Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Those options could work too, however I was addressing the Gaudreau abuse issue specifically. Bennett could solve that. Tkachuk doesn’t need that. If Bennett doesn’t work a trade solution would be required, including Bennett or not.
  3. I wouldn't change that top line initially to start the season. This gave Lindholm his first season with Gaudreau and Monahan, the 2nd season should have them more familiar with each other. Bennett with Tkachuk and Backlund should provide another element to that line, to free up the other two for better results. Nothing against Frolik but I think Bennett should provide that missing edge and frees up Tkachuk a bit more. Like you suggest, if Bennett isn't a difference maker on this line Peters will need to use him elsewhere not trade him.
  4. IMHO, I don't think that's a tough one at all, back to Buy Low and sell high. Of course it is actually tough haha.....you're right,, But him having a down year should be a Requirement for considering him. We should NEVER be acquiring players in their career years, ever. We should only be selling players in their career years (and don't have to). So first requirement met (this is the only year he'll ever be anywhere near affordable). What do we know? We know he's one of the top 3-5 most talented young players in the NHL right now. I would personally say it's a tossup between him, McDavid, and a couple others. Except he's had an aweful season. Step 1: Why did he have an aweful season? First question to ask. https://www.nhl.com/news/injuries-hindered-patrik-laine-during-season-and-playoffs/c-306950966 Answered. Step 2: His attitude? Despite recent media remarks, I would say good. He is definitely frustrated right now. But I refer to his playoff performances. His performances in the playoffs are elevated. He is a championship winner. Step 3: Is his current situation reversible? Answer: Yes. Look at this quote: "Nothing I couldn't handle," from the above article. This guy, one of the brightest stars in the NHL, is being allowed to self-manage a serious back issue and play 82 games. He's 21, so his back can probably be fixed. But, he's being mismanaged 100%. One of the top talents in the NHL playing 82 games with a back injury should be a fireable offense. I thought only Edmonton was this dumb. He should have INSTANTLY gone on injured reserve and be sent to the best back specialists in the world with dedicated staff giving him a recovery plan. Step 4: Laine for Gaudreau and Lucic Or something like that. Step 5: Do what you do with Any Ferrari and get him sent to the experts. Don't think twice about putting him on injured reserve for half the upcoming season. Don't even flinch.
  5. ok, so let's be fair... We traded Iginla at the age of 57 or something like that. Bouwmeester too. Those aren't reasonable comparisons. Also keep in mind the reality that whatever disadvantage we have imagined, is the exact same disadvantage for the other trading party. Another way of saying this is come on guys let's not be ridiculous. So literally I just watched the conversation go from "trading Gaudreau is ridiculous and we would never do that, and".. .. "let's trade Tkachuk for Laine". Like literally. lol. You keep Tkachuk. Which is why what's happening now with his contract, and the Lucic move, scares me half to death. And I'm not the only one. Laine: Offer Gaudreau. Gaudreau for Laine. Negotiate pieces on the side from there. Your team instantly gets huge, and all your top talent now performs in the playoffs (or can). You get way younger, you're scoring more goals than you are now (Gaudreau is mostly assists). And.....for those who think we will lose on Gaudreau.... Yeah you're probably right because we'll keep him until he's 35 and trade him for a bag of pucks. But if he were in play for Laine, the same is true on both sides. Winnipeg is also worrying about how they get similar back. This solves that, more or less. So really I see only two big problems: 1. We don't know Laine and what baggage he comes with 2. We'd pretty much have to buy out Lucic because of that totally insane trade we made. Or send him as part of a package and assume some of the salary. I'm just saying guys, everyone's getting all emotional about trading Gaudreau and how you can't trade franchise players and then three seconds later we're all talking about trading Tkachuk. lol. Now you're going to make me emotional
  6. If it came down to him or Tkachuk I'd keep Matty. The fact Laine has 27 pts less and half of them are PP pts re enforces the whole one trick pony idea.
  7. Yeah, look at those prospects and 1st round picks we got for Iginla and Bouwmeester. They are really NOT making a difference.
  8. Laine is a tough one because he's coming off a down year and yet, it was a 30-goal season. He's already scored 40-goals once and he's one of the NHL's highest goal scorers by the age of 21. He's beginning to look somewhat like a one trick pony but yet, what a trick. He could score 60-goals a season in the near future. He sounds available whereas Connor doesn't. So i wonder what's the price. He could play both RW/LW and we need RW.
  9. Horsman1


    Goalies are certainly a funny lot.. But.. one consistent trend amongst all teams is that they all had a long term dependable back-up goalie to fall back on.. Back up goalie was never a star.. Just a goalie teams had enough confidence in that the rest of their team could play their game.. For Vernon.. We had Reggie lemelin.. never a star goalie.. but always a fan favorite so to see him in nets was not a Oh Crap!! Were' done for!!!.. Kipper completely changed the game here in Calgary.. When he first became a star.. There was a particular point to the season where he told the d men to clear the front of the freggin net so he could see the shots coming.. Can't stop what you can't see.. Our defence has played that way ever since and this is why we get frustrated watching our d-men skate like the wing instead of doing what we consider to be a proper job of defending in our zone
  10. Haven't heard any rumblings on what Connor is asking but the numbers say it shouldn't be much more than Schiefle (6.5 max, depending on term). The popular rumor for Laine is he's asking north of 9M, personally a 3 year "show me" deal at about the same as Connor should be enough to keep him in the good graces of the fans.
  11. jjgallow


    Except the trend of us never being on that list since Kipper. Or even anywhere close to it. That's a trend. So 4 to 5 out of 5 of those goalies were developed in-house. Which is pretty much what you get when you look at Stanley cup winning goalies, which matters more, except the trend is even stronger. 4 to 5 out of 5 were identified as 1As by or before the age of 26. Same with Stanley cup winning goalies but even stronger. Only exception I can think of is Tim Thomas. Those are, quite honestly strikingly high correlations. And again I think you get better data out of Stanley cup winners, but this aligns pretty well. Probably one more trend, that I can't validate: Pretty sure if you look at the teams responsible for developing those goalies, their organizations Do believe in trends, and recipes, and put resources into them. And I think you'd find they produce a higher number of quality goalies in general. Not seeing a lot of Voodoo here.
  12. Showing up in the playoffs is a definite must, and it is easy to argue that with past line-ups it has been too easy to shut down Gaudreau. Perhaps they got the message and improve internally, with better effort, which is possible but likely not to the degree needed. Increased team toughness, with Lucic should actually help, but you have to wonder if the deterrent to cheap shots, etc on Gaudreau needs to be on the same line? I’m of that mind and therefore are inclined to put Bennett as 1RW as he seems to be our best option internally. Perhaps that could change with an up and comer-Pospisil?-but that’s a huge long shot at the moment. Give Bennett till Christmas to figure it out and if it doesn’t work out then we’d be looking for a serious trade, a la last TDL misfire, for Zucker.
  13. Really, so how much is Connor going to get paid? What's your guess on Laine?
  14. Yesterday
  15. You're right on that point, but going by that reasoning there are no franchise players on the team either. So why single out the player that has probably the best value contract on the team? Any dollar for dollar trade (cant afford anything else right now) is going to return alot less.
  16. Nobody suggested a bag of pucks. So with regards to teams who traded top players to win a Stanley cup, the answer is all of them, including St. Louis. Franchise player trades are rare but imho Gaudreau is not a and should not be a franchise player, that is the whole crux of this. A franchise player delivers in the post-season. Binnington himself was a result of the Eric Brewer trade. A technicality perhaps, but these teams all make trades and if you Look at those trades, they are with the future in mind. Some very strong arguements for keeping Gaudreau were just made above. Very strong. But they are all based on the premise that he is our franchise player on a team that is building for the Stanley Cup. Which simply isn't true and we all saw it in the playoffs. It's what we want to believe. Anyway. Can't build a team around a guy who can't show up in the playoffs. We all know it
  17. If you trade Gaudreau you aren't getting anything as close as good as him in return, you would end up with a bunch picks and prospects that amount to hopes and prayers. The idea of trading to Gaudreau to get better is laughable.
  18. This current team has been building towards trying to win a SC and now would not be the time to start trading away the talent that got you this far. Having said this I think as an organization you have to define the time frame (window) to achieve this goal and make changes intelligently. Also as you say paying attention to contracts and especially players on expiring contracts. I think Treliving did the right thing if he was trying to move Brodie and Frolik this offseason using other pieces if necessary. Part of all this is of course in the cap management part and doing what is necessary to get Tkachuk nailed down and added to this core group. I would play out a scenario to use the remaining years with Giordano to win a SC. He is this team's leader and is getting past the time to trade him so make the most of the next 3 seasons. If the effort is not going well I would start trading off the likes of Gaudreau, Monahan Backlund and Bennett to start a new wave of talent to move forward with.
  19. I'd like to add a list of players who should have had astronomical value. Gretzky, Messier, Thornton, Jagr. None got any type of haul. The minute BT picks up the phone to shop him is the minute another GM would question why and offer less. If someone offers you something of good value how many people would not view the seller as desperate and offer less. I believe if we traded Johnny or Gio tomorrow the return would be less than most here expect.
  20. The Flames won top spot in the West. They are a young team with a number of solid contracts. They won't, can't, and shouldn't trade one of their best players for picks / prospects. I can see suggesting trading a core player for a better fit. That includes Gaudreau. If there is a specific player on the other end of the trade that is a better fit. But a generalized debate that we should trade him because his value is high doesn't make sense. Which Stanley Cup contender got there by trading their best players away while the team was in its prime?
  21. Agree and agree. But Gaudreau is a regular season franchise point-player. Not a playoff franchise player. And not a franchise goal scorer either. I am fine with trading for a player with a higher ceiling than Gaudreau (height pun not intended), and they are out there. Even on this team we have Tkachuk. Would a team give us a Tkachuk-type talent for Gaudreau? They'd give us a lot more than that. You'd have to assume some risk and they would likely be in the prospect stage. But we assume greater risk doing nothing. Package deals are just fine too.
  22. Your points on Gaudreau are not far off, not that I would trade him. If it’s a straight 1 for 1 hockey trade, say Gaudreau for Hall, I’m not sure anybody wins though of course there are differences. In a Niewyndyck type scenario of superstar for rising, potential star it may be more palatable, especially if there are other issues like contract problems, but the team trading away the superstar is taking a huge risk. Doesn’t happen without some compelling reason. At this time there is no compelling reason to even think of trading Gaudreau. In another 2 years, if he has stated and made clear he wants to play close to home once UFA, that would be a reason and we can seriously look at options.
  23. Logic to one is insanity to others. There haven;t been too many modern trades that have turned a franchise into a cup winner. STL won from steady goaltending. ROR may be a fine addition. but wasn;t a trade of a franchise player. WAS won from having a regular season stud manage to combine with others at the right time against the right time. PITTS was goaltending and scoring. Both times. CHI was a lot of rights things at the right time. NO franchise altering trades. McDavid trade would be massive, but again unlikely to turn EDM into a winner. Draisaitl would be big, but not franchise altering. The team that gets the best player wins 99% of the time.
  24. That's news to me. https://www.nhltraderumors.me/2019/04/rumor-connor-mcdavid-demands-trade-out.html History shows that point-getters in the top 10 are tradeable. Really though we should be looking at goals first. And from there, you have 18 others, many more under trade consideration. Totally agree, and this is why he holds incredibly high value. The returns would be astronomical. So if you look at the top 10 point getters from the previous season (17-18), how many then improved upon that performance? 2 out of 10. Which happens to be pretty much bang-on what you would expect if you look at it historically and even if you adjust for age, and don't consider size. So, you are suggesting that the best route to take is to make him a 100+ points player, which has odds of about 20% being very kind. Very kind indeed. Then, making Gaudreau a scoring force in the playoffs. Which is literally next to impossible and has no precedence. So this approach is admirable. But it is low probability. It just is. Couple with the reality that the Flames have not done as you suggested. They have done very little in any direction other than failing to sign Tkachuk.
  25. I do believe in the 5th, elimination game Gaudreau had something like 3-4 clear cut breakaways or net-front near misses. I’m not sure that qualifies as “shutting down” as much as luck, but statistics-wise it might look different. I like to look at the games. What I saw was a Flames blow-out and 2 games the Flames were leading late, couldn’t hold, went to overtime and probably should/could have easily won both....but didn’t and ended up losing the series 4-1. I believe we all know this and that’s perhaps why it hurts so much, we know we should have won and didn’t.
  26. To be honest, I actually thought you meant Gaudreau. No matter. I don’t think no Tkachuk action is saying much of anything at this point. If you check around there are at least a dozen teams in pretty much the same spot with their RFAs. Everyone is waiting for the first shoe to drop, not busting their behinds trying to make a trade.
  27. So 7 other teams had a player or players with 95 points or more and none of those players are a trade consideration. I bet 23 other teams wish they had a 95 + point player and if they did would they complain that that player was too small or not the top player in playoffs NO. Instead of trading JG we should be looking for ways to elevate his game to a 100+ points in the regular season and a scoring force in the playoffs.
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...