Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

But you would trade him for Rasmus Dahlin.  Right?

 

Yes. But we're talking a rare talent here. Even then I still had to think about it. 

The reason it's frustrating is the pick you would take you would hope for the impact that hamilton already gives you. Even Dhahlin, he could easiky become a player the level of what hamilton already is and it wouldn't be considered a bad pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

I also think we could get any of those 3 guys for $3.5m or under and most likely on short term deals. So I think if we can sign one of them and trade Brodie it makes a lot sense, especially if we can get someone like a Tyler Johnson for Brodie.

I'm a hard no.

Not a johnson fan at all. He's the classic case against small guys. Too small and soft.

I'm not saying everyone his size fits that mould, but he does.

Sure he has a motor, it gets him injured a lot in my mind.

Should get 2 players for him, him and his IR stand in.

I'll keep Brodie, yeah? He can play a full season.

Katchouk? That gets me talking, at least.

I'm giving you a 20+minute dman for a guy you know you can replace, right?

Not even on a Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly the more I think about it the less I want to trade Brodie. Let him work with Peters and the new staff first and let's see what happens. I'm not one that thinks Gulutzan had a negative effect on Brodie, but I also think a change could wake Brodie up too. 

 

Im also fine with going back to Brodie-Hamonic as well. Some will cringe but they were actually pretty decent in the 2nd half. Fresh start and Hamonic not needing to settle in and I can see them being a solid pairing all year. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cross16 said:

Honestly the more I think about it the less I want to trade Brodie. Let him work with Peters and the new staff first and let's see what happens. I'm not one that thinks Gulutzan had a negative effect on Brodie, but I also think a change could wake Brodie up too. 

 

Im also fine with going back to Brodie-Hamonic as well. Some will cringe but they were actually pretty decent in the 2nd half. Fresh start and Hamonic not needing to settle in and I can see them being a solid pairing all year. 

 

Makes the most sense. I think we take Brodie for granted, he's had a lot of dance partners in Engelland, Gio and Hamonic....he hasn't really had time to fully gel with a partner yet. I'm all for a reset with Brodie under Peters...he's a top skater and he has potential to be better both defensively and offensively. He's still on a good contract, paired with Hamonic at his cap it's one of the best value top D man pairings in the league. However...If Treliving flips Brodie for Erik Karlsons rights I'm not mad!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cross16 said:

Honestly the more I think about it the less I want to trade Brodie. Let him work with Peters and the new staff first and let's see what happens. I'm not one that thinks Gulutzan had a negative effect on Brodie, but I also think a change could wake Brodie up too. 

 

Im also fine with going back to Brodie-Hamonic as well. Some will cringe but they were actually pretty decent in the 2nd half. Fresh start and Hamonic not needing to settle in and I can see them being a solid pairing all year. 

 

I don't see keeping Brodie and Hamonic together as the best use of our defensemen's experience. Brodie is a veteran that should be able to support someone like Andersson that has some of the same qualities. My hope would be that Brodie mentors more so than try to do everything himself. Hamonic should be able to do the same with someone like Kulak or later Valimaki. Why have rookies basically for your 3rd pairing ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cross16 said:

Honestly the more I think about it the less I want to trade Brodie. Let him work with Peters and the new staff first and let's see what happens. I'm not one that thinks Gulutzan had a negative effect on Brodie, but I also think a change could wake Brodie up too. 

 

Im also fine with going back to Brodie-Hamonic as well. Some will cringe but they were actually pretty decent in the 2nd half. Fresh start and Hamonic not needing to settle in and I can see them being a solid pairing all year. 

 

 

It's hard to contemplate trading a guy that used to be in discussion for the Norris (at least mentioned).  Sometimes you have to bite the bullet if you want to improve the team operall.  Trading a top 2 D-man for a chance of a NHL player (Tkachuk or Zadina) is a big risk.  Doubt that's on the table, but we are talking like that here.  Trading him for a top 6 player like Stone should be considered a win.  Less than that, and it really depends on the player.

 

If we are keeping Brodie, then I would prefer to be able to roll three pairs of D-men.  The way they play a certain game determines their total minutes.  Kulak with Hamonic and Brodie with Andersson.  Gio with Hammy.  No real 3rd pairing.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Wow. So nobody likes my question about trading Hamilton for the 3rd overall pick lol. Not saying I would trade Hamilton, but I think if we want a top 6 RW, he would most likely have to be the one to go, especially if we are talking about an elite RW. I think Hamilton is an elite offensive defenseman, but the rest of his game is lacking IMO. Hopefully he keeps rounding it out.

 

Trading Brodie probably doesn't get us a top line player, probably gets a 2nd line player. I know lots of people like to point out that Larsson got the Devils Hall, but it sure sounds like there was some extenuating circumstances that led to Edmonton wanting Hall out of town as quick as possible and teams knew about it. So I don't think that is a fair comparison. I also don't think Brodie's issues were coaching, or playing on the left side, I think that's just who Brodie is, a high risk player.

 

We don't have a ton of assets to move to improve the forward group and the few assets we do have are on the back end. If this team stands pat, I am not sure we will see much of a change from this season. Coaching is important but I think people over rate the impact the coach has on a team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Ok. Wow. So nobody likes my question about trading Hamilton for the 3rd overall pick lol. Not saying I would trade Hamilton, but I think if we want a top 6 RW, he would most likely have to be the one to go, especially if we are talking about an elite RW. I think Hamilton is an elite offensive defenseman, but the rest of his game is lacking IMO. Hopefully he keeps rounding it out.

 

Trading Brodie probably doesn't get us a top line player, probably gets a 2nd line player. I know lots of people like to point out that Larsson got the Devils Hall, but it sure sounds like there was some extenuating circumstances that led to Edmonton wanting Hall out of town as quick as possible and teams knew about it. So I don't think that is a fair comparison. I also don't think Brodie's issues were coaching, or playing on the left side, I think that's just who Brodie is, a high risk player.

 

We don't have a ton of assets to move to improve the forward group and the few assets we do have are on the back end. If this team stands pat, I am not sure we will see much of a change from this season. Coaching is important but I think people over rate the impact the coach has on a team.

First of I think most everyone has said they would trade Brodie for the right deal. I agree with you that deal may be for no higher than a 2nd line type RW using my favorite Sam Reinhart for us. (example) The real problem IMO comes from the trading partner because no one wants to give up scoring including ourselves. This brings me to your idea of trading Hamilton on the notion he will deliver that elite RW scoring machine. This has you giving up an elite defenseman that provides scoring for what net gain becomes the question. Also we should get one thing straight Hall was traded to clear out his salary because nobody wanted Eberle at the time, some one had to go.

Oddly I think entering 2018/19 Peters will have the same challenges that GG had and that is who is best to play with who for maximum results. Outside of a true elite talent to play RW with Gaudreau and Monahan I believe the talent is here but needs to be brought out by Peters and his staff. The player/person I think we lack is that character with a winning background and contagious attitude towards winning. I think we have one in the wings with Tkachuk but I'm not sure he should carry that pressure right now but he likely could. We could try him on RW with Gaudreau and Monahan and look another RW that fits 2nd or 3rd line effectively for us. I would love a trade with WAS for Tom Wilson because he is what I think this team needs in order to gain some attitude and believe in themselves.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk

Bennett, Backlund, Frolik

Ferland, Jankowski, Wilson

Klimchuk, Shore, Lazar

DEFENSE

Giordano, Hamilton

Brodie, Andersson

Kulak, Hamonic

GOALIES

Smith, Rittich

I have said this before and you don't think it possible is if trading Brodie do it with MON for Gallagher RW instead of a Wilson deal. Then sign a 1 year deal  defenseman LS to replace Brodie and wait for Valimaki. I realize this is close to standing pat but with a few of the right changes this team could be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Ok. Wow. So nobody likes my question about trading Hamilton for the 3rd overall pick lol. Not saying I would trade Hamilton, but I think if we want a top 6 RW, he would most likely have to be the one to go, especially if we are talking about an elite RW. I think Hamilton is an elite offensive defenseman, but the rest of his game is lacking IMO. Hopefully he keeps rounding it out.

 

Trading Brodie probably doesn't get us a top line player, probably gets a 2nd line player. I know lots of people like to point out that Larsson got the Devils Hall, but it sure sounds like there was some extenuating circumstances that led to Edmonton wanting Hall out of town as quick as possible and teams knew about it. So I don't think that is a fair comparison. I also don't think Brodie's issues were coaching, or playing on the left side, I think that's just who Brodie is, a high risk player.

 

We don't have a ton of assets to move to improve the forward group and the few assets we do have are on the back end. If this team stands pat, I am not sure we will see much of a change from this season. Coaching is important but I think people over rate the impact the coach has on a team.

 

I feel Hamilton's defending skills are underrated because he gets stereotyped as an offensive Dman.  The biggest places Hamilton hurts his team is when he has the puck. He makes risky plays and bad decisions.  He also takes dumb penalties.  When it comes to shut down though, he's actually above average.

 

I don't mind trading Hamilton but the return has to be franchise altering.  It would have to take a Patrick Kane, Laine, Ovechkin, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

 Why have rookies basically for your 3rd pairing ?

 

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

If we are keeping Brodie, then I would prefer to be able to roll three pairs of D-men.  The way they play a certain game determines their total minutes.  Kulak with Hamonic and Brodie with Andersson.  Gio with Hammy.  No real 3rd pairing.   

 

I don't really care about 1st, 2nd 3rd pairing. I care about situations, zone starts and match-ups.  Be open to changing it but it comes to down to heavy lifting. Gio - Hamilton can't take all the hard minutes, so if you split up Brodie-Hamonic you are having Kulak or Andersson take a top match-up in a lot of situations. I'd prefer to see them in a more sheltered role, so if you stick with Gio-Hamilton, Brodie-Hamonic, you have more flexibility to get Kulak-Andersson into favorable situations and leave them less exposed so in that light I don't think it matters that they are lesser experienced.I'm also not a fan of the idea of Brodie trying with a younger guy because Brodie freelances, that is not what you want to have a young player deal with and that's not likely going to suddenly change in Brodie. 

 

54 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

We don't have a ton of assets to move to improve the forward group and the few assets we do have are on the back end. If this team stands pat, I am not sure we will see much of a change from this season. Coaching is important but I think people over rate the impact the coach has on a team.

 

I agree that coaching is not going to be that important or make a huge difference. I do like Peters a lot, but for alot of players I only think it's a fresh start and a chance to get out of their heads, i'm certainly not expecting Peters to provide the swing as I agree thats not how coaching works. 

 

I however, buy into the theory that basically everything went wrong last year so I also don't think as much change is needed as other's think. I don't think Backlund is going to struggle 2 seasons in a row, I don't think the team is going to lead the league by a mile in missed shots/posts hit 2 years in a row and I don't think 2 years in a row you are going to get hit with a barrage of injuries in crunch time. I think there is alot of merit in the stand pat, with some small improvements and this is a playoff team again. Easy to forget that over halfway through he year they were right there so it's not like this is a team that needs a massive improvement. 

 

I'm still open to trading Brodie i'm just leaning towrads keeping him and the trade would really need to impress me. Now, the caveat here is if the Flames can get Calvin De Hahn my answer completely changes, but assuming they cannot they I'm just more careful about a Brodie trade. I still think this D core can be a top 10 D core and becuae of Peters success coaching a D core i'm optimistic they can get back to that and if they do I think that's a marked improvement over last year. I think we can all agree that if the Flames D core performed at that level and the PP was competent this is a playoff team and probably not of the wild card variety, no?

 

And not suggesting that they make no trades. I'd like to see them add some RHS but I just am not so sure it needs to be of the big name variety so it may not require Brodie. If it does, look at it, but i'm just not in the rush to trade Brodie that it seems like many are. 

Share this post


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

 

I feel Hamilton's defending skills are underrated because he gets stereotyped as an offensive Dman.  The biggest places Hamilton hurts his team is when he has the puck. He makes risky plays and bad decisions.  He also takes dumb penalties.  When it comes to shut down though, he's actually above average.

 

I don't mind trading Hamilton but the return has to be franchise altering.  It would have to take a Patrick Kane, Laine, Ovechkin, etc.

 

I agree. Hamilton doesn't defend well in the "traditional" sense and he doesn't use his size so I get why people criticize him for his defense but I've never agreed with it personally. He's a very good defender in my mind because he's got a great reach and he's very smart with his stick. Unfortunately that leads to penalties, not all of them bad but some of them, so I also see where he draws the ire of people in that regard.

 

There is absolutely a high risk/high reward element to Hamiltons game but IMO the good far outweighs the bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I don't really care about 1st, 2nd 3rd pairing. I care about situations, zone starts and match-ups.  Be open to changing it but it comes to down to heavy lifting. Gio - Hamilton can't take all the hard minutes, so if you split up Brodie-Hamonic you are having Kulak or Andersson take a top match-up in a lot of situations. I'd prefer to see them in a more sheltered role, so if you stick with Gio-Hamilton, Brodie-Hamonic, you have more flexibility to get Kulak-Andersson into favorable situations and leave them less exposed so in that light I don't think it matters that they are lesser experienced.I'm also not a fan of the idea of Brodie trying with a younger guy because Brodie freelances, that is not what you want to have a young player deal with and that's not likely going to suddenly change in Brodie. 

 

 

I agree that coaching is not going to be that important or make a huge difference. I do like Peters a lot, but for alot of players I only think it's a fresh start and a chance to get out of their heads, i'm certainly not expecting Peters to provide the swing as I agree thats not how coaching works. 

 

I however, buy into the theory that basically everything went wrong last year so I also don't think as much change is needed as other's think. I don't think Backlund is going to struggle 2 seasons in a row, I don't think the team is going to lead the league by a mile in missed shots/posts hit 2 years in a row and I don't think 2 years in a row you are going to get hit with a barrage of injuries in crunch time. I think there is alot of merit in the stand pat, with some small improvements and this is a playoff team again. Easy to forget that over halfway through he year they were right there so it's not like this is a team that needs a massive improvement. 

 

I'm still open to trading Brodie i'm just leaning towrads keeping him and the trade would really need to impress me. Now, the caveat here is if the Flames can get Calvin De Hahn my answer completely changes, but assuming they cannot they I'm just more careful about a Brodie trade. I still think this D core can be a top 10 D core and becuae of Peters success coaching a D core i'm optimistic they can get back to that and if they do I think that's a marked improvement over last year. I think we can all agree that if the Flames D core performed at that level and the PP was competent this is a playoff team and probably not of the wild card variety, no?

 

And not suggesting that they make no trades. I'd like to see them add some RHS but I just am not so sure it needs to be of the big name variety so it may not require Brodie. If it does, look at it, but i'm just not in the rush to trade Brodie that it seems like many are. 

 

Do you feel that the top 6 can be improved without trading away from our top 4 defense? Now I ask that with caveat that draft picks and prospects like Dube, Valimaki and Fox are off the table for trades. 

 

I suppose we could go out and sign Perron and he could slide in on the top 2 lines, but that worries me a bit as he is a UFA, and I am not afraid of the cap hit he would get but the term could become worrisome. I think anything over 3 years with Perron and you are playing with fire, but I think it probably takes 4 to 5 years to get him signed.

 

I do wonder how much value Hamonic would have and would we be comfortable moving him for less than what we gave up, because we won't get that much value in return anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

I don't really care about 1st, 2nd 3rd pairing. I care about situations, zone starts and match-ups.  Be open to changing it but it comes to down to heavy lifting. Gio - Hamilton can't take all the hard minutes, so if you split up Brodie-Hamonic you are having Kulak or Andersson take a top match-up in a lot of situations. I'd prefer to see them in a more sheltered role, so if you stick with Gio-Hamilton, Brodie-Hamonic, you have more flexibility to get Kulak-Andersson into favorable situations and leave them less exposed so in that light I don't think it matters that they are lesser experienced.I'm also not a fan of the idea of Brodie trying with a younger guy because Brodie freelances, that is not what you want to have a young player deal with and that's not likely going to suddenly change in Brodie. 

 

 

I agree that coaching is not going to be that important or make a huge difference. I do like Peters a lot, but for alot of players I only think it's a fresh start and a chance to get out of their heads, i'm certainly not expecting Peters to provide the swing as I agree thats not how coaching works. 

 

I however, buy into the theory that basically everything went wrong last year so I also don't think as much change is needed as other's think. I don't think Backlund is going to struggle 2 seasons in a row, I don't think the team is going to lead the league by a mile in missed shots/posts hit 2 years in a row and I don't think 2 years in a row you are going to get hit with a barrage of injuries in crunch time. I think there is alot of merit in the stand pat, with some small improvements and this is a playoff team again. Easy to forget that over halfway through he year they were right there so it's not like this is a team that needs a massive improvement. 

 

I'm still open to trading Brodie i'm just leaning towrads keeping him and the trade would really need to impress me. Now, the caveat here is if the Flames can get Calvin De Hahn my answer completely changes, but assuming they cannot they I'm just more careful about a Brodie trade. I still think this D core can be a top 10 D core and becuae of Peters success coaching a D core i'm optimistic they can get back to that and if they do I think that's a marked improvement over last year. I think we can all agree that if the Flames D core performed at that level and the PP was competent this is a playoff team and probably not of the wild card variety, no?

 

And not suggesting that they make no trades. I'd like to see them add some RHS but I just am not so sure it needs to be of the big name variety so it may not require Brodie. If it does, look at it, but i'm just not in the rush to trade Brodie that it seems like many are. 

Where we will disagree is that I believe Brodie's game NEEDS to change because what he has been doing is unacceptable. He has the experience and talent to be one of our best players but I think he tries to take on to much and needs to back off with a more defined role from Peters. Also and this may just be me but I think some sacrifices should be made next season to get these 1st and 2nd year rookies as much exposure as possible next season. If we ever want to win a SC it starts next season so it can happen somewhere in the next 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Do you feel that the top 6 can be improved without trading away from our top 4 defense? Now I ask that with caveat that draft picks and prospects like Dube, Valimaki and Fox are off the table for trades. 

 

I suppose we could go out and sign Perron and he could slide in on the top 2 lines, but that worries me a bit as he is a UFA, and I am not afraid of the cap hit he would get but the term could become worrisome. I think anything over 3 years with Perron and you are playing with fire, but I think it probably takes 4 to 5 years to get him signed.

 

I do wonder how much value Hamonic would have and would we be comfortable moving him for less than what we gave up, because we won't get that much value in return anymore.

 

I do. I think it would be possible to pick up some lesser know name or younger players looking for an opportunity and not give up a top 4 d or top prospect.  I know we talked about these elsewhere, but I still look at someone like Rust, Sprong, do you look at guys with bad contracts like Perry/Okposo. Can Riley Nash be had on a more afford FA deal? What is Zack Hyman worth in trade? I agree with you on Perron both in terms of $ and contract length but that is an option too. I think there is enough there that 1 may shake out. 

 

But I would also challenge the point that the top 6 needs to be improved. Flames had one of the top lines in hockey until it got hurt, Tkachuk is emerging, and Backlund/Frolik had really off years. Let's assume Frolik doesn't bounce back but I personally think Backlund will so is the top 6 now as much an issue? What about moving Tkachuk with Jankowkski and playing them more in the offfensive zone does that balance you out?

 

I point more to the D core and the bottom 6 as needing improvement. I think someone like Derek Ryan in FA would help alot to give them a legitimate 4th line and then if you use Backs-Froilk in a more traditional 3rd line role can you open up some offence for Tkachuk - Jankow - Bennett? do you use Bennett in trade?

 

Long story short, yes I thikn there are ways they can improve without giving up a top 4 d. Eventually they are going to have to with Valamaki coming so if if it's not this year someone is going next year but why not try an rebuild the value under a solid D coach and improve other weaknesses. 

 

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

Where we will disagree is that I believe Brodie's game NEEDS to change because what he has been doing is unacceptable. 

 

Do we disagree there?

I am absolutely of the opinion that Brodie needs to change his game but I don't think he will do that by pairing him with a rookie. If anything he'll likely go the opposite way, i'd rather pair Brodie with the Hamonic type to keep himself accountable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I do. I think it would be possible to pick up some lesser know name or younger players looking for an opportunity and not give up a top 4 d or top prospect.  I know we talked about these elsewhere, but I still look at someone like Rust, Sprong, do you look at guys with bad contracts like Perry/Okposo. Can Riley Nash be had on a more afford FA deal? What is Zack Hyman worth in trade? I agree with you on Perron both in terms of $ and contract length but that is an option too. I think there is enough there that 1 may shake out. 

 

But I would also challenge the point that the top 6 needs to be improved. Flames had one of the top lines in hockey until it got hurt, Tkachuk is emerging, and Backlund/Frolik had really off years. Let's assume Frolik doesn't bounce back but I personally think Backlund will so is the top 6 now as much an issue? What about moving Tkachuk with Jankowkski and playing them more in the offfensive zone does that balance you out?

 

I point more to the D core and the bottom 6 as needing improvement. I think someone like Derek Ryan in FA would help alot to give them a legitimate 4th line and then if you use Backs-Froilk in a more traditional 3rd line role can you open up some offence for Tkachuk - Jankow - Bennett? do you use Bennett in trade?

 

Long story short, yes I thikn there are ways they can improve without giving up a top 4 d. Eventually they are going to have to with Valamaki coming so if if it's not this year someone is going next year but why not try an rebuild the value under a solid D coach and improve other weaknesses. 

 

 

Do we disagree there?

I am absolutely of the opinion that Brodie needs to change his game but I don't think he will do that by pairing him with a rookie. If anything he'll likely go the opposite way, i'd rather pair Brodie with the Hamonic type to keep himself accountable. 

Yes we disagree because I see the need for Brodie to be the one to hang back and play a more conservative game. If you leave him with Hamonic I see him using Hamonic's style to just keep doing what he always has. He could be a good mentor for Andersson in that he encourages him but doesn't allow him to take unnecessary risks with the puck. Sheltering has it's time and place but I would prefer a better spread of the experience we have to offer, especially next season.

Share this post


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

Yes we disagree because I see the need for Brodie to be the one to hang back and play a more conservative game. If you leave him with Hamonic I see him using Hamonic's style to just keep doing what he always has. He could be a good mentor for Andersson in that he encourages him but doesn't allow him to take unnecessary risks with the puck. Sheltering has it's time and place but I would prefer a better spread of the experience we have to offer, especially next season.

 

Fair, but problem there is then you are turning him into someone he is not and taking away the skills that make him great. HOnestly, at that point Flames would be better to trade him. 

 

I think it's a similar situation to Jbow. He never fit under Sutter, but Hartley let him play to his strengths while still keeping him accountable. That's what I want to see with Brodie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I do. I think it would be possible to pick up some lesser know name or younger players looking for an opportunity and not give up a top 4 d or top prospect.  I know we talked about these elsewhere, but I still look at someone like Rust, Sprong, do you look at guys with bad contracts like Perry/Okposo. Can Riley Nash be had on a more afford FA deal? What is Zack Hyman worth in trade? I agree with you on Perron both in terms of $ and contract length but that is an option too. I think there is enough there that 1 may shake out. 

 

But I would also challenge the point that the top 6 needs to be improved. Flames had one of the top lines in hockey until it got hurt, Tkachuk is emerging, and Backlund/Frolik had really off years. Let's assume Frolik doesn't bounce back but I personally think Backlund will so is the top 6 now as much an issue? What about moving Tkachuk with Jankowkski and playing them more in the offfensive zone does that balance you out?

 

I point more to the D core and the bottom 6 as needing improvement. I think someone like Derek Ryan in FA would help alot to give them a legitimate 4th line and then if you use Backs-Froilk in a more traditional 3rd line role can you open up some offence for Tkachuk - Jankow - Bennett? do you use Bennett in trade?

 

Long story short, yes I thikn there are ways they can improve without giving up a top 4 d. Eventually they are going to have to with Valamaki coming so if if it's not this year someone is going next year but why not try an rebuild the value under a solid D coach and improve other weaknesses. 

 

 

Do we disagree there?

I am absolutely of the opinion that Brodie needs to change his game but I don't think he will do that by pairing him with a rookie. If anything he'll likely go the opposite way, i'd rather pair Brodie with the Hamonic type to keep himself accountable. 

 

I think Hyman costs a lot in a trade, as he is Babcock's guy, he has played him on the top line for the last two years and moved other guys around on the top line. I think if the new GM came in and traded Hyman they would have one pissed off coach on their hands.

 

I think Josh Leivo could be a guy we can get for cheap, he skates well and every time I have watched him has gone to the net hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Fair, but problem there is then you are turning him into someone he is not and taking away the skills that make him great. HOnestly, at that point Flames would be better to trade him. 

 

I think it's a similar situation to Jbow. He never fit under Sutter, but Hartley let him play to his strengths while still keeping him accountable. That's what I want to see with Brodie. 

I think I said this somewhere else but this is why I am torn with the decision to keep Brodie or trade him. If he can't gear it down and be more responsible then I would trade him now. He has become so indecisive and never has been great defensively in our end. If other teams view him as a dynamo puck mover and would trade us a useful forward I would say BT should do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think Hyman costs a lot in a trade, as he is Babcock's guy, he has played him on the top line for the last two years and moved other guys around on the top line. I think if the new GM came in and traded Hyman they would have one pissed off coach on their hands.

 

I think Josh Leivo could be a guy we can get for cheap, he skates well and every time I have watched him has gone to the net hard.

I think Leivo is a player that we could use on RW with say Backlund and Bennett with moving Frolik to the 3rd line. What would it take from us, Mangiapane ??? a LW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Fair, but problem there is then you are turning him into someone he is not and taking away the skills that make him great. HOnestly, at that point Flames would be better to trade him. 

 

I think it's a similar situation to Jbow. He never fit under Sutter, but Hartley let him play to his strengths while still keeping him accountable. That's what I want to see with Brodie. 

 

I wonder if there is enough of a difference between Gully and Peters to turn Brodie's game around.  Play to his strength may include moving to RD.

We saw a change of some of the play between Y1 and Y2 of Gully.  The short passes and attacking as a group disappeared somewhere between the start of Y1 and the start of Y2.

 

As far as Brodie playing a more conservative game, I would suggest that you let Andersson do that, assuming they played together.  Brodie can wheel and get back as required, while Andersson would be back with the forward covering for Brodie.  When Kulak played with Hamonic, you saw that approach.  They were pretty good together.

 

End of the day, a trade of Brodie has to be a remarkable return, not a marginal player.  We're not going to get a Laine, but we might get a ROR (wishful thinking) or a Saad.  Depends on what teams are thinking this off-season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://frshockey.com/nhl/flames/friedman-considers-hamilton-and-bennett-trade-potential/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

 

Friedman talks about the possibility of moving Bennett and Hamilton. Before anyone freaks out this is just Friedman giving his opinion on what Calgary might do this off season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

https://frshockey.com/nhl/flames/friedman-considers-hamilton-and-bennett-trade-potential/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

 

Friedman talks about the possibility of moving Bennett and Hamilton. Before anyone freaks out this is just Friedman giving his opinion on what Calgary might do this off season.

 

He also talked about Brodie being the most likely.

I'm open to trading players if the return is right and we aren't selling low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2018 at 10:52 PM, Heartbreaker said:

 

I don't think we'll see that, but I do think that we could get a decent forward for Brodie. I know that a lot of people like Montreal as a trading partner for TJ, and I think you could probably work out a deal for Galchenyuk, but I would anticipate they'll be looking for a RHS. 

 

Love. 

I wouldn't be against a deal for Galchenyuk because I've followed him a lot.

Not just Galchenyuk, but I have no idea what Montreal is doing. They don't wanna pay Patches, they move Subban. Galchenyuk's been reefed around that lineup so much now, I don't know what they're doing.

He had a good clip in his rookie year, then they change everything on him. 2nd year not so good, then a 20 goal year, then a 30 goal year.

Trending perfect, maybe a consistent 30g-70 pt guy. MTL will go into a funk, he's the first guy down to the 4th line.

Such an odd approach there, I've quit trying to understand.

If he went to either of my teams (Flames/Wings), I'd be very happy.

It's like MTL has 2 faces. One side is you're going to treat him with kid gloves. The other side is when your world falls apart he's to blame.

Makes no sense. He should be a game changer now, but Montreal has been so inconsistent with him that he'll never get there.

RS be damned, if you can get a fwd that helps the elements you need help with.

Imo Galchenyuk can give you a sniper's wrist shot, hard in front of the net, hard to knock off the puck, a solid skater and a good enough 2 way game.

He's the kind of player to give you a lot of options at forward and adds more of the skills at least I'd like to see.

And Mony would definitely know him.

Galchenyuk was ripping the O to shreds when the NHL lockout ended that year, his draft +1 yr, Mony's draft year.

Here's an article on his last month in the O, before the lockout ended. He knew it was ending, knew MTL was calling him up, and he just went on a tear.

As a Sting fan, I greatly appreciated him torqueing up the swan song.

 

http://ontariohockeyleague.com/ohl-top-performers-of-december/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...