Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The problem I have with Bennett on the 3rd line is that's an awefully low ceiling for a top draft pick.  Third line should be for up-and-comers like Janko, Mangiapane, etc.  Bennett should be at least on the second line.  To do that, you need to move Tkachuk to the top line RW and move Frolik elsewhere, unless you trade Ferland.

 

I would love to keep Bennett, but maybe you have to consider a trade of Bennett for Stone.  Then you don't have that surplus of LW's on the team and you could bring up Mangiapane to play with Janko and Ferland.

 

You can probably say that Bennett for Stone is underpay by a longshot, but I think the low cost contract and type of team Ottawa is would bring out the best in Bennett.  Ottawa gets cost certainty for this and next year.  

 

I would look at trading Brodie in a separate deal, unless you do Brodie and Bennett and Brouwer for Stone and Ryan ($1m retained). :P

 

 

 

Those are very good points. As I said above, I am reluctant to trade our future away. On the other hand, when a trade can benefit two players and two teams, that might be when they should take place. I still hold out hope that he will soon be ready for the second line. One could make the argument that Bennett should soon be on the first line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The problem I have with Bennett on the 3rd line is that's an awefully low ceiling for a top draft pick.  Third line should be for up-and-comers like Janko, Mangiapane, etc.  Bennett should be at least on the second line.  To do that, you need to move Tkachuk to the top line RW and move Frolik elsewhere, unless you trade Ferland.

 

I would love to keep Bennett, but maybe you have to consider a trade of Bennett for Stone.  Then you don't have that surplus of LW's on the team and you could bring up Mangiapane to play with Janko and Ferland.

 

You can probably say that Bennett for Stone is underpay by a longshot, but I think the low cost contract and type of team Ottawa is would bring out the best in Bennett.  Ottawa gets cost certainty for this and next year.  

 

I would look at trading Brodie in a separate deal, unless you do Brodie and Bennett and Brouwer for Stone and Ryan ($1m retained). :P

 

 

 

 

This is where I don’t get logic... I see Bennett as an up and coming player. This is his 3rd full year. Lack of patience will bite us in the Hash Rate. 

 

Courtourier played years beyond up and coming on the 3rd line as a C and now is playing to “potential.”

 

i get it, they drafted about 10 spots different. But everyone is different. I bet Yakupov could’ve done years in the AHL to develop a bit more, it’s the same with Bennett. Sure he is a high pick, but I think we should give him time to actually develop and stop trying to peg him in because of where he was drafted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

The problem I have with Bennett on the 3rd line is that's an awefully low ceiling for a top draft pick.  Third line should be for up-and-comers like Janko, Mangiapane, etc.  Bennett should be at least on the second line.  To do that, you need to move Tkachuk to the top line RW and move Frolik elsewhere, unless you trade Ferland.

 

I would love to keep Bennett, but maybe you have to consider a trade of Bennett for Stone.  Then you don't have that surplus of LW's on the team and you could bring up Mangiapane to play with Janko and Ferland.

 

You can probably say that Bennett for Stone is underpay by a longshot, but I think the low cost contract and type of team Ottawa is would bring out the best in Bennett.  Ottawa gets cost certainty for this and next year.  

 

I would look at trading Brodie in a separate deal, unless you do Brodie and Bennett and Brouwer for Stone and Ryan ($1m retained). :P

 

 

 

I don't think the line of Bennett and Jankowski is destined as a 3rd line past this season even if Backlund stays. I would put Tkachuk with these two on RW if we got Stone. So you think Mangiapane will be better than Bennett in the long run ? You need to get used to the idea of Brouwer being around for a while.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Those are very good points. As I said above, I am reluctant to trade our future away. On the other hand, when a trade can benefit two players and two teams, that might be when they should take place. I still hold out hope that he will soon be ready for the second line. One could make the argument that Bennett should soon be on the first line.

 

he is only on the 3rd line due to circumstance. 

At times, when the team isn’t going, he is. Bennett has been snake bitten a lot this year and last and confidence played a big roll in the fallout.

 

he had a good rookie year. Not blow your pants off and earned another year with Backlund to see how he would fair. Management wanted him as a C and they forced the issue last year without giving him a chance to succeed. 

 

If they wanted offence, they should’ve at least played him on the PP to gain it. Instead they used Brouwer and still do. 

 

For me, Bennett is a 2nd LW that has to play 3rd line. 

Is he better or worse than Tkachuk? Some (a lot) will say no. I say we won’t know until Bennet gets another chance to play with actual skilled players, which is starting to happen. 

 

We are rushing our judgement on the kid...

 

 

Edit in:

other than his first year, he has had zero consistency with line mates and position. 

We weren’t wanting to accept growing pains as a C, which we were able to do for both Gaudreau and Monahan. Monahan and Bennett having similar numbers in their rookie years, while Monahan has had full consistent line mates since he entered the league.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I don't think the line of Bennett and Jankowski is destined as a 3rd line past this season even if Backlund stays. I would put Tkachuk with these two on RW if we got Stone. So you think Mangiapane will be better than Bennett in the long run ? You need to get used to the idea of Brouwer being around for a while.

 

Don't really have comparables at the AHL level between Mangiapane and Bennett.  In junior, Mangiapane was far superior.  In the AHL, Mangiapane is scoring at over 1.0 p/gp, while last year was .6 p/gp as a rookie.

 

BTW, I don't believe I said anywhere that Mangiapane will be a better player in the long run.  You trade Bennett for Stone, it's to get a top line RW.  You give up some LW depth for it.  Mangiapane may or may not be able to replace Bennett's future production, but he hasn't lit it up yet either on LW.

 

Brouwer is here until the cost to buy him out is low enough(summer), a trade opens up, or they decide that having $4.5m playing on the 4th line isn't any better than a 4th line player called up to replace him - exact same cap hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to get frustrated at the inconsistency of people’s perception of how a draft pick should progress.  Bennett had a good, but not outstanding  first year.  Lots of people stated he needed to be played at centre to progress.  That proved to be a rash thought, as he struggled from the very start.  Back on LW with good support and we see confidence and the start of progress and growth.  Allow him to develop at his pace, people!  Not all players develop at the same rate.  I seem to recall that too often, people considered Backlund to be a waste of a draft and too slow in progressing; perhaps a draft failure.  Good thing management didn’t listen!  Backlund grew at the pace he needed to, and is now a prized shut down centre, leading one of the best 2 way lines in the league. Have patience, people.  He is still barely 20, and has lots of growth left.  He can play 3rd line with good players like Janko and Jagr, and gain from the time.  What I see is the building of 3 really good lines right now, and the need to improve the fourth.  Once that is complete, this team will be incredibly dangerous and successful.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how many think Stone in OTT is being traded. however, Brodie for Stone straight across wont work. Look at the Duchenne deal for Colorado, IMHO Stone is more valuable than Duchenne so Brodie, Prospects and a high pick Dorion may pick up the phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tmac70 said:

Not sure how many think Stone in OTT is being traded. however, Brodie for Stone straight across wont work. Look at the Duchenne deal for Colorado, IMHO Stone is more valuable than Duchenne so Brodie, Prospects and a high pick Dorion may pick up the phone.

At this point, it sure looks like Ottawa got shanked on that deal. I am certain Duchene will improve, but he is struggling right now while Turris is tearing it up. Maybe if the owner let the GM like, manage, life would be better for the Sens. Soon, they will have to seriously consider a fire sale IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Not sure how many think Stone in OTT is being traded. however, Brodie for Stone straight across wont work. Look at the Duchenne deal for Colorado, IMHO Stone is more valuable than Duchenne so Brodie, Prospects and a high pick Dorion may pick up the phone.

 

I don't pretend to understand the value of that trade one bit.  Ottawa paid way more than market value for a player like Duchene.  By that logic, Bennett should be worth the same.  RJ for Jones or Hall for Larsson are more realistic of what to expect for a young D-man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point producing defensmen are a premium property out there.  Don't doubt that Brodie would fetch a strong return.  How about Brodie + Ferland for Stone + Ceci?  Ottawa gets the better D and saves on the Stone contract extension, we upgrade at forward and get back a young defensmen who we could flip somewhere else (too many right shots ironically).

 

Alternatively we could stand pat on Brodie.  He eats so many minutes these days, and is actually a plus four over the last 5 games or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ABC923 said:

Point producing defensmen are a premium property out there.  Don't doubt that Brodie would fetch a strong return.  How about Brodie + Ferland for Stone + Ceci?  Ottawa gets the better D and saves on the Stone contract extension, we upgrade at forward and get back a young defensmen who we could flip somewhere else (too many right shots ironically).

 

Alternatively we could stand pat on Brodie.  He eats so many minutes these days, and is actually a plus four over the last 5 games or so.

Brodie IMHO is dispensable, I still firmly believe bring up Anderson and moving Stone up to 2nd pairing does not hurt us. There are guys I would trade but Ferland is not one of them. Can hit, score, go to the dirty areas, coach able, fights, big and creates space. He checks a lot of boxes for us than Brodie. WE are small and soft enough, taking away one of our assets in those departments puts us further behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Don't really have comparables at the AHL level between Mangiapane and Bennett.  In junior, Mangiapane was far superior.  In the AHL, Mangiapane is scoring at over 1.0 p/gp, while last year was .6 p/gp as a rookie.

 

BTW, I don't believe I said anywhere that Mangiapane will be a better player in the long run.  You trade Bennett for Stone, it's to get a top line RW.  You give up some LW depth for it.  Mangiapane may or may not be able to replace Bennett's future production, but he hasn't lit it up yet either on LW.

 

Brouwer is here until the cost to buy him out is low enough(summer), a trade opens up, or they decide that having $4.5m playing on the 4th line isn't any better than a 4th line player called up to replace him - exact same cap hit.

From a pure trade stand point I don't think it would matter Bennett or Mangiapane, OTT will ask for something other than just Brodie. I prefer Bennett because he has a rough edge to him, some additional size and I think we need more of that. The two of them can score and I don't need to compare them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Brodie IMHO is dispensable, I still firmly believe bring up Anderson and moving Stone up to 2nd pairing does not hurt us. There are guys I would trade but Ferland is not one of them. Can hit, score, go to the dirty areas, coach able, fights, big and creates space. He checks a lot of boxes for us than Brodie. WE are small and soft enough, taking away one of our assets in those departments puts us further behind.

I agree tmac, we shouldn't be giving up any size and physicality from this team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTH is this talk that Bennett - Jankowski is the 3rd line?  If they play great, why number the lines?  They will just play more minutes.  They will play the most minutes as our forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The_People1 said:

WTH is this talk that Bennett - Jankowski is the 3rd line?  If they play great, why number the lines?  They will just play more minutes.  They will play the most minutes as our forwards.

 

And to add to this, I would love to add Stone for Brodie and put Stone on this line.

 

Bennett - Jankowski - Stone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

WTH is this talk that Bennett - Jankowski is the 3rd line?  If they play great, why number the lines?  They will just play more minutes.  They will play the most minutes as our forwards.

 

Call it whatever.  3rd most minutes.  Secondary scoring line.  Tertiary scoring?  How do you see them playing the most minutes?  Are you thinking they produce the other half of all Flames scoring at some point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Call it whatever.  3rd most minutes.  Secondary scoring line.  Tertiary scoring?  How do you see them playing the most minutes?  Are you thinking they produce the other half of all Flames scoring at some point?

 

I'm just saying.  As long as they keep scoring, then that pair is defacto "2nd line".  If they score more than JG-SM, then they are "1st line".  

 

The idea that Bennett - Jankowski is a 3rd line isn't true.  They will determine what line they are called based on their performance from here on in.  No need to move Bennett into the "top 6" or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to add more scoring, tonight's loss further illustrates that point. 4 goals scored in our last 3 losses. We had a good November goal scoring wise, but October and so far in December that hasn't been the case. We need another top 6 winger. For anyone other than Kane, my offer would start with Brodie. Although that would never happen as BT is apparently very happy with the blueline he has assembled...

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

We need to add more scoring, tonight's loss further illustrates that point. 4 goals scored in our last 3 losses. We had a good November goal scoring wise, but October and so far in December that hasn't been the case. We need another top 6 winger. For anyone other than Kane, my offer would start with Brodie. Although that would never happen as BT is apparently very happy with the blueline he has assembled...

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think scoring is the problem.  We have and can score, but not the way the team is being played.  Coach wanted the team to play to overtime.  Possess the puck, don't give it up to take a shot.  Pass the puck around.  The PK is a perfect example of how to keep the puck without scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

We need to add more scoring, tonight's loss further illustrates that point. 4 goals scored in our last 3 losses. We had a good November goal scoring wise, but October and so far in December that hasn't been the case. We need another top 6 winger. For anyone other than Kane, my offer would start with Brodie. Although that would never happen as BT is apparently very happy with the blueline he has assembled...

 

We really need to look into Mark Stone.  I think he checks off the most boxes for us.  Erik Karlsson might be available too as Karlsson has stated he will go get market value via UFA already. But Karlsson will cost us Johnny or Monahan which is a non-starter.  

 

Duchene is not working out for the Sens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

We need to add more scoring, tonight's loss further illustrates that point. 4 goals scored in our last 3 losses. We had a good November goal scoring wise, but October and so far in December that hasn't been the case. We need another top 6 winger. For anyone other than Kane, my offer would start with Brodie. Although that would never happen as BT is apparently very happy with the blueline he has assembled...

 

 

 

 

We need more scoring from what we have here now and it is coming. Last night we had two stinkers slow roll under Smith but of late our D has picked it up and playing well.

Backlund's line has been good but not great, personally I think we need to get Tkachuk off that line now. Jankowski's line is still finding out what they are capable of and need a more skilled RW than Hathaway. Right now I would swap Ferland and Tkachuk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thehockeynews.com/rumors/article/rumor-roundup-sliding-senators-ask-for-no-trade-lists-panthers-seek-goaltender

 

Sens preparing for trades.  Let's hope we are not on Mark Stones NT list.  Since he's a Winnipeg boy and the fact that his brother likes it in Calgary, I would venture to guess he would like to be here too if he had a choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

http://www.thehockeynews.com/rumors/article/rumor-roundup-sliding-senators-ask-for-no-trade-lists-panthers-seek-goaltender

 

Sens preparing for trades.  Let's hope we are not on Mark Stones NT list.  Since he's a Winnipeg boy and the fact that his brother likes it in Calgary, I would venture to guess he would like to be here too if he had a choice.

 

Stone doesn't have a NTC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ottawa could be a potentially interesting trade partner. Friedman reported we were in on Turris so at least we know there's been dialogue between the teams.

 

Possible targets;

Ryan- the comments from Burke may have been taken out of context a bit. He makes 7.25 and hasn't been productive under Boucher. In fact he was a 50+ point player under Cameron. If OTT eats 2 mill his AAV drops to 5.25 which is more manageable.

 

Brassard- the fact that we were in on Turris makes me think BT isn't sure how he feels about Backlund's future, does he want to pay Backlund 5.5-6 on a 6-8 year term?Maybe you flip Backlund for Brassard. One year left at 5mill after this one, by that point hopefully Jankowski is a capable 2nd line NHL centre. IMO that's too risky

 

Hoffman- pure goal scorer, very good release. He's been on OTT's 3rd line recently as well. If he was right handed it would be a no brainer for me.

 

Stone- we all want Stone but the price would be very high, not sure OTT wants to move him in-season anyway. A package likely would include an NHL player, F prospect, D prospect and G prospect. If that price sounds high here's how he compares to a prototypical to line RW courtesy of ownthepuck  

https://public.tableau.com/shared/MD27GGDHY?:display_count=yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...