Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The_Snowbear said:

Id  Fricken trade  The tool Hamonic First

 

 

Hamonic brings somethkng that not even Gio brings. He’s the only player that really knows the value in protecting our goalie. 

 

I understand it was a bad year, but it was a bad year for everyone aside from Gio, Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk and Hamilton (offensively). Even Hamilton has defensive warts, but just makes up for it on offence. You minus Hamonic and we have zero brute on D. Some get a pass because it’s a rookie year. 

 

We've played the system for 2 years and the team barely gets it for a year and a half. This is the first time with a new coach, the first time in a different play system, first time since entering the NHL having to move cities. 

 

I am willing to give him more time. We did that with Hamilton, and the fact he played with Brodie means he would be left alone when the play transitions against us. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am starting to see more and more players playing on their off side especially on the PP. This puts the players sticks to the center of the ice allowing for a higher degree of visible net. ie Ovechkin and Lainne on the left side and look at the points they produce from that one timer.

We should consider Brodie on the right side at least for the PP to start.

Share this post


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

 

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.

 

Sometimes though it's not the coach necessarily it's just a different voice. For me with Brodie I think it's been a snowball/quick sand effect. Things have slowly been going down for a while, got worse this year playing with Hamonic early on and then it just snowballed and ran away on him. Some of the plays that looked really bad, were just bad luck plays but it just seemed to always find Brodie and that happens sometimes. May not need a different style coach, he may just need a different voice to alter the path just my theory. 

I definetly don't think you can try to Brodie's game "conservative" nor do i think it was his risk taking that got him into trouble. What got him into trouble was puck control. I don't think there is value in asking Brodie to play more conservatively. 

 

55 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I wonder if Toronto is still interested.

 

Honestly of any dman, not named Stone of course, Hamonic would be my first to trade. While I do think its reasonable to expect he will be better next year, I still don't think he'll ever be worth what the Flames traded to get him and I wonder if he'll be stuck for it. As i've made well known i'm not his biggest fan anyway, but I do really wonder if the Flames can get the best of Hamonic becuase i worry that the "trade" will always hang over him given how it turned out. Hamonic for something invovlving one of the many RS RW the Leafs have makes a ton of sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

I am starting to see more and more players playing on their off side especially on the PP. This puts the players sticks to the center of the ice allowing for a higher degree of visible net. ie Ovechkin and Lainne on the left side and look at the points they produce from that one timer.

We should consider Brodie on the right side at least for the PP to start.

There are far more left shooters than right, so I think it stands to reason that if you value that, you sure limit your options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

I am starting to see more and more players playing on their off side especially on the PP. This puts the players sticks to the center of the ice allowing for a higher degree of visible net. ie Ovechkin and Lainne on the left side and look at the points they produce from that one timer.

We should consider Brodie on the right side at least for the PP to start.

 

This is an absolute must.Not necessarily with Brodie, but Hamilton. If the Flames don't run this PP unit next year (assyuming they stick with the 1-3-1 which they should) i'll be choked.

Tkachuk

Hamilton - Mony - Gaudreau

Gio

 

Open up one timers. So much easier to get away on your off side.  I honestly think if they keep Brouwer, which I suspect they will, he can become useful on the PP if put in the right spot. 

Share this post


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

Honestly of any dman, not named Stone of course, Hamonic would be my first to trade. While I do think its reasonable to expect he will be better next year, I still don't think he'll ever be worth what the Flames traded to get him and I wonder if he'll be stuck for it. As i've made well known i'm not his biggest fan anyway, but I do really wonder if the Flames can get the best of Hamonic becuase i worry that the "trade" will always hang over him given how it turned out. Hamonic for something invovlving one of the many RS RW the Leafs have makes a ton of sense. 

Not used to not giving you likes, but I definitely disagree with you here.

Hamonic only has to do one thing well for us imo.

Protect your goalie.

Without him, right now, I'd say we have no one particularly good at it.

Who remembers Detroit running Kipper at will?

For me, it's still a big part of the game, so makes Hamonic amongst the least of our problems.

His role isn't point producing, it's being tough down low.

I expect to see him more comfortable with us in year 2, and us with him.

And Brodie not let off-ice issues go on indefinitely.

Patience is a virtue. We might be better off with it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

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.

 

Yeah, I think it has the potential to be a great pickup because I think that to some extent, you'd be buying low. I think the value is still there for Brodie, and of course there's the risk that it doesn't pan out for you - but to be honest, I'm not sure that Brodie does either. I guess that's the definition of a high risk/high reward type of trade. 

 

To put the shoe on the other foot, though, would you move Bennett for Brodie? 

 

Love. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Yeah, I think it has the potential to be a great pickup because I think that to some extent, you'd be buying low. I think the value is still there for Brodie, and of course there's the risk that it doesn't pan out for you - but to be honest, I'm not sure that Brodie does either. I guess that's the definition of a high risk/high reward type of trade. 

 

To put the shoe on the other foot, though, would you move Bennett for Brodie? 

 

Love. 

Tbh, that's one I've thrown out there in the past. Bad dev vs bad dev to kinda generalize it.

I'd prefer Brodie actually.

If I have O stars Mony, Galchenyuk, Bennett, Tkachuk, Hamilton.

That for me, will be a heavy, hard to play team. Easy to add complementary to that.

I think you can even add Mangiapane, and you've got a formidable O group that will be hard to play against.

Focus on skill, keep Gio Captain, and those guys one up each other outta pride.

Exceptional players, just make the environment right. Letting them feed off of each other sounds right to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Burke no longer on the payroll I wonder if the direction of trades will steer BT towards speed from truculence.

We could always try for both and make a play for Marchand, speed and giving the other team a "LICKING" ha ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

With Burke no longer on the payroll I wonder if the direction of trades will steer BT towards speed from truculence.

We could always try for both and make a play for Marchand, speed and giving the other team a "LICKING" ha ha.

I had never considered that you can lose and still "hang a lickin'" on an opponent, lol.

Share this post


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

Honestly of any dman, not named Stone of course, Hamonic would be my first to trade. While I do think its reasonable to expect he will be better next year, I still don't think he'll ever be worth what the Flames traded to get him and I wonder if he'll be stuck for it. As i've made well known i'm not his biggest fan anyway, but I do really wonder if the Flames can get the best of Hamonic becuase i worry that the "trade" will always hang over him given how it turned out. Hamonic for something invovlving one of the many RS RW the Leafs have makes a ton of sense. 

 

What can Hamonic get us from the Leafs?  Surely not Nylander or Marner.

Share this post


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

 

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.

 

I feel Brodie's problems are off ice.  Namely, family health issues which are terminal.  So that's really depressing to say the least.

 

No reason Brodie couldn't have been just as good on the left side as the right side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have we talked about any Hurricanes players yet?  We've got their ex-coach and maybe he's got the inside scoop on who might be available there? He's also got first hand scouting info on all their prospects and stuff.

 

After hiring GG, we got Shinkaruk, Vey, and Bartkowski from the Canucks. We also got Alex Chiasson and Nic Grossman who he worked with in Dallas as head coach.  GG may have also had some work with Tanner Glass in the past.

 

Of course we all remember getting Darryl Sutter and then getting Kiprusoff right after from SJ.

 

Who might be available from the Hurricane?  Surely they miss the playoffs so much that there can't be that many untouchables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Aho is the only "untouchable" on the roster under the new management. That could expose guys like Faulk and Skinner to the trading block if it proves true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rickross said:

Apparently Aho is the only "untouchable" on the roster under the new management. That could expose guys like Faulk and Skinner to the trading block if it proves true.

 

I wouldn't want to give up the assets it took to get Faulk and Skinner's defense was so bad last year that Peters couldn't play him in the top 6. 

 

If Aho is the only untouchable, the first player I am calling about is Martin Necas, though I would guess he would be pretty close to untouchable for them too. He is that high skill RHS we covet.

 

I would also call about Elias Lindholm, slick skating, skilled RHS C/RW. He would check a lot of boxes and I think there is another level of offense for him.

 

Share this post


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

Does a Brodie for Eberle trade make any sense?

Only if they take Brouwer or give us our 1st or 2nd back.

Share this post


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

 

Sometimes though it's not the coach necessarily it's just a different voice. For me with Brodie I think it's been a snowball/quick sand effect. Things have slowly been going down for a while, got worse this year playing with Hamonic early on and then it just snowballed and ran away on him. Some of the plays that looked really bad, were just bad luck plays but it just seemed to always find Brodie and that happens sometimes. May not need a different style coach, he may just need a different voice to alter the path just my theory. 

I definetly don't think you can try to Brodie's game "conservative" nor do i think it was his risk taking that got him into trouble. What got him into trouble was puck control. I don't think there is value in asking Brodie to play more conservatively. 

 

 

Honestly of any dman, not named Stone of course, Hamonic would be my first to trade. While I do think its reasonable to expect he will be better next year, I still don't think he'll ever be worth what the Flames traded to get him and I wonder if he'll be stuck for it. As i've made well known i'm not his biggest fan anyway, but I do really wonder if the Flames can get the best of Hamonic becuase i worry that the "trade" will always hang over him given how it turned out. Hamonic for something invovlving one of the many RS RW the Leafs have makes a ton of sense. 

While you and I have differing views on what could help Brodie get is game back on track I do agree they should give Peters a crack at him. In regards to Hamonic I think you are out to lunch, first off I don't think you judge a trade on1 year of performance. How people will or should see this trade is in a worthy period of time like 3 years at least. Then let people decide if we got value in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Yeah, I think it has the potential to be a great pickup because I think that to some extent, you'd be buying low. I think the value is still there for Brodie, and of course there's the risk that it doesn't pan out for you - but to be honest, I'm not sure that Brodie does either. I guess that's the definition of a high risk/high reward type of trade. 

 

To put the shoe on the other foot, though, would you move Bennett for Brodie? 

 

Love. 

Sorry Heartbreaker, I misunderstood your question originally, "cute kid, kinda stupid".

I actually do think Bennett for Brodie is pretty even.  Anyway you slice it, Brodie can still pull 20 mins on either side. You put all of his mistakes together for one game, you're only turning the hyperbole machine at what, 20 seconds of icetime?

With Bennett, you are definitely looking for increased production. But you have an easy 2-3 winger.

If Bennett can get his draft position/expectations out of his head, the game will get a lot easier for him. So for Brodie you may have to add to Bennett, but Bennett's ceiling should mean no more than a borderline NHLer.

Regarding all 3 players we're discussing, I find it hard to traipse through the constant stream of negativity of fandom. It's just way more than what is likely deserved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Sorry Heartbreaker, I misunderstood your question originally, "cute kid, kinda stupid".

I actually do think Bennett for Brodie is pretty even.  Anyway you slice it, Brodie can still pull 20 mins on either side. You put all of his mistakes together for one game, you're only turning the hyperbole machine at what, 20 seconds of icetime?

With Bennett, you are definitely looking for increased production. But you have an easy 2-3 winger.

If Bennett can get his draft position/expectations out of his head, the game will get a lot easier for him. So for Brodie you may have to add to Bennett, but Bennett's ceiling should mean no more than a borderline NHLer.

Regarding all 3 players we're discussing, I find it hard to traipse through the constant stream of negativity of fandom. It's just way more than what is likely deserved.

 

Brodie, Bennett and I assume the 3rd is Galchenyuk...

With me the players bring out frustration more than dislike or lack of faith in the players.

Brodie looked like he was going to be a perennial Norris guy, then got moved to the 2nd pair.

Around the same time, his girl was diagnosed with MS.  Tough blow for anyone.

Got to play with Wideman when he was trending down, Russell, Hamilton (for a bit), Hamonic (1st year struggles) and Engelland (emergency pairing).

Still got 2nd most icetime and near tops in PP time.

All of this saw his game start to trend downward.  Expectedly so (is that even a word?).

So the big question is does a new coach make a difference in his game if he still plays with Hamonic?  

Does the lure of a top 6 winger make up for the loss on the blueline?

 

Bennett is one of those guys that you see the great player unable to consistently show his skills.

Half his game is exactly what you want most nights - solid checking, smart defensive positioning, slick moves.

The other half leaves me wanting most nights - skating speed with the puck, shot selection, vision, passing.

The second half may just be a lack of the right fit or thinking he has to be the man and do it all.

The end result is the lazy penalties due to frustration or being in the wrong place.  I believe he is -17 in penalties taken vs drawn over the last two seasons.

 

Just asking because you know both players, would you do Bennett for Galchenyuk straight up?

And does that make any sense to do? 

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Brodie, Bennett and I assume the 3rd is Galchenyuk...

With me the players bring out frustration more than dislike or lack of faith in the players.

Brodie looked like he was going to be a perennial Norris guy, then got moved to the 2nd pair.

Around the same time, his girl was diagnosed with MS.  Tough blow for anyone.

Got to play with Wideman when he was trending down, Russell, Hamilton (for a bit), Hamonic (1st year struggles) and Engelland (emergency pairing).

Still got 2nd most icetime and near tops in PP time.

All of this saw his game start to trend downward.  Expectedly so (is that even a word?).

So the big question is does a new coach make a difference in his game if he still plays with Hamonic?  

Does the lure of a top 6 winger make up for the loss on the blueline?

 

Bennett is one of those guys that you see the great player unable to consistently show his skills.

Half his game is exactly what you want most nights - solid checking, smart defensive positioning, slick moves.

The other half leaves me wanting most nights - skating speed with the puck, shot selection, vision, passing.

The second half may just be a lack of the right fit or thinking he has to be the man and do it all.

The end result is the lazy penalties due to frustration or being in the wrong place.  I believe he is -17 in penalties taken vs drawn over the last two seasons.

 

Just asking because you know both players, would you do Bennett for Galchenyuk straight up?

And does that make any sense to do? 

 

 

That's actually a suggestion I made months ago. Pound for pound, I think we get the better player, but it's one of those things of what do you want?

Both were marqueed as future 1C, both are LWers. With Galchenyuk, you're taking a bit of a hit at D and lose some speed, but your gaining a much better shot and harder to knock off the puck, so that makes Galchenyuk better at the net also. Galchenyuk has had a 20 and 30 goal season, so he definitely knows how to score.

If you're going to do a hockey trade, this would be one.

Just a question of whether MTL would move on from him and what teams we'd be up against that would force us to add imho.

I believe when I first made the suggestion, I noted Bennett is more suited to the East, Galchenyuk to the West.

The entirety of the problem here, is the market. If Bennett is feeling a little overwhelmed rn, MTL might be his worst nightmare.

 

A lot of talk about Gallagher here, I'd be very leery of that. He's being over rated based on this past season imho. He's feisty, I get it, I just don't see very big toolbox to tell me those numbers are not inflated.

Share this post


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

That's actually a suggestion I made months ago. Pound for pound, I think we get the better player, but it's one of those things of what do you want?

Both were marqueed as future 1C, both are LWers. With Galchenyuk, you're taking a bit of a hit at D and lose some speed, but your gaining a much better shot and harder to knock off the puck, so that makes Galchenyuk better at the net also. Galchenyuk has had a 20 and 30 goal season, so he definitely knows how to score.

If you're going to do a hockey trade, this would be one.

Just a question of whether MTL would move on from him and what teams we'd be up against that would force us to add imho.

I believe when I first made the suggestion, I noted Bennett is more suited to the East, Galchenyuk to the West.

The entirety of the problem here, is the market. If Bennett is feeling a little overwhelmed rn, MTL might be his worst nightmare.

 

A lot of talk about Gallagher here, I'd be very leery of that. He's being over rated based on this past season imho. He's feisty, I get it, I just don't see very big toolbox to tell me those numbers are not inflated.

I think if Bennett were to be traded it should be for someone such as Gallagher being a swap of a C/LW for a RW to us. I don't feel Bennett has been overwhelmed just badly handled IMO. I agree we shouldn't read to much into Gallagher's exceptional season but there is no denying he would be the very type of attitude this team could use more of now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

I think if Bennett were to be traded it should be for someone such as Gallagher being a swap of a C/LW for a RW to us. I don't feel Bennett has been overwhelmed just badly handled IMO. I agree we shouldn't read to much into Gallagher's exceptional season but there is no denying he would be the very type of attitude this team could use more of now.

I disagree. How has Gallagher's attitude made Montreal a better team?

I doubt Gallagher will show up here and show more drive than Giordano. Imho, we aren't lacking attitude, we're lacking skill, and specific skillsets that can improve the group.

It's really splitting hairs on what hand a player shoots, I'd throw that to the wind for the complementary skillsets 100% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I disagree. How has Gallagher's attitude made Montreal a better team?

I doubt Gallagher will show up here and show more drive than Giordano. Imho, we aren't lacking attitude, we're lacking skill, and specific skillsets that can improve the group.

It's really splitting hairs on what hand a player shoots, I'd throw that to the wind for the complementary skillsets 100% of the time.

HMMMM let me see now, no Gallagher alone would have a hard time making MON better. Now you take our team and to say they couldn't use a bit more attitude would be incorrect. We have a number of quiet leaders but you need those in between glue guys to bring a team together and this is where I see Gallagher as a fit here. I also agree we could use another skilled RW for our top line but that wasn't were I suggested for Gallagher. Personally I would like to get Tom Wilson from WAS but the discussion surround MON and Gallagher.

Share this post


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

HMMMM let me see now, no Gallagher alone would have a hard time making MON better. Now you take our team and to say they couldn't use a bit more attitude would be incorrect. We have a number of quiet leaders but you need those in between glue guys to bring a team together and this is where I see Gallagher as a fit here. I also agree we could use another skilled RW for our top line but that wasn't were I suggested for Gallagher. Personally I would like to get Tom Wilson from WAS but the discussion surround MON and Gallagher.

But it's still the same question. What do you want? What do you think OUR needs are?

At forward, I think we need guys that have better than average snipes and can be solid net presence to pound in rebounds.

Then it's a question of what are you willing to sacrifice in the d zone?

You can't have it all.

R/L shot doesn't really matter imo, the L vs R options favour the left by a lot. Teams have to deal with it because it's a reality.

I'd get Tom Wilson too, but know what you're getting, he's a mucker, not so much a snipe.

If we sent Brodie or Bennett for Wilson, I'd be disappointed.

Tom Wilson is not a skill player, and imho we need more skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...