Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. For such a prolific goal scorer Neal has been traded a lot over his career. It’s something you can’t ignore, what team wouldn’t want to keep a proven 20 goal scorer? Could be a character or work ethic issue...he was underwhelming the entire season. Whatever it was BT and BP didn’t want him around. Now we can only hope Lucic defies the odds
  3. With Lucic a Flame for the next 4 years, I really see Bennett as the casualty. I don’t think he’ll be a Flame much longer, much to my dismay.
  4. Adding this kid to the mix but makes Gaudreau look kinda big https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/446415/artur-gatiyatov
  5. For what it’s worth, Lucic’s contract has considerably less cash value than Neal’s. The owners saved money here, especially waiting for the signing bonus to be paid for this season. That probably factors in too.
  6. The mistake was signing Neal in the 1st place. This trade is an attempt to make the best of a bad situation. We don't need Lucic to be a top 6 player just like we didn't need Neal to be a top 6 player. We need is someone to fit a role, Neal didn't fit a role on this team and never would have. I don't think the Flames are expecting Lucic to be a top 6 player. I also don't think Neal is a top 6 player anymore, though he may get played in the top 6 in Edmonton, but that is just because of their lack of any kind of scoring depth. We are replacing a 3rd line player with a player with a 3rd line player who fits the role better, and contrary to popular belief has put up similar or better numbers on the PP and 5v5 over the last 3 years. I see us getting a player with similar offense, but is much better in his own end and is one the most imposing physical players in the league. I get that I may be in the minority but I have to agree with Cross, I think we are getting the better player, and the numbers sure bear that out.
  7. What’s the difference between having Lucic or Neal on the team though? Both will/would have played in the bottom 6, and Lucic will be the better fit there. Either way they were likely overpaying a bad contract.
  8. I would argue this wasn't a reaction to the playoffs, rather has been his MO from day one First player he signs ..Engelland Adds Brouwer based on one beast mode playoff Traded for Dalton Prout Peluso Went extremely hard at Ryan Reaves BT wanted this player profile all along I'm not overly concerned about the expansion draft just because with or without him we were likely already in a position to make a deal to make Seattle take a player to begin with And like I said before , I look at this as paying -$500k for Hathaway's replacement. Neal's replacement is already in house
  9. I'm not saing we should have kept Neal, as he was a poor fit. I am saying we are taking on a bad contract that may not fit any better. At 3m, it's less of an issue. AT 5.25m, he's the 4th most expensive forward and 5th most expensive player on the team. He's also signed a year longer than Gaudreau.
  10. Yesterday
  11. This logic doesn’t make sense. I think we all can agree that Neal wasn’t going to play top 6 this year, in Calgary. He didn’t fit in the bottom 6 with his style, so we had no where to play him. So instead of paying Neal $5.75M to play in a bottom 6 role that he wouldn’t fit in, we pay Lucic $5.25M to play a bottom 6 role that he will fit in to. I agree it’s too much money to pay a bottom 6 guy, but we were going to be doing it either way. At least we have a better fit this way, and for $500,000 cheaper.
  12. The only thing to consider, and the big question in this trade is, is James Neal a declining player as well, or was last year just a blip? Why is everyone so quick to assume that Neal just had an off year and give him credit that he’ll bounce back, while at the same time not giving Lucic the same benefit of the doubt? Maybe his last couple of years truly are a result of playing on a terrible Oilers team, and not being a good fit with their other players? We’re so quick to discount Lucic, when Neal really does carry the same risks.
  13. He will retire a Flame or be bought out. I feel funny saying that, but we got another contract signed by the Oilers that is impossible to move again. I will probably warm up to the trade as time passes, but it's raw right now. BT reacted to the playoffs. Made a Brian Burke decision. Doesn't mean he is wrong, but I think he overreacted. The trade stinks because we approached it wth an overpaid player that couldn't fit the top 6, and looked for a solution that didn't fit the top 6. $5.25m is fine if they can play in the top 6. Role player or 3-4th liner making that much kills the cap. Neal couldn;t play himself up the lineup, but is a more skilled player. We can;t expect a declining Lucic to somehow be a top 6 player. And if he isn;t we just wasted $5.25m a year. Not to mention the retained NMC.
  14. When you think about it.... We signed Neal to be top 6. He played bottom 6. We traded for a guy that was barely top 6 in the Oilers. For this to make any sense, he has to play top 6 here. In other words, he has to replace Frolik for this to make sense. He won't.
  15. rickross

    MILAN LUCIC

    Yeah the contract is unsightly...it’s what makes this trade such an unfavourable one. I guess BT just got tired of looking for toughness and settled for Lucic, Neal obviously needed to go and the Coilers were willing to eat some cap. I agree BT has overpaid for some of the bottom 6-9 players. This ones all on Chiarelli though...maybe they should start drug testing GMs??
  16. For anyone hoping to move Lucic somewhere else, it sure seems unlikely.
  17. DHT

    MILAN LUCIC

    Lucic, Marchant and Thomas were the real reason why I hated Boston so much and still do. I was happy when Lucic went to Oilers. Now he is a Flames. I have to bite my lips from now on. I hope he is worth it.
  18. It would be nice if Dube can wrestle that 3rd spot away from Janks. In the preseason I'm sure Dube could take Janks spot. But, the regular season I'm not sure. I'm biased towards Dube because he was a junior star in a tougher league then the NCAA with Janks.
  19. I was a big fan of Hath and wished he would have stayed but then Neals contract would still be around. Basically each team took a drink of the other teams poison hoping the other gets sicker than them.
  20. I do believe in those kinds of superstitions. I think even if Bennett went to #39 then he’d be fully following in Gilmour’s strides. When he gets traded to Toronto he can switch to 93.
  21. I know that this sounds stupid, and I think that we've had this conversation before, but I truly believe that Sam Bennett should change his number. First of all, I don't think 93 suits him, and second, he's not Doug Gilmour. Furthermore, and an aside, when Doug Gilmour scored the most important goal of his career, he was wearing 39. Anyway, I think Sammy might have better luck finding his game in a number like 15. 26 would work really well, too - but we've already got one of those. Love.
  22. I think it’s actually harder than we think, and I mean, to find a guy that can play with energy and that can actually play. We’ve had guys who can punch faces but took up roster spots to play a few minutes. I actually think Peters could have deployed the 4th line a lot better to get more energy into the lineup. That 4th got really good there but he seemed to go away from it. I actually think we will really miss Hathaway and what he brings. We found him but also haven’t really found anyone that can replace him; for a decent contract that is.
  23. His career will blossom as he will feel more himself now
  24. It isnt hard to find a face puncher for around 1M. But then you're still stuck with Neals contract. .5 mil saved on Lucics contract plus 1m or so for the face puncher. I personally didnt think Neal was going anywhere, I figured he would get another chance only because the contract is almost as bad as Lucics and no one was going to want that.
  25. You know, for what it's worth, 27 is my favourite number. For some of us, number selection is a big deal. I think for Milan, though, 17 is his first choice. It's been his number on every team except for Edmonton as it's retired (Jari Kurri). Love.
  26. You left out Jankowski..which would move Bennett to the wing
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...