you played against Minny, if you can't get a win against the worst team, you should not be the defacto starter to get the playoffs.

[travel_dude]

I will point out the one big difference between goalies.

Win/loss/OTL

 

Markstrom 59 games, 58 games started, 23-21-12  

Vladar 27 games, 23 starts, 14-6-5

[The_People1]

Great news

 

 

[conundrumed]

Awesome. Per CF: $825,000 per.

One less Ritchie.lol

[travel_dude]

Although this is a minor re-signing, I'm not sure it's something that needed to be done prior to a new GM coming in.  

The cost is low.  Good two year deal.

Instead of Ritchie's maybe we should target Connor Dewar.

Play em together and we have the Liquor Line.

[conundrumed]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Although this is a minor re-signing, I'm not sure it's something that needed to be done prior to a new GM coming in.  

The cost is low.  Good two year deal.

Instead of Ritchie's maybe we should target Connor Dewar.

Play em together and we have the Liquor Line.

It's excellent form. Reward him. Don't leave it hanging over his head. Stop throwing shade on everything.lol It's like that poem of the child who sees a man eating his own heart. "how does it taste?" "Bitter".lol

Duehr earned it. It's excellent form to not let it hang over his head and all of his buddies bugging him about "what's up".

That's a huge step he took. You gotta let your guys know that you love it. I like that was the 1st order of business with a player. Get that worry off of his plate. He definitely earned it.

[cross16]

Nice work. I'm a bit surprised they got 2 years at that AAV. Thought Dueher may bet on himself more than that but the one way helps too. 

 

Nice tradeoff and good business from the Flames. Quite like Dueher as a player and agree he took a nice step forward. 

 

EdIt: Just looked it up and it's interesting that this walks him right to UFA. I think that gives you some indication of how they view their team. 

[The_People1]

3 minutes ago, cross16 said:

EdIt: Just looked it up and it's interesting that this walks him right to UFA. I think that gives you some indication of how they view their team. 

 

You mean, the Flames plan to rebuild in two years?

[cross16]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

You mean, the Flames plan to rebuild in two years?

 

No. More they are trying to keep costs down. I find it interesting that they walk him to UFA but their trade off is they get a low cap hit. 

 

I don't think signing a player like Dueher would implicate anything around a rebuild

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

No. More they are trying to keep costs down. I find it interesting that they walk him to UFA but their trade off is they get a low cap hit. 

 

I don't think a signing a Dueher would implicate anything around a rebuild

 

Ah I see.  Yes, give the player the fastest path to UFA in exchange for keeping the cap hit low.  Flames didn't buy a single UFA year.  Duehr is obviously trending into a full time NHL like Garnet Hathaway back in the day.  If all goes well for Duehr, then he may become a 3rd line + top PK guy by the end of his second year.  He could be looking at between $2-mil-to-$3-mil-per by that point.

[conundrumed]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

No. More they are trying to keep costs down. I find it interesting that they walk him to UFA but their trade off is they get a low cap hit. 

 

I don't think signing a player like Dueher would implicate anything around a rebuild

Could also be what the player wanted, secures a 1 way. Kinda works for both parties currently. He can up his value and the cap will rise.

[The_People1]

So perhaps Mange was playing hurt most of the season.  Does he get a pass then?

 

 

[cross16]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

So perhaps Mange was playing hurt most of the season.  Does he get a pass then?

 

 

 

 

I don't think he had that bad a year. I get the totals were down but I think that was a product of some bad luck and poor team play.

 

His underlying numbers were really strong and he continued to be a borderline elite player away from the puck. Not sure he'll bounce back to 30 plus (not sure that was the baseline to begin with) but very confident he'll be better next year. 

[cross16]

Elias Lindholm is pretty high on Frank Seravelli's trade bait lists

 

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/now-or-never-erik-karlssons-trade-value-will-likely-never-be-higher-for-the-san-jose-sharks

 

(I don't think this is a surprise and the reasoning is sound)

[travel_dude]

26 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Elias Lindholm is pretty high on Frank Seravelli's trade bait lists

 

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/now-or-never-erik-karlssons-trade-value-will-likely-never-be-higher-for-the-san-jose-sharks

 

(I don't think this is a surprise and the reasoning is sound)

 

It's a sad statement on the team when guys that used to be happy now want out.  At the very least, they are non-committal about wanting to re-sign.  Maloney needs to make the right decisions or the team will have to do a make-over.

[Heartbreaker]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's a sad statement on the team when guys that used to be happy now want out.  At the very least, they are non-committal about wanting to re-sign.  Maloney needs to make the right decisions or the team will have to do a make-over.

 

Yeah, I mean, if there are common variables that led to the GM leaving, and potentially all three skaters in the best line in the entire league last season, then maybe there is some issue that requires attention. Even if that's expensive.

 

Love.

[jjgallow]

14 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Yeah, I mean, if there are common variables that led to the GM leaving, and potentially all three skaters in the best line in the entire league last season, then maybe there is some issue that requires attention. Even if that's expensive.

 

Love.

 

or takes 5-7 years

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

Elias Lindholm is pretty high on Frank Seravelli's trade bait lists

 

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/now-or-never-erik-karlssons-trade-value-will-likely-never-be-higher-for-the-san-jose-sharks

 

(I don't think this is a surprise and the reasoning is sound)

 

That list though.  Feels like the Flames would love to trade Lindholm for Kuznetsov.  Checks lots of Sutter's boxes.

 

Cup experience

Former #1 Center

Past his prime

And most importantly, it helps get us older

 

 

 

...and I wish I was joking.

[conundrumed]

On 4/27/2023 at 1:25 PM, The_People1 said:

 

That list though.  Feels like the Flames would love to trade Lindholm for Kuznetsov.  Checks lots of Sutter's boxes.

 

Cup experience

Former #1 Center

Past his prime

And most importantly, it helps get us older

 

 

 

...and I wish I was joking.

Lindholm for Kuznetsov and a coke machine please. We'd have no problem attracting players.lol

In all seriousness, should we be considering moves on the draft floor?

I'll start: Hanifin to Buffalo for their first if it stays at 13 and their 2nd(45).

If that's what Hronek was worth to a non-playoff team Hanifin should be similar. But then again Van got owned.

But 1. is that realistic? 2. Would you?

Buffalo needs to address their D with a solid move.

I know everyone loves Backlund but we're getting close to walking him to retirement. He'd be ideal in Detroit as a 3C and Detroit has 2 1sts and 3 2nds and solid prospects.

I'd love to trade partner with Detroit.

Backlund would be a great mentor and Detroit is rising quickly and has a lot of young Swedes, so he'd be going to a good landscape while we work on changing our complexion which I think we need. As a Wings fan, Backlund is almost ideal.

What a fair return would be I'm uncertain. Rasmussen and a 2nd? That would be a great boost for Detroit. What would make a great boost for us? Veleno is a really good young C as well, but he's basically in role-playing in the D.

Most of all, I think we need a bit of a reset on cap space if we hope to change much.

I know those 2 moves would affect us, but they'd buy some cap and force a bit of change which is important imho.

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Lindholm for Kuznetsov and a coke machine please. We'd have no problem attracting players.lol

In all seriousness, should we be considering moves on the draft floor?

I'll start: Hanifin to Buffalo for their first if it stays at 13 and their 2nd(45).

If that's what Hronek was worth to a non-playoff team Hanifin should be similar. But then again Van got owned.

But 1. is that realistic? 2. Would you?

Buffalo needs to address their D with a solid move.

I know everyone loves Backlund but we're getting close to walking him to retirement. He'd be ideal in Detroit as a 3C and Detroit has 2 1sts and 3 2nds and solid prospects.

I'd love to trade partner with Detroit.

Backlund would be a great mentor and Detroit is rising quickly and has a lot of young Swedes, so he'd be going to a good landscape while we work on changing our complexion which I think we need. As a Wings fan, Backlund is almost ideal.

What a fair return would be I'm uncertain. Rasmussen and a 2nd? That would be a great boost for Detroit. What would make a great boost for us? Veleno is a really good young C as well, but he's basically in role-playing in the D.

Most of all, I think we need a bit of a reset on cap space if we hope to change much.

I know those 2 moves would affect us, but they'd buy some cap and force a bit of change which is important imho.

what package would you put together?

 

 Backlund, Hanifin for a 1st, 2nd and Veleno and Rasmussen? Was there a 2nd 2nd? 
 

If we are trying to compete sooner, are there prospects close to being ready? I think it's how the flames would prefer to operate.

[conundrumed]

5 hours ago, robrob74 said:

what package would you put together?

 

 Backlund, Hanifin for a 1st, 2nd and Veleno and Rasmussen? Was there a 2nd 2nd? 
 

If we are trying to compete sooner, are there prospects close to being ready? I think it's how the flames would prefer to operate.

Detroit has no need for Hanifin. Buffalo has a huge need at D.

[The_People1]

40 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Detroit has no need for Hanifin. Buffalo has a huge need at D.

 

BUF has a hugemungus need for RHS RD.  They have LHS LD, Dahlin, Powers, and Samuelson.  RD is so weak.  Should we trade Andersson?