Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

KACaribou

Farewell Max Reinhart and good luck!

Recommended Posts

What about Jankowski?  There's a chance we sign him this summer.

 

Personally I think he does another year of college.  But I think the more depth the merrier.  Especially with a bunch of our top six guys likely getting regular call-ups to the Flames. There is room for Reinhart.  I think it is more about what type of future the Flames see in Reinhart and letting him move on if they don't see a fit.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Jankowski?  There's a chance we sign him this summer.

I think Janko has to de-register to be able to sign.  I think this has to do with NCAA regulations more than college ones.

Mike Reilly do so, as he was originally registered and has opted to go pro.

 

Whether or not that is true, Janko would be better served by playing one more year.  We have too much depth that needs to be worked out.  If Arnold and Granlund make the jump this year, that clears a better development path in the AHL for Janko.  He would be the top center there, likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NYI would get a 5th rounder in in 2016 in compensation, if they let him go to FA in August. Negotiating rights could bet traded to a team.

I would want any trade to be conditional, though, because if he didn't sign they get that pick anyways.

Wouldn't we get the pick if we have his rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't we get the pick if we have his rights?

 

Hmmm, good point....

If we traded something worth more than a 5th rounder in 2016, then I would prefer that we make the trade contingent.  We could give them back the 5th if that came to us, but we negate the trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade him?

 

From what I understand, his contract expires at the end of the season and if the Flames don't qualify him, then he's free to go anywhere he wants.  I think the Flames should just release him.

 

 

A qualified Reinhart (currently 0.618 NHL, 0.0675 AHL) is a usable asset as a toss in for a trade. Just the name would generate interest from the Isles or Sabres. Even as a stand alone trade a late pick > 0.

Unqualified = 0 return.

 

As dude mentioned it's bad asset management (especially coming from the same that want to trade Wideman just in case he might regress :o ). Heck, we don't even have to sign him because once qualified we own those tradable RFA rights).

 

I'm going to back up Flyerfan52 on this one, but from a perspective that only ThePeople may appreciate:

 

Both are true.  It's bad asset management, and it's also the right call.

 

It's the right call, made far too late.

 

A year ago, simple math would have indicated that we clearly had a problem with all our prospect talent stacked on LW.

 

Even at that time, both Baertschi and Reinhart had significantly more value than they do now.  Yet, it was a fair assessment even then that they were never going to make it through our talent wall in that position.

 

I would argue that this was a known even two years ago.

 

It is unfortunate that we may let Reinhart go (who I believe is NHL quality), yet we are signing players of far less value at other positions.

 

I think we had enough knowledge a year ago, or maybe even two, to make some trades at left wing at a time when there would have been far better return.  In addition, with so many LWs in our system, not all of them have been given the same opportunity to develop.  A further example of bad asset management.

 

We didn't even necessarily need to trade the kids.  We could have also traded the likes of Hudler, and achieved similar results.

 

But....had we gone down that "dark path", we probably would have ended up with McDavid or Eichel, like we were originally projected to.

 

And we would be in a very different position right now.

 

"Asset Life Cycle Management" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a "vet" on the baby Flames or Stockton Heat, he has value (C or LW).  He is redundant at center (in the NHL) due to having Granlund, Nacklund, Stajan, Jooris, Shore and Arnold with similar game types; defensive.  You qualify him, then decide whether he is due a trade, sitting in Stockton, or qualify and don't sign.  Trading Baertschi was a bad PR move, because it looks like we don't know how to develop a "star".  Letting a guy walk that is one year removed from a career AHL season and you look foolish.  A trade makes sense.  We traded Knight for a similar player with a better pro career.  We could possibly turn it into a pick or another Shore-like trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its also very much possible that arnold plays on the nhl team next season. He had a great season in the ahl and if he doesnt start on the team I believe he will at the very least get a few call ups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching Smith play in the Memorial, and thought there is no way he goes back to junior.  Him and Kanzig are too big to play against kids, since it does nothing to develop them as a potential NHL'ers.

Agree on Smith, he needs to make the jump. If he has a great summer and camp he might also make it interesting for the Flames, though at least a year in Stockton would be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think he does another year of college.  But I think the more depth the merrier.  Especially with a bunch of our top six guys likely getting regular call-ups to the Flames. There is room for Reinhart.  I think it is more about what type of future the Flames see in Reinhart and letting him move on if they don't see a fit.

I'm torn about Jankowski. I'd love to see him in the AHL and get him started learning the Flames way. I believe he could do so and fit in just fine. Having just won the Frozen Four it would be a good time to make the jump. I also feel he'd develop better in the AHL versus Providence, with our coaches, strength training and etc. However not signing right away normally means he's going back to college.

Perhaps BT is waiting till after the draft and he figures out what he's doing with our glut of RFAs and AHL players before making a commitment with the college kids (Gimour too)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to back up Flyerfan52 on this one, but from a perspective that only ThePeople may appreciate:

 

Both are true.  It's bad asset management, and it's also the right call.

 

It's the right call, made far too late.

 

A year ago, simple math would have indicated that we clearly had a problem with all our prospect talent stacked on LW.

 

Even at that time, both Baertschi and Reinhart had significantly more value than they do now.  Yet, it was a fair assessment even then that they were never going to make it through our talent wall in that position.

 

I would argue that this was a known even two years ago.

 

It is unfortunate that we may let Reinhart go (who I believe is NHL quality), yet we are signing players of far less value at other positions.

 

I think we had enough knowledge a year ago, or maybe even two, to make some trades at left wing at a time when there would have been far better return.  In addition, with so many LWs in our system, not all of them have been given the same opportunity to develop.  A further example of bad asset management.

 

We didn't even necessarily need to trade the kids.  We could have also traded the likes of Hudler, and achieved similar results.

 

But....had we gone down that "dark path", we probably would have ended up with McDavid or Eichel, like we were originally projected to.

 

And we would be in a very different position right now.

 

"Asset Life Cycle Management" :)

Even if we had traded Hudler we likely may have missed the playoffs, but unlikely to be bottom two to guarantee at least Eichel in the draft. Both Edmonton and Buffalo, later joined by Phoenix were "all-in" tank mode and would have been hard to beat to the gutter.

As for asset management you are correct in a look back kind of way. Reinhardt is left dangling at this point, but he had a crappy year last year and if he had been consistent from the previous year(~pt/game) I'm sure he would have gotten a call-up and we'd be talking about someone else now. Jooris passed him by in a big surprise last year, but he didn't help himself, either. BVB and Hanowski the same. It's an open competition and unless you are a sublime talent (ie Gaudreau/Bennett) you've got to keep progressing to make the team. Sure they may not have been given an NHL stint but had an opportunity and still do.

No one can accurately project the future and we don't know who is going to make the jump next Fall. It's likely 2-3 currently-slotted AHL prospects will be on the team full-time by next Christmas either due to injuries, trade or exceptional performance. Who will they be?

As a "vet" on the baby Flames or Stockton Heat, he has value (C or LW).  He is redundant at center (in the NHL) due to having Granlund, Nacklund, Stajan, Jooris, Shore and Arnold with similar game types; defensive.  You qualify him, then decide whether he is due a trade, sitting in Stockton, or qualify and don't sign.  Trading Baertschi was a bad PR move, because it looks like we don't know how to develop a "star".  Letting a guy walk that is one year removed from a career AHL season and you look foolish.  A trade makes sense.  We traded Knight for a similar player with a better pro career.  We could possibly turn it into a pick or another Shore-like trade.

Trading Baertchi was not a bad PR move, he was going to refuse to re-sign. And looking like we can't develop a "star"? What in heck does developing true stars like Monahan, Gaudreau, TJ Brodie, Giordano and Hudler look like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we had traded Hudler we likely may have missed the playoffs, but unlikely to be bottom two to guarantee at least Eichel in the draft. Both Edmonton and Buffalo, later joined by Phoenix were "all-in" tank mode and would have been hard to beat to the gutter.

As for asset management you are correct in a look back kind of way. Reinhardt is left dangling at this point, but he had a crappy year last year and if he had been consistent from the previous year(~pt/game) I'm sure he would have gotten a call-up and we'd be talking about someone else now. Jooris passed him by in a big surprise last year, but he didn't help himself, either. BVB and Hanowski the same. It's an open competition and unless you are a sublime talent (ie Gaudreau/Bennett) you've got to keep progressing to make the team. Sure they may not have been given an NHL stint but had an opportunity and still do.

No one can accurately project the future and we don't know who is going to make the jump next Fall. It's likely 2-3 currently-slotted AHL prospects will be on the team full-time by next Christmas either due to injuries, trade or exceptional performance. Who will they be?

Trading Baertchi was not a bad PR move, he was going to refuse to re-sign. And looking like we can't develop a "star"? What in heck does developing true stars like Monahan, Gaudreau, TJ Brodie, Giordano and Hudler look like?

 

TJ was the only one that was in the Flames "development system".  The others came into the Flames right out of amateur, and Gio came back from Europe.

 

Baertschi did not say he wouldn't re-sign; he asked to be traded.  Bad PR is letting people know about a guy asking for a trade.  And I used the term star in quotes, as in he hasn't developed into one even with the 2.0 p/gp he had in his last year in junior.  I'm not saying he ever will become one, just saying that there have been a number of players that have struggled in the Flames development system - Baertschi, Wotherspoon, Knight, Breen, etc.  You rarely hear about guys in the Detroit system asking to be traded, or struggling to take the next step.  

 

I'm not coming down on the Flames, just throwing it out there that there may be some issues with the farm.  Reinhart went from a high-scoring forward to a lesser one in space of one year.  It may be all him, or it may be a farm problem.  I'm not sold on Huska. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes going back to junior/college is a very good thing, it allows guys to develop and gain offensive confidence, which they might not get playing in the AHL. Jankowski and Smith might end up being bottom 6 guys in Stockton, but if they go back to Providence/Oshawa they are top line guys who will play in every situation.

 

I heard an interesting thing on the radio the other day, someone was speculating that the reason why the 2003 draft has turned out so well is because there was a lockout the following season, so a lot of guys that might have made teams that year were forced to play another season in junior, and get to play in the WJC, this ultimately helped their development. On the surface it makes a lot of sense.

 

As far as Reinhart, I think you have to keep him, this guy lead the team in scoring before the move to Adirondack. I am not sure I am ready to cut bait on a prospect after one bad season. He won't ever be a top 6 guy, but he does have NHL upside still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes going back to junior/college is a very good thing, it allows guys to develop and gain offensive confidence, which they might not get playing in the AHL. Jankowski and Smith might end up being bottom 6 guys in Stockton, but if they go back to Providence/Oshawa they are top line guys who will play in every situation.

 

I heard an interesting thing on the radio the other day, someone was speculating that the reason why the 2003 draft has turned out so well is because there was a lockout the following season, so a lot of guys that might have made teams that year were forced to play another season in junior, and get to play in the WJC, this ultimately helped their development. On the surface it makes a lot of sense.

 

As far as Reinhart, I think you have to keep him, this guy lead the team in scoring before the move to Adirondack. I am not sure I am ready to cut bait on a prospect after one bad season. He won't ever be a top 6 guy, but he does have NHL upside still.

 

Smith going back may not be an option if he plays like a beast in TC.  Consider that BT may cut bait with Hanowski (little progression  over last few years, older player) or give more of a nod to Smith for development purposes. 

 

Janko can use a free year of development in college; no harm.  He is just really starting to add weight and muscle.  He should get the opportunity to bulk up this year, after getting some direction post development camp (not main camp).

 

Reinhart played well with Granlund in his previous season, so I don't know what happened this past season.  The scoring seemed to mostly come from other lines, so that tells me he was deployed with less effective or offensive players.  That said he was still 3rd in team scoring, just took more games to do so, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TJ was the only one that was in the Flames "development system".  The others came into the Flames right out of amateur, and Gio came back from Europe.

 

Baertschi did not say he wouldn't re-sign; he asked to be traded.  Bad PR is letting people know about a guy asking for a trade.  And I used the term star in quotes, as in he hasn't developed into one even with the 2.0 p/gp he had in his last year in junior.  I'm not saying he ever will become one, just saying that there have been a number of players that have struggled in the Flames development system - Baertschi, Wotherspoon, Knight, Breen, etc.  You rarely hear about guys in the Detroit system asking to be traded, or struggling to take the next step.  

 

I'm not coming down on the Flames, just throwing it out there that there may be some issues with the farm.  Reinhart went from a high-scoring forward to a lesser one in space of one year.  It may be all him, or it may be a farm problem.  I'm not sold on Huska. 

They were all in the Flames development system, just not all in the AHL.  Monahan, for instance has definitely been developed even though it was all at the NHL level.

 

What we heard on Baertchi after the fact(not including Dad comments) was that he definitely wasn't interested in re-signing and asked to be traded.  Struggles in the Flames' system?  Breach-attitudes, Wotherspoon-on track, Knight-passed by and Breen-not good enough.  Personally I think Reinhart got passed by as well and it impacted his season but that's just conjecture on my part.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, we are still talking about an NHL-quality prospect that had a bad year and needs to bounce back.

 

I think he does have value, and I don't think we would give up on him because of him.

 

We would give up on him because of our depth at LW.

 

For that reason, I think we should be able to trade for someone who has a similar story, but on RW, RD, or G.

 

AHL player for AHL player, straight up.

 

Or.....maybe we end up doing that big Hudler deal and move up in the draft.

 

Then this whole thread is a moot point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were all in the Flames development system, just not all in the AHL.  Monahan, for instance has definitely been developed even though it was all at the NHL level.

 

What we heard on Baertchi after the fact(not including Dad comments) was that he definitely wasn't interested in re-signing and asked to be traded.  Struggles in the Flames' system?  Breach-attitudes, Wotherspoon-on track, Knight-passed by and Breen-not good enough.  Personally I think Reinhart got passed by as well and it impacted his season but that's just conjecture on my part.  

 

Say what?  If you want to describe development as playing in the NHL for ~80 games, then the Oilers have the best system for new players.  I suggested that there may be some issues with the farm.  Addy was horrendous to begin/end in their 1st and only season in the AHL.  There were some valid reasons for that, but it may go deeper, like coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say what?  If you want to describe development as playing in the NHL for ~80 games, then the Oilers have the best system for new players.  I suggested that there may be some issues with the farm.  Addy was horrendous to begin/end in their 1st and only season in the AHL.  There were some valid reasons for that, but it may go deeper, like coaching.

I'm using development to describe all situations where the player is developed-minutes managed, Qual of Opposition and etc-and the player actually progresses to new levels of skill and effectiveness.  That happened to Monahan in the NHL.  The Oilers generally don't qualify because their NHL experience pretty much reduced their effectiveness over time.  

 

NHL aside I would agree most development happens in Junior/AHL/NCAA and to a much lessor degree the NHL where it is rare indeed.  As for Addy its hard to just look at wins/losses without seeing the circumstances. The start was a mix of massive team and location and coach changes and yes, they were horrendous for the first 8-10 games or so.  Once things settled and the coaches got to work with them they went on a tear and were one of the best teams in the AHL.  Shortly thereafter and till the end of the season on and off was a mix of significant injuries (e.g. Ortio & back-up...) and a lot of players getting called up to the Flames.  

 

Every time the top players were lost someone else stepped into the breach and came to the fore (e.g. Wolf, Agostino, Reinhart...) which to me is good coaching and players stepping up given more opportunity.  Not sure why the negative feelings towards the coaching but I didn't see any evidence of it myself.  I guess we'll see more next year, though again mega changes in store both location and roster-wise....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to back up Flyerfan52 on this one, but from a perspective that only ThePeople may appreciate:

 

Both are true.  It's bad asset management, and it's also the right call.

 

It's the right call, made far too late.

 

A year ago, simple math would have indicated that we clearly had a problem with all our prospect talent stacked on LW.

 

Even at that time, both Baertschi and Reinhart had significantly more value than they do now.  Yet, it was a fair assessment even then that they were never going to make it through our talent wall in that position.

 

I would argue that this was a known even two years ago.

 

It is unfortunate that we may let Reinhart go (who I believe is NHL quality), yet we are signing players of far less value at other positions.

 

I think we had enough knowledge a year ago, or maybe even two, to make some trades at left wing at a time when there would have been far better return.  In addition, with so many LWs in our system, not all of them have been given the same opportunity to develop.  A further example of bad asset management.

 

We didn't even necessarily need to trade the kids.  We could have also traded the likes of Hudler, and achieved similar results.

 

But....had we gone down that "dark path", we probably would have ended up with McDavid or Eichel, like we were originally projected to.

 

And we would be in a very different position right now.

 

"Asset Life Cycle Management" :)

 

I can certainly appreciate that.

 

Drafting 15 is a tough spot.  McDavid/Eichel is a big difference from Merkley/Konecny.   For that matter, Strome/Marner is a big difference from Merkley/Konency.  Hanifin/Provorov is a big difference from Zboril/Chabot.

 

But anyways, I would sign Janko as soon as possible and let Reinhart go.  Then play Janko in the top 6 in Stockton this coming season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using development to describe all situations where the player is developed-minutes managed, Qual of Opposition and etc-and the player actually progresses to new levels of skill and effectiveness.  That happened to Monahan in the NHL.  The Oilers generally don't qualify because their NHL experience pretty much reduced their effectiveness over time.  

 

NHL aside I would agree most development happens in Junior/AHL/NCAA and to a much lessor degree the NHL where it is rare indeed.  As for Addy its hard to just look at wins/losses without seeing the circumstances. The start was a mix of massive team and location and coach changes and yes, they were horrendous for the first 8-10 games or so.  Once things settled and the coaches got to work with them they went on a tear and were one of the best teams in the AHL.  Shortly thereafter and till the end of the season on and off was a mix of significant injuries (e.g. Ortio & back-up...) and a lot of players getting called up to the Flames.  

 

Every time the top players were lost someone else stepped into the breach and came to the fore (e.g. Wolf, Agostino, Reinhart...) which to me is good coaching and players stepping up given more opportunity.  Not sure why the negative feelings towards the coaching but I didn't see any evidence of it myself.  I guess we'll see more next year, though again mega changes in store both location and roster-wise....

 

The negatives on the coaching was based on some articles I read.  The players are to be congratulated for what they were able to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand both sides. We draft someone who has a certain attainable ceiling, but they also have to earn it. If they're sitting and watching games in the NHL , I feel like that's time wasted. A game to watch is one thing, but the amount someone like Wotherspoon sat was just too much.

He should have played.

Now, if a player does the work but still isn't playing in a role and minutes that would be attached to a role, is that poor asset management, poor development?

Where is that line?

I feel like Baertschi wasn't necessarily given that opportunity all the time.

Has Reinhart just fallen out of favour with the new coaching staff? Or did he not do the work last summer? Did his skills diminish, or remain the same but ended up getting passed on the depth chart?

I believe players should be played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reinhart is still only 23.  To be sure he regressed this year.  That said, he was 3rd in scoring on the team.  Does he make a glut of AHL players?  Players like Cundari, Vause, Acolatse, Yonkman, Potter, Setoguchi, T.Gillies, BVB are glut players.

 

I agree that trading him to a team that will find room for him makes sense, if he doesn't fit the Flames system.  Losing him for nothing makes no sense.  We spent time and money developing him, and offers vet experience on the baby Flames (Heat).  The guys coming in are not centers, so he isn't blocking an AHL spot.

I agree that there are a number of players I'd rather see move on from Stockton before Max.

Who's spot at center is he taking in Stockton? Reinhart, Granlund, Arnold, Van Brabant, Elson, Vause and Tousignant are the listed centers. I put Max 3rd on that list. With Janko going back for his senior year I don't see any center prospects that we need to make room for. Arnold and Granlund are likely to get lots of injury call-up time so I see Max being a go to guy for the Heat this year.

What would Detroit do? Qualify as a minimum, sign to a reasonable contract, and let Max marinate for another year. I also believe he would have some value in a trade, either for a late round pick, or as a complimentary piece in a large deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No reason not to qualify him. See if he bounces back, if not cut bait. Its not like we are going to get or lose anything substantial and there are more spots and lesser value players to drop before you get to a versatile bottom 6 potential player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Andrew Magiapane drafted, it's one more player yet that Reinhart has to compete with.

 

Chances are Magiapane will go straight to Stockton next season, and compete with Reinhart for similar positions.

 

Me wonders if he'll end up with his brother in Edmonton...since Reinharts in Edmonton (puke) is now a thing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Andrew Magiapane drafted, it's one more player yet that Reinhart has to compete with.

 

Chances are Magiapane will go straight to Stockton next season, and compete with Reinhart for similar positions.

 

Me wonders if he'll end up with his brother in Edmonton...since Reinharts in Edmonton (puke) is now a thing...

 

Too young.  April 1996 birthday, so he can't play till the end of his OHL season in 2016.  I would have traded him for Maricin, had he been re-upped.  Probably wouldn't have happened, since they traded for some "steroid" guy and a Toronto 4th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard somewhere about 2 years ago that reinhart barely trains in the summer. Although, maybe it's something he has learned he has to do.

But it was a Reinhart trait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...