Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/08/2020 in Posts

  1. 6 points
    Sorry I'm never around, I wasn't originally going to do one this year for a multitude of reasons: 1. Been busy with my job(s) 2. My grasp of the draft eligibles these last few years has been less than it used to be due to the 17-18 age group in particular being outside of my focused areas Now that the draft has technically been pushed back I can absolutely try and put something together, if y'all had any interest! I do think this year will be a very volatile draft in terms of hits and misses, and next year even more so.
  2. 3 points
    Just to add. The switch from Hartley to Gulutzan also saw Bennett's total PP TOI decrease by 50 minutes. Despite that decrease he still scored more PP goals than Tkachuk, as many as Gaudreau, and one less than the PP specialist Brouwer. Hard to grow when the coach has little faith in your ability to grow.
  3. 2 points
    I've had a couple years more experience under my belt now so I feel like I've mellowed out a lot more with regards to player evaluation. A few years ago my ND lists were closer to real NHL lists in length, now I find I'm a lot more forgiving. Plus I'm a Flames homer, so doubly so for our guys! Having seen a ton of kids now, we can pretend all we want about drafting but the reality is no one ever really knows. The guys who clearly have the talent and clearly have the drive will always go top 10, but the rest of the kids are a complete guess. Some of them figure it out and will pass guys who had shown their stuff earlier and were drafted high as a result, some never will. All we can do is throw a dart at something we like and hope for the best. We're all just hoping the kids we like are 60-40 success rates rather than 50-50, because so much of development comes down to opportunity, organization, etc. It's very very difficult to separate bad drafting and scouting versus bad luck and bad development, and a guy who would've succeeded in one spot can easily fail elsewhere and vice versa. There's never a black and white answer and the people that pretend there is are both wrong and full of ****.
  4. 2 points
    We lose to WPG and win the lotto, that is my prediction. I am not on board with those who figure the best idea is to trade #1 for other parts. When we win, you keep that pick and take Lafreniere, this is the break this club deserves.
  5. 2 points
    I wouldn't really classify Pelletier as the stereotypical "safe" pick. That would be a Suzuki or Foote type player. Pelletier is more of a boom-bust guy a la Lavoie, Suzuki or Kaliyev. The difference is he has more work ethic than those 3 which makes him "safer" if such a thing exists. I would say that if he pans out you're looking at a Gallagher or Anthony Beauvillier type 2nd line player, maybe a DeBrincat level complementary 1st liner if you're incredibly lucky, so he's an interesting mix of upside versus safety, because I think a lot of guys would say Lavoie is "safer" due to his NHL size and the fact he could conceivably turn into a 4th line depth guy. The thing I like about the recent Flames drafting is they're swinging for the fences while still looking for players that fit their goals character-wise. There's by definition only one or two Gaudreaus every draft. If it were that easy to select a guy like that he'd be long gone before the pick, the reality is most guys like that bust just as well and if they were such sure things they're likely drafted in the top 5. Pelletier might just be another, smaller Bennett (which honestly is what he'd be looking at if his offense doesn't translate), but for where he stacks against his contemporaries one year later there's at best maybe one or two guys from the 28-45 range I would say had anywhere near as complete a season as Pelletier, which is a good sign. I'd very much say they went all or nothing because everything about the pick at the time screamed BPA rather than fit. If it wasn't about skill and character and potential, then why not just go with a big, skilled right-shot RW? From my standpoint, there's literally no worries about Pelletier as of yet. Every milestone he's needed to hit, he's hit. Matched up against his peers, he stands out as a guy who has maintained his status post draft unlike other picks in his range. Attitude-wise, he brings way more to the table than almost anyone else around his draft spot. I would have been really mad with Lavoie, or Foote, or Kaliyev, for various different reasons, but Pelletier (who while not my favorite choice at the time) is a good pick. Being bigger or having one elite skill means absolutely nothing in the long run, it doesn't even make you more NHL ready. Just look at the development curve for Nolan's older brother with Tampa Bay, he's not going to be close to a lineup spot until possibly 2021-22. Either way, where the Flames have really lost guys is at the NHL level, so we'll get a real litmus test for Pelletier in a year and a half. At that time I'm just hopeful they work to develop him instead of looking at him as "this is what he is, good enough for me" which they've been prone to do in the past.
  6. 2 points
    I think there's a few reasons The Bill Belichick philosophy, it's better to get rid of players a year early rather than a year late. This offseason you can sell 160 games of Gaudreau, by next TDL you are selling 100, the return will be less. His value may be down after a "down" season by his standards, but it will become even less the closer he gets to UFA. Another reason, this core has remained untouched for 5 seasons and this is a core that has failed to meet expectations. The Flames have won 2 of their last 14 playoff games. I'm not blaming Gaudreau by any means, but when the team struggles that much in the playoffs, changes are bound to happen. The final reason, I don't think Gaudreau is the guy to build around. Tkachuk is the guy for me. Take nothing away from Gaudreau, he's an elite NHL player, I just think he's a lot like Phil Kessel. A very good player, but not someone I'm building a winner around.
  7. 2 points
    I am pretty huge on defence, I think it's the most important position and role in the game. That said, I do believe it is the defence which is teachable. Yes, you can teach anyone to skate. No, you can't teach anyone to be a world class skater. We....Should...be getting a world class skater in the first round (or a goalie lol). In his entire hockey existence he has never scored more than 10 goals in a season. I think he's the ultimate Safe pick. Extremely likely to make the NHL. But the things he lacks, can't be taught. IMHO you're going for world class skills in the first round. You want someone with first line potential at worst, superstar potential at best. I'd rather fail the odd year and get that, then take safe picks
  8. 2 points
  9. 2 points
    I just thought I'd start this as a positive to come out of the organization, which hasn't had too many positives in the last few years. With June being ALS awareness month, something I was not aware of previously but good to know, a new campaign in support of ALS for Chris Snow has been taking place. It is similar to the Ice Bucket Challenge from 2014, for reflection on the severity of the disease, Pete Frates who was the inspiration for the Ice Bucket Challenge passed in December at 34. Great to see the organization step up in support. Here are some of the trick shots so far. This has even spread throughout the sports world with former Colts punter Pat McAfee having his own Great to see, hope to see it continue. https://snowystrong.ca/ is where you can donate if interested.
  10. 2 points
    I really like Mangiapane, I don't think the Flames have enough players like him. He is a hound on the puck, and he brings it every night. I think going forward, his floor is 20-20=40. If I was BT I'd try to get him on a longer term deal, these are the kind of players you win with. 3.5-4 on a 5 or 6 year deal. It will look like a steal in a few seasons
  11. 2 points
    Hes got a sweet set of hands in tight and I think that may be where the Schwartz comparisons come from. He may not be quite as agitating as Gallagher but he is very effective in the dirty areas just like him and how creative and successful he is with puck deflections reminds me of Gallagher quite a bit. Just an all-around sparkplug.
  12. 2 points
    Markstrom and Lehner are the only two out there I would consider on the right deal. I don't really agree with giving goalies more than 4 year terms so if they want more I would be out. The rest of the options to me are not starters, not worth the money they will get, or I would just prefer to stick with Ritttich. I'm pretty lukewarm on Murray given his injury problems. Might be tough for him to recover but I do like the skill set. Unless it's a young goalie that you can add now and for the future I'm not as much a believer in the Flames needing a solution in net. While I understand the reservation around Rittich, IMO I think you would have the same reservations around many of the available "upgrades". i just don't think there are that many very good or great goalies in the league so spending time, assets or cap space for a marginal upgrade doesn't really interest me. I see the Flames going with Rittich and another 1B next year and there are a few options there I don't mind.
  13. 2 points
    The one thing is, Atkinson is a good player but not a superstar like Gaudreau. But yes, if the day comes that a trade happens lots of us will be unhappy. However, I have more confidence in BT being the man pulling the trigger than Feaster and past GM’s
  14. 2 points
    Yup this. For me it makes perfect sense to discuss a Gaudreau trade for a number of reasons and the biggest has nothing to do with the playoffs. This is the summer to decide if Gaudreau is going to be a career Flame or not because if he is not your going to lose your window to maximize the return. Playoff performance should not be the biggest questions it should be: 1. Do we want to keep building the team around Gaudreau and can we win with him as our franchise player? 2. Are we comfortable giving him full market value when his deal is up? 3. Does he want to be here? You need to answer those 3 questions in that order IMO and then make the decision.
  15. 1 point
    That part was just something made up by John Shannon as an example that got taken literally. I've known people that worked closely with the players who have said that he is one of the easiest to work with and a genuinely nice human, and I've heard some not so good stories of others. My own belief was the trade came from one of 2 sources. 1) Dougie requested a move. 2) Tre couldn't let the failures of the season fall directly on Gulutzan, a major move needed to be made and Dougie made the most sense. This story https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/tragedy-forged-special-bond-dougie-hamilton-grieving-family/ was one I had heard of when it actually happened, and why I will stick up for his character despite not personally knowing him. Neat fact too, the guy who wrote this lovely piece on him was the same guy who painted him as a guy who didn't care about losing.
  16. 1 point
    I highly doubt it, I think Kakko is untouchable. Maybe if they wanted to try for Eichel but I don't see a scenario where they trade Kakko for Gaudreau unless the Flames added something dumb. I don't have much interest in DeAngelo either. I'm not worried about his attitude as I think he's matured and isn't really a problem but I more worry you are acquiring him at his peak. He's going to be expensive and while he's a wicked offensive player he's got defensive warts. Not an ideal person to pay for. Picks are interesting for sure. other players that I would have varrying degress of interest in: Andersson, Lindgren, Georgiev (although i'm not sure I value him that highly as I don't see a high end starter), Buchnevich, Chytil, Kravstov, K'Andre Miller, Libor Hjack. Lots of quantity for sure and some decent upside players there. I do think the Rangers would be willing to give them up which is why they may be an attractive partner.
  17. 1 point
    Really glad to have you back! I wish I had known sooner all I had to do was bash our first round picks to get you back in the fold, here I was wasting time in the goalie thread. I do absolutely agree with the last part of this..... as soon as the player looks strong enough for a 4th line role they get the player to change all their habits and develop them as a 4th line player. Gaudreau turned out so well in part because US college kept him out of our development system, or I swear he'd be a checker right now. Thanks very much for the feedback. You're more optimistic than me but sometimes that's not a bad thing lol
  18. 1 point
    Who would Barrie play with? His best fit is probably Gio, but is Barrie able to handle those minutes against the oppositions best? Hanifin wouldn’t be a great fit with Barrie. If you’re playing him on the 3rd pair, I would just sign Gustafsson
  19. 1 point
    If the Flames were fortunate enough to select Lafreniere, I'd keep Gaudreau, for at least one season. It goes against everything I've said, and I know the value on him drops, but if you get Lafreniere, I'm ok with that. I don't want the Flames putting him in any role he isn't ready for. If this happened, my goal would then be to find a C to play with Lafreniere. Cirelli, Domi, either of the Strome's could be available. I would stick with Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm Tkachuk-Backlund-Mangiapane Lafreniere-?-? My goal would be to give him sheltered minutes and lots of offensive zone stars, and unlike Bennett, surround him with competent players.
  20. 1 point
    It is funny that the Flames have a "chance" at picking #1 and oh look, it's a LHS LW, of course. Too bad Shane Wright isn't eligible until 2022... I'm high on Askarov too. It's a high risk, high reward, but I remember being annoyed when the Flames traded down in 2012 and missed out on Vasilevskiy... NJ is the best bet for 2021 picks. If Hall wins the lotto again, NJ gets ARI's 2021 with no protection, same with the VAN pick, they lose to MIN and then NJ gets the 2021, no protection. Maybe unlikely, but worth a shot. The league is so volatile, who would have thought that the SJ pick would be 3rd overall back in Sept?
  21. 1 point
    Wednesday the Hall will announce the inductees who will be enshrined for 2020. Could be multiple Flames stories as well. Iginla is a shoe in as far as i'm concerned. Easy 1st ballot Hall of Famer and would be an all time shocker if he isn't elected. The more interesting story is Theoren Fleury. Today Frank Seravalli wrote a good piece that has me thinking. https://www.tsn.ca/theoren-fleury-deserves-a-spot-in-the-hockey-hall-of-fame-1.1488299 I've gone back and forth on this in the past and ultimately it was more "no" than yes but now I'm all in for Fleury in the Hall. His credentials warrant it, especially in reference to others who are already in, and with what has now come out about his personal life I think it actually strengthens his case. In the past it's been held against him that he wasn't an ambassador for the game or how he got into personal troubles but now we know why and honestly can we blame him anymore? The fact that this guy had the career he did with all of that going on i think makes him deserving. I think it would be a great message to put him in the Hall. I'm not sure he'll get in there this year but I do think it should happen.
  22. 1 point
    I'm curious to see if it's consistent. McGwire, Bonds, Clemens and Sosa tend to keep active in voting, but I think there are enough voter that won't sway their position on either of them. But will that pattern hold up with A-Rod and Ortiz? Ortiz comes from another area of weakness as they have many biased voters who refuse to vote DH's, but Ortiz' failed test seemed to get swept under the rug, also a more likeable person than Bonds and Clemens for sure. My issue with the character judgement is it isn't consistent throughout time. In Baseball Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb would be perceived differently if the played in today's era if they behaved both on and off the field in the same manner, truly terrible people but only held to their success in the game. For hockey I don't know too many examples, Tim Horton for one may be viewed in a different light in today's world. So I would say Fleury wouldn't be either the worst player or the worst human in the Hall.
  23. 1 point
    For the record I pretty adamantly hated that trade from the get go lol. but that's what I do 😉 The reality is that any team who wants Gaudreau cares about the now and is putting a premium on the now. You want to win the trade? You pretty much either have to trade for straight picks and wait. And maybe not even 2020 picks, if you Really want return for value you might be looking at 2021 picks. Trading for picks is the smart move. It's the only move where you have good odds of winning the trade.
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
    I really like Rossi. He's short, but stout. His build is more Marchand than Gaudreau. He's listed at 6lbs heavier than Marchand and 22 heavier than Gaudreau. The only question is can he be a C at his size, in junior he's a career 57%b in the circle though. He would be the steal of the draft. I would rank him 5th, ahead of the Swedish wingers and Perfetti.
  26. 1 point
    I don't really know who has "soured" on Gaudreau because i'm seeing some pretty high value in these proposed trades. I don't see anyone who is souring on him or wanting to give him away. We can draw this out, but to me this is not a hard conversation. it comes down to 2 questions: 1. Does Gaudreau want to be here long term? (I don't know the answer to this one but people closer to the team say No) 2. Are you prepared to give him a contract that makes him your franchise player and in turn build your team around him? You can answer yes to the first one and still no to the 2nd and for me that's it. I think Gaudreau is a very good player, a special talent (especially offensively), but I would not build my team around him and thus I am not prepared to give him the contract he's heading for. Once you reach that decision then it makes more sense to put him out there now than wait because I don't think the value is going up. For me it has nothing to do with how he has performed or performed this year (in fact i'd argue he played better than the sentiment seems to be here), how he will perform in the playoffs, the fans whatever. All of that emotion clouds what is at the core a pretty easy call IMO.
  27. 1 point
    Here is the thing with trading Gaudreau, you have to be prepared your going to take an immediate step down in talent and probably "lose" the trade in the short term. If your angle is they shouldn't trade Gaudreau without getting equal talent back then that's ok, but then you won't trade Gaudreau because that isn't likely to happen. There is a reason top 10 pick trades are rare and there is a reason player for player hockey deals are rare, teams don't give up high end talent easily or frequently. Whether this is a "waste" or not depends on if you are looking big picture or small picture. Small picture, sure it's easy to rationalize that trading Gaudreau could be a "waste" because you are very likely going to lose the trade in the short term. Big picture or in the long term is where the Flames could hope to win by taking into account his pending UFA status, modified NTC, potential desire to leave and pending extension that IMO wont' be kind to the Flames. The price also isn't going to go up, it's going to go down.
  28. 1 point
    I never understand what the thought process of voters is. Brendan Shanahan got passed over his first time despite 650 goals and 3 Stanley Cups, which would seem pretty automatic, might have been the key to the Wings getting over the hump. With Theo it is obvious he rubbed people the wrong way, he spoke his mind and I think hockey writers don't like that. Personally if writers were to take a stand and be harsher on players, I'd like it to be the ones who played with zero regard for the opponents health. A guy like Pronger IMO would have been a good example to take a stand, he had like 8 suspensions and an attitude that he would do it all over again. Given the concussion issues I'd like to see guys who played dangerously have their legacy tarnished a little bit for it. Yes I still don't get it, IIRC Matt Stajan who had worn 14 in Toronto had said he had never been given the option to wear that in Calgary, why 10 more years after that. Yes words were said and written, but he did a lot for the franchise in some lean years, he could've easily asked to leave when all the other stars were getting shipped off. I don't see why they can't put it up.
  29. 1 point
    I think Fleury should get in. Whether you like him or not, he’s more than qualified. Longevity, cup champ, over a pt/g, gold medalist. Also overcame trauma from his teens. To play at his size in the 80’s and 90’s is no small feat either. I get that he may have burnt bridges in the last with the voters. But they have to do the right thing. Vote him in and then let’s see 14 in the rafters at the dome.
  30. 1 point
    If it was me I would go with these lines based on the trade I mentioned above: Mangiapane-Monahan-Lindholm Tkachuk-Necas-Niederreiter Dube-Backlund-? Lucic-Ryan-Gawdin That center depth looks so much better going forward.
  31. 1 point
    I don't know how people in Jersey are, but I don't think Johnny Gaudreau is going to boost attendance, Jack Hughes was billed as the best since McDavid and attendance still sucked, and its American Jack Hughes. I also don't think if the Flames got Taylor Hall its going to start a new sell out streak immediately. Its a nice story to get more people to relate to the team, but won't get people on the bandwagon ready to commit thousands for season tickets. And that's without factoring in the COVID impact that the area could be facing.
  32. 1 point
    Most will disagree with me but I would trade JH to NJ for Palmerri and what ever the best pieces we can get added to get a top line RWer. We then sign Hall to replace Johnny and play Lindholm with Chucky.and Baclund. I think this would give us the best looking top 6 we could hope for. Resign Hamonic and Gustufson to play on the third, with Valamiki back next year the roster is looking fairly good. Just my thoughts.
  33. 1 point
    Ottawa is in a way just lucky in theirs, they made a dumb move for Duchene that didn't work but lucked out that San Jose completely fell apart. They are heading into a good spot this draft, but we need to see how they handle this. We had 3 firsts in what was thought to be a deep draft. The problem with Buffalo is that if they don't have a slam-dunk decision (Eichel, Reinhart, and Dahlin) they screw it up, only a couple good draft picks, have next to nothing to show for trades like Vanek, Kane, Miller, Myers etc. terrible contracts and everything. Its just sad to think about what those poor people have had to deal with over the last 30 years with the Super Bowls and Brett Hull. Fans at Bills games tailgating do a thing were they jump off a van onto a plastic folding table, I think its all so they can injure themselves and avoid attending a Buffalo sporting event.
  34. 1 point
    That’s what I was saying. This doesn’t pass the smell test for me. It actually gives me the sense that anything and everything is on the table if it pushes the right button for these owners. (And by button I mean playoffs and bringing in $)
  35. 1 point
    Depends on the relationships between the clubs. Sometimes they have a lot of say, sometimes it's very little. I've said this before but until Bennett got stuck with the likes of Gulutzan and Troy Brouwer I think things were going well and were on the right track but they got off the rails after that and for a multitude of reasons have never really recovered. Easy to forget now but Bennett was one of the best Flames in the playoffs against Vancouver and one of their best players in training camp the following season. he was passing every test and was treated as such. this wasn't a Baertschi situation where the prospect was kept at the NHL level despite his play, it was earned. I'm of the opinion that another year of junior would have not change where he is today because it was at the NHL level where the Flames fell short. I don't see what another year of junior would have changed in terms of how the Flames worked him into the NHL. Time in the AHL would have been ideal but unfortunately it was not available. why i'm in favor of the NHL looking into a special status rule where maybe each club can have 1 player they assign to the AHL that doesn't fit with the age rules.
  36. 1 point
    I think when talking about busts or players that didn't work out you have to weight the actually drafting of he player and then their development as just because a player didn't work out doesn't make him a bad draft pick. This is how i feel about both Nemisz and Bennett that they were both very good picks at the time but development is where things went wrong. Looking back, and i've gone back and watched Bennett's junior tape to see where I went wrong, I will admit that what was missed was Bennett was a spectacular one on one player. So many of his highlights are him going around almost entire teams to score these highlight reel goals. So the production and the "wow" that had everyone so excited about him was cool but it had a built in danger, in that the style of game does not translate to pro very well. Once you lose time and space, which you will at the NHL, what's the backup plan? You need to start using your teammates to re open up that space, or you need to battle through it. This is why I thought Bennett had so much upside because he has the skil level to do both, but what ended up happening was he became a one trick pony. However, this is where development comes into play and where I think the Flames failed Bennett. By providing him no help and expecting him, at such a young age, to carry his line and his teammates they reinforced the danger that was already there. Bennett needed to be learning how to work off his teammates, how to give up on the play and fight for another day and to play simple. Instead it kept reinforcing that he should do it all himself which is so, so challenging at the NHL level as it's easy to defend. Once teams changed how they defended Bennett, took away space, you could see the confidence and the indecision creep into his game. combine with with the fact the Flames bounced him around from line to line, role to role, and position to position, he just never got comfortable and never defined a game he can play in the NHL level. I think the reason Bennett looks better in the playoffs is he understands what he needs to do and does it. But for the 82 game grind that is the regular season, he has no defined role and no clarity on how to execute his game. This is on the Flames IMO. so there was a miss in the scouting but it was also small IMO. there was still plenty there to make Bennett a successful pro if the Flames had done a better job working with him as a young player.
  37. 1 point
    I think every GM is going to try to take advantage of Adams inexperience. Brian Burke said yesterday he received zero texts from execs saying they wish they got that BUF job lol. Unless they bring in an experiences president of hockey ops, you're dealing with the Pegula's. I think you make a massive proposal for Eichel. You can play off the fact that Eichel and Monahan have the same career high in points, 82 and Monahan is 37% cheaper for Buffalo. Unfortunately for Calgary this is the only offseason that I think they could in theory trade for Eichel. Next offseason Gaudreau only has 1 year, and Monahan has a M-NTC, no chance he would waive for Buffalo. You'd have to be willing to move Lindholm or Tkachuk at that point.
  38. 1 point
    Eichel is 5 years into Buffalo with ZERO playoffs. Then they can the GM, and hire a former player who’s never been a GM. If I’m Eichel, “starting from scratch - again” is not what I want to do. Especially with inexperience at the helm. I read the Pegula’s cut a lot of staff and scouts and such as well. Not sure how confident that makes Eichel about the direction of the team. I personally believe Eichel is going to ask for a trade in due time. He’s too competitive to stay on this ride. BT, get Kevyn on the phone already!
  39. 1 point
    I came away watching this 11 min video thinking "who were the defense in front of him?" If the flames defense cleared the crease, tied up forwards, limited quality scoring chances like the russians did against Canada our goalie numbers would be in the top 5 in the league. So maybe instead of expecting a goalie to make us cup compliant we should be looking at the Russian coach running the D and bring him on as an assistant.
  40. 1 point
    No surprise but Pelletier is invited to Team Canada's summer camp for the 2021 World Juniors. Camp will be held virtually. Given the makeup of the roster (less than 50% are drafted) I would suspect Pelleiter to have a large role and maybe even wear a letter. It's as light on experience a roster as I've ever seen from Team Canada.
  41. 1 point
    Yeah, I was thinking of something along those lines, I made an earlier proposal with CAR 2020 1st (TOR) 2021 2nd- becomes a 1st if CAR reaches 2021 conference finals Warren Foegele- becomes the Flames best bottom 6 forward Morgan Geekie- 6'3" C NHL ready Jamieson Rees- Buzz saw in the OHL, plays "reckless", that can be corrected. Roland Mckeown- Will compete for 3rd pairing minutes Maybe the Flames send something else to CAR too like a Pospisil or something to help with contract numbers
  42. 1 point
  43. 1 point
    I would be fine with 4 or 5 years for either Markstrom or Lehner, even Holtby. I think Calgary needs to find a solution in net, Rittich might be that I am just not 100% sold on him at this point. If Wolf or Parsons end up being the real deal then we can make room for them at that point. As it stands right now, we can't count on them.
  44. 1 point
    Besides we already have the better Silvertip goalie in our system
  45. 1 point
    This offseason you are selling 160+ games of Johnny Gaudreau. The chances of the Flames trading him next TDL are very small, as they are trying to compete. That takes you into next offseason, if he isn't signed then you're only selling 82 games of Gaudreau. Since this is a Canadian market it would be a huge story all season, there goes all your leverage and you are either walking him to UFA, or you move him for a similar return to what Hall fetched, a 1st, 3rd and 3 prospects that likely don't amount to much. If the Flames want value for Gaudreau this is the offseason.
  46. 1 point
    I'm not ready to give up on Parsons yet either. Hopefully he is in a good place mentally, and enjoying the game again. I think being a 7th rounder has really lit a fire in Wolf and he is ready to make the hockey world pay for overlooking him.
  47. 1 point
    NJ doesn’t even have an official GM, so I doubt there’s any legs to NJ- Gaudreau. That team also has so many holes that it’s not worth trading a top 10 pick for 2 years of Gaudreau. Any young players they have that are interesting they can’t afford to trade. What I would be looking for in a deal that’s not a hockey trade is, young players that can step in and make an immediate impact, while also being exempt from expansion. Bemstrom from CBJ and Farabee from PHI fit that bill. High upside players, on an ELC that you can build around as well as a 1st, and maybe another piece. You might get more from Philly than anywhere else, because they know they can sign him and they are in a window to win, they have their goalie, an aging Giroux. The time is now.
  48. 1 point
    not a bad year....
  49. 1 point
    The target makes sense and i can see some legs behind it even thought I don't really trust that source. There were links to Andersson and the Flames before his draft and he was a very popular Flames mock so that would make sense and he has characteristics they like. Reminds me a lot of Backlund at the same age. As long as he checks out ok, seemed to be some issues with how he left the Rangers, i think the Flames should be interested at the right cost. Wouldn't do the first but if you could get him for a 2nd or less i'd be interested. I get the medal thing will rub some the wrong way and that's fair but i don't think the link to Lazar is fair. IMO, Lazar was not really a reclamation project even though it was sold that way. I consider a reclamation project to be a player how has high upside and it's not working in their current situation. I didn't view Lazar as having high upside and I think the reasons it wasn't working in Ottawa was that the transition to pro was starting to show the weakness in Lazar's game. At multpile levels, World Juniors, AHL, back in the SHL Andersson i still flashing the high upside that got him drafted as high as it did so i see the gamble as being much more worth it than the gamble on Lazar was.
  50. 1 point
    My honest opinion on this was I actually don’t think it was in and even if it was in there was no way it was going to be ruled a goal after review. There’s just no way to tell conclusively. I’m more upset about the non call on the trip on Simon in 2OT that allowed St Louis to get the winner.
  • Create New...