Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

How you descript Lindholm sounds like a RW Gaudreau so I don't see the need for him at C. 

 

Somewhat fair, although Gaudreau is the much better player, but Gaudreau is also rare. Typically I think a player like Gaudreau would be a center but his size prevents that so he winds up a winger. 

 

either way, moot point as it's not the way they are leaning but as I said it's just what I would do. 

Share this post


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

I say we should try and land Athanasiou from the Wings, who reports keep saying they are open to trading, for reasons I don't really understand.  I don't know what it would take to get him, but he's lightning fast and has more consistent flashes of brilliance than Bennett.  It's not that I'm down on Bennett (but in my opinion he NEEDS to take a big step forward this year), but man I'd love to see Athanasiou on our team.  He fits our young core, he's super quick, and I think he'll turn into a really solid top 6 player, but for the next two years or so could be an awesome 3rd liner...the knock on him is that he needs to round out his defensive game.

 

I don't know what it would take to get him, but I'd package Bennett and maybe Kulak or Andersson.  We've got too many skaters, and quite a few solid D prospects that we don't have room for anymore, so I think something like that fits.

DET is a hard team to figure out their needs right now. They are working to rebuild but have a lot of veteran contracts with 2 or 3 years remaining that nobody wants. I would offer up someone like Mangiapane for Athanasiou and see if they bite because of the lower salary. This could be the type of move that lights the fire under Bennett if he wants a job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Somewhat fair, although Gaudreau is the much better player, but Gaudreau is also rare. Typically I think a player like Gaudreau would be a center but his size prevents that so he winds up a winger. You adjust for a player like Gaudreau, but also remember LIndholm himself said he's more comfortable at center.

 

either way, moot point as it's not the way they are leaning but as I said it's just what I would do. 

He also said he likes the idea of playing with fellow Swede Backlund. I like that Lindholm has the ability to play C because it give BT future trade possibilities as well but for this season I would use him at RW. The same may apply to Bennett, play LW this season and have a good year, may be he converts back to a C. We know they both are capable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

well to start I should clarify it is not "essential" it's just what I would start with personally.

 

Combination of the fact that I think his skill set is better suited to center vs the wing and the fact that he's already said that center is his preferred position. Lindholm's 2 biggest strengths are his ability to carry the puck in and out of the zone and his ability to find people once in the offensive zone because he is a pretty good play maker. However, he's a below avg shooter. For me, I like centers who can bring th epuck up and down the ice, attack the middle and then dish off to wingers.

 

The logic of him being on the RW due to a lack of depth is sound and i'm not saying it's wrong, It's just not what I would do that's all. I think the best way to maximize Lindholm is at center. I'm also not as high on Jankowski as some others too so i'm being a 3rd line LW is not an issue to me. I'm a really big fan of Monahan-Lindholm -Backlund down the middle and it's much better than Monahan-Backlund-Ryan IMO. 

 

Interesting take.

I'm not that keen on having Bennett on the top line (as you suggest in the other thread) as RW, but the other lines have some merit.

Playing Neal and Lindholm with Neal and Tkachuk sounds good, but it does leave you short for the top line.

I would also suggest that they brought in Ryan to play more than a 4th line role.

 

I think it would be a reasonable alternative to have Bennett play on a "3rd line" with Backlund and Ryan.

To carry forward your lines with those changes:

JH-Monahan-Neal

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Frolik

Bennett-Backlund-Ryan

Mangiapane-Janko-Czarnik/Brouwer

 

Leaves you one RHS on each of the 2-4th lines.  I think you could elevate Tkachuk and have Neal RW and Frolik LW if secondary scoring is still a concern.

 

Share this post


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

DET is a hard team to figure out their needs right now. They are working to rebuild but have a lot of veteran contracts with 2 or 3 years remaining that nobody wants. I would offer up someone like Mangiapane for Athanasiou and see if they bite because of the lower salary. This could be the type of move that lights the fire under Bennett if he wants a job.

 

A little bit of underpayment on our part.  More like Bennett for him.  And that might even be a reasonable trade.

Unfortunately, we can't do either without sending cap to DET.

 

Hows about Harri Sateri as a target.  Shouldn't cost a lot.  Pretty good even though he's a bit older.    

Share this post


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

DET is a hard team to figure out their needs right now. They are working to rebuild but have a lot of veteran contracts with 2 or 3 years remaining that nobody wants. I would offer up someone like Mangiapane for Athanasiou and see if they bite because of the lower salary. This could be the type of move that lights the fire under Bennett if he wants a job.

Yeah I'd think the conversation would have to be with a young but legitimate NHL player, that has the potential to be a impact player one day, as that is what they are losing if they were to trade Athanasiou.  Mangiapane might become awesome, but I think any team would see him as too much of a question mark and gamble, as he is still completely unproven at the NHL level.  Bennett on the other hand, has flashes of elite, but is too inconsistent and is unable to translate those flashes into goals.  He might become awesome.  It would kind of be a swap of similar talent, so I guess maybe hold on to Bennett and see what we have, but then again I'd be quite comfortable sending Bennett their way for Athanasiou...I just thought that alone wouldn't be enough, so you'd have to throw in one of our young D prospects like Kulak....but then maybe we're over paying unless Athanasiou really takes off.

Share this post


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

 

Interesting take.

I'm not that keen on having Bennett on the top line (as you suggest in the other thread) as RW, but the other lines have some merit.

Playing Neal and Lindholm with Neal and Tkachuk sounds good, but it does leave you short for the top line.

I would also suggest that they brought in Ryan to play more than a 4th line role.

 

I think it would be a reasonable alternative to have Bennett play on a "3rd line" with Backlund and Ryan.

To carry forward your lines with those changes:

JH-Monahan-Neal

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Frolik

Bennett-Backlund-Ryan

Mangiapane-Janko-Czarnik/Brouwer

 

Leaves you one RHS on each of the 2-4th lines.  I think you could elevate Tkachuk and have Neal RW and Frolik LW if secondary scoring is still a concern.

 

I would suggest they brought Ryan in to play C.

Share this post


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

 

A little bit of underpayment on our part.  More like Bennett for him.  And that might even be a reasonable trade.

Unfortunately, we can't do either without sending cap to DET.

 

Hows about Harri Sateri as a target.  Shouldn't cost a lot.  Pretty good even though he's a bit older.    

Why at this point should DET view Mangiapane any less than Bennett ? DET needs more good young players at a low cost right now until they clear out some redundancy. It would be the only reason they are even considering a trade of AA who is the point of discussion. Last time I will say this but Bennett needs to prove himself out here this season and we need him as much as any other team. I wouldn't be considering a tradie of Bennett now.

Cap room I will leave to BT.

Share this post


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

Yeah I'd think the conversation would have to be with a young but legitimate NHL player, that has the potential to be a impact player one day, as that is what they are losing if they were to trade Athanasiou.  Mangiapane might become awesome, but I think any team would see him as too much of a question mark and gamble, as he is still completely unproven at the NHL level.  Bennett on the other hand, has flashes of elite, but is too inconsistent and is unable to translate those flashes into goals.  He might become awesome.  It would kind of be a swap of similar talent, so I guess maybe hold on to Bennett and see what we have, but then again I'd be quite comfortable sending Bennett their way for Athanasiou...I just thought that alone wouldn't be enough, so you'd have to throw in one of our young D prospects like Kulak....but then maybe we're over paying unless Athanasiou really takes off.

I wouldn't use Bennett in this deal or be trading Bennett at this point. Sure we may need to add but again I think a few low cost carry players may be what DET is wanting right now. Go with Mangiapane LW and Kylington LSD. There could be a deal there but I like the idea of both Bennett and AA on our team because it makes us that much better up the LW side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

well to start I should clarify it is not "essential" it's just what I would start with personally.

 

Combination of the fact that I think his skill set is better suited to center vs the wing and the fact that he's already said that center is his preferred position. Lindholm's 2 biggest strengths are his ability to carry the puck in and out of the zone and his ability to find people once in the offensive zone because he is a pretty good play maker. However, he's a below avg shooter. For me, I like centers who can bring th epuck up and down the ice, attack the middle and then dish off to wingers.

 

The logic of him being on the RW due to a lack of depth is sound and i'm not saying it's wrong, It's just not what I would do that's all. I think the best way to maximize Lindholm is at center. I'm also not as high on Jankowski as some others too so i'm being a 3rd line LW is not an issue to me. I'm a really big fan of Monahan-Lindholm -Backlund down the middle and it's much better than Monahan-Backlund-Ryan IMO. 

 

I have Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund as my centres as well. Last season the Backlund line had to play 2 more minutes per night because they had to shelter Jankowski. The line suffered for it. 

 

Bennett or Jankowski would have to show me they took a step forward and are ready to play tough minutes. Ryan has never been a strong defensive option. Lindholm is ready for the role now, and as you say, his skill set fits the position. 

 

That said, there are lots of options. They may flank Jankowski with strong defensive wingers like Frolik to help him along. The fact that Treliving speaks about Lindholm as a winger suggests they see Jankowski as a C long term so its probably where they start. 

Share this post


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

Why at this point should DET view Mangiapane any less than Bennett ? DET needs more good young players at a low cost right now until they clear out some redundancy. It would be the only reason they are even considering a trade of AA who is the point of discussion. Last time I will say this but Bennett needs to prove himself out here this season and we need him as much as any other team. I wouldn't be considering a tradie of Bennett now.

Cap room I will leave to BT.

 

Bennett and Happy-to-see-you (the way some broadcasters say him name) have scored at similar rates, while Mangiapane is a prospect that DET had ample opportunity to draft.  AA has been an issue trying to sign.  I can see them moving on from AA.  More the reason for the trade than saving cap space.  They can always call up the Cap Dump Coyotes if they need the space. 

Share this post


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

 

Interesting take.

I'm not that keen on having Bennett on the top line (as you suggest in the other thread) as RW, but the other lines have some merit.

 

 

 

and I differ, i'm very keen on it. I was excited about how Bennett played with those 2 and thought Gulutzan abandoned it too quickly. I think Bennett can play the exact same game Ferland played that made Ferland a success on that line and that line was one of the best in the NHL last year. 

 

I''m also getting less excited about the idea of Neal on the top line. That's 3 players who all struggle in the D Zone and it concentrates snipers on 1 line. I'd spread it out. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

and I differ, i'm very keen on it. I was excited about how Bennett played with those 2 and thought Gulutzan abandoned it too quickly. I think Bennett can play the exact same game Ferland played that made Ferland a success on that line and that line was one of the best in the NHL last year. 

 

I''m also getting less excited about the idea of Neal on the top line. That's 3 players who all struggle in the D Zone and it concentrates snipers on 1 line. I'd spread it out. 

 

Tkachuk-Bennett-Neal could be a great line. It would be a terrible line to play against and would be a great tool for the coaches. The downside is it takes up the three best candidates to play on the top line, but Gaudreau-Monahan is going to produce regardless of who is on it.

 

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ryan

Tkachuk-Bennett-Neal 

Frolik-Backlund-Lindholm

Hathaway-Jankowski-Czarnick

 

That is as good a middle six as any team and the top line won't missed a beat. There is some decent depth on line 4 as well. 

Share this post


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

 

Tkachuk-Bennett-Neal could be a great line. It would be a terrible line to play against and would be a great tool for the coaches. The downside is it takes up the three best candidates to play on the top line, but Gaudreau-Monahan is going to produce regardless of who is on it.

 

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ryan

Tkachuk-Bennett-Neal 

Frolik-Backlund-Lindholm

Hathaway-Jankowski-Czarnick

 

That is as good a middle six as any team and the top line won't missed a beat. There is some decent depth on line 4 as well. 

I'm still somewhat weary of splitting up Tkachuk, Backlund and Frolik.  Advanced stats showed they were their dominant selves last year in terms of possession and driving play out of our defensive zone, only they were scoring at percentages well below their average (a problem 90% of the team shared last year).  Also Frolik isn't flashy, but he's still a very capable and dependable player...I don't think he gets the credit he deserves.  He was as important to that lines past success as the other two.  I just think you have such a good combination in the 3M line, why break that up?  I think you focus on the 3rd line, and finding the best fit on the top line winger, but I wouldn't be rushing to blow up the 3M line completely.  Plus, Bennett hasn't shown he's capable of 2nd line C duties at all really.  I agree his potential is high, but his play has been nowhere near there.  I don't think demoting Backlund in favor of Bennett would be a smart move as Backlund has proven himself year in and out that he's awesome in that 2nd line C role, and Bennett has proven year in and year out that he's still very much a work in progress.  Backlund is awesome...again not flashy, but awesome.  Bennett is flashy, but not yet awesome, in fact most games he's frustratingly mediocre.  I don't think Bennett has proven he deserves to center the 3rd line even, let alone the 2nd.

 

...that being said, if Bennett were to take a big step forward, then that line would be incredible.  What a tough line to play against!

Share this post


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

 

Bennett and Happy-to-see-you (the way some broadcasters say him name) have scored at similar rates, while Mangiapane is a prospect that DET had ample opportunity to draft.  AA has been an issue trying to sign.  I can see them moving on from AA.  More the reason for the trade than saving cap space.  They can always call up the Cap Dump Coyotes if they need the space. 

I would give up those two prospects before giving up 3 years of what has been put into Bennett. Trade are not just a exchange of similar stats, that would make the world to simple. I feel I have assessed their situation correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, YounGuns said:

I'm still somewhat weary of splitting up Tkachuk, Backlund and Frolik.  Advanced stats showed they were their dominant selves last year in terms of possession and driving play out of our defensive zone, only they were scoring at percentages well below their average (a problem 90% of the team shared last year).  Also Frolik isn't flashy, but he's still a very capable and dependable player...I don't think he gets the credit he deserves.  He was as important to that lines past success as the other two.  I just think you have such a good combination in the 3M line, why break that up?  I think you focus on the 3rd line, and finding the best fit on the top line winger, but I wouldn't be rushing to blow up the 3M line completely.  Plus, Bennett hasn't shown he's capable of 2nd line C duties at all really.  I agree his potential is high, but his play has been nowhere near there.  I don't think demoting Backlund in favor of Bennett would be a smart move as Backlund has proven himself year in and out that he's awesome in that 2nd line C role, and Bennett has proven year in and year out that he's still very much a work in progress.  Backlund is awesome...again not flashy, but awesome.  Bennett is flashy, but not yet awesome, in fact most games he's frustratingly mediocre.  I don't think Bennett has proven he deserves to center the 3rd line even, let alone the 2nd.

 

...that being said, if Bennett were to take a big step forward, then that line would be incredible.  What a tough line to play against!

I will use your word, we need more flashy from our 2nd line so moving Frolik to 3rd line and adding Lindholm should make total sense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

and I differ, i'm very keen on it. I was excited about how Bennett played with those 2 and thought Gulutzan abandoned it too quickly. I think Bennett can play the exact same game Ferland played that made Ferland a success on that line and that line was one of the best in the NHL last year. 

 

I''m also getting less excited about the idea of Neal on the top line. That's 3 players who all struggle in the D Zone and it concentrates snipers on 1 line. I'd spread it out. 

Here is what I think Bennett deserves heading into next season. The opportunity to play with 2 solid veterans to elevate his play and if he gains the confidence with a regained scoring touch then consider moving him off the 3rd line. Going into the season I think it would be ludicrous to not have Neal on the top line.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently with 48 hours till arbitration Trouba is asking for $7mm and the Jets are offering $4mm, which is quite the chasm.  I am thinking there might be some trade opportunities like this, or, say Stone in Ottawa due to player conflicts with their teams.  If the arbitrator gives Trouba the money, would we be interested in a trade, of say Brodie, or Anderson+ for Trouba at $6-$7mm per year?  If they buy-out Brouwer we could probably handle the salary cap....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Apparently with 48 hours till arbitration Trouba is asking for $7mm and the Jets are offering $4mm, which is quite the chasm.  I am thinking there might be some trade opportunities like this, or, say Stone in Ottawa due to player conflicts with their teams.  If the arbitrator gives Trouba the money, would we be interested in a trade, of say Brodie, or Anderson+ for Trouba at $6-$7mm per year?  If they buy-out Brouwer we could probably handle the salary cap....

First off I would say WPG is the one that has it right. Trouba is not worth anywhere near 6M or 7M so signing him at all may be an issue. I would do a Brodie for Trouba for sure.

I think the best chance to convince Stone to waive and move would be to OTT should they manage to move Karlsson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Apparently with 48 hours till arbitration Trouba is asking for $7mm and the Jets are offering $4mm, which is quite the chasm.  I am thinking there might be some trade opportunities like this, or, say Stone in Ottawa due to player conflicts with their teams.  If the arbitrator gives Trouba the money, would we be interested in a trade, of say Brodie, or Anderson+ for Trouba at $6-$7mm per year?  If they buy-out Brouwer we could probably handle the salary cap....

 

The Flames still need so sign Hanafin and then Tkachuk. We also need to add a starting goalie for 19/20. I don't think we can handle the cap without unloading one of our big name players. That said, it will cost us a big name player to get a player like Trouba or Stone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

The Flames still need so sign Hanafin and then Tkachuk. We also need to add a starting goalie for 19/20. I don't think we can handle the cap without unloading one of our big name players. That said, it will cost us a big name player to get a player like Trouba or Stone. 

Brodie should be a big enough name to exchange with WPG for Trouba if they want contract certainy. OTT can't afford to let Stone get away so I don't see any panic there even if they have to live with arbitration.

Share this post


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

 

Somewhat fair, although Gaudreau is the much better player, but Gaudreau is also rare. Typically I think a player like Gaudreau would be a center but his size prevents that so he winds up a winger. 

 

either way, moot point as it's not the way they are leaning but as I said it's just what I would do. 

Not a chance Gaudreau has the defensive acumen to be a center.

Lindholm does, and I agree that's where he should be.

He's also good at the dot and RHS at the dot.

If we say no to the OHL line, Tkachuk-Lindholm-Neal would give me the warm and fuzzies.

JG-Mony-Bennett, as you said.

Looks right to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that we, as a team are willing to bend over backwards for Bennett given “three years of investment”-and Jankowski, who has less then a full year with the team is considered an afterthought, or “maxed out” with his ceiling.  Yes, I’m a Jankowski fan in as much as he has done everything he has been asked to; and stepped up to every task assigned with a positive attitude and a desire to improve.  I can’t say the same for Bennett.  Jankowski has shown he could contribute and hold the third line center, as well as produce as a shooter.  With all the talk of Bennett playing RW on the top line, why hasn’t Jankowski’s name come up in the same breath?  He has shown, IMO, a better ability to act as a defensive playmaker for a top line then Bennett has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouba is a defence-man that plays at the coveted RHRD position.

His career PPG average is 0.396.

He has good size and strength that he uses smartly for big hits and winning one on one battles.

His skating and passing are well above average and he can play effectively on both the PK and PP.

He blocks a lot of of shots and has had a positive +/- every season.

 

But, he has only played more than 65 games in a season once in his 5 year career (8 injuries including one scary looking concussion last March).

 

I believe that his next contract will depend mainly on how many years of UFA a team is willing to buy.

If it's only a 2 year contract that doesn't buy into UFA; the most I envision him receiving would be $5.2M AAV, without any trade or movement clauses.

Assuming he plays somewhere close to 162 games, and produces at the same level of offence for both those seasons; I feel that there will be multiple teams willing to sign him for 6 or 7 years at up to $7M AAV.

 

As of today, I don't think the Flames currently have the assets to acquire Trouba, unless they are willing to part with a core player.

Would Brodie (LD/RD) and Frolik (LW/C/RW) even be enough to entice the Jets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that it’s going to happen. 

 

So if the Gaudreau and Monahan line start getting outscored by another line on the Flames, do we start calling that line the first line? 

 

Does it matter what line we call Backlund? 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Ryan

Tkachuk, Backlund, Frolik 

Bennett, Lindholm, Neal

Foo/Dube, Jankowski, Czarnik

Brouwer, Hathaway

 

PP1

Gaudreau, Monahan, Neal

Hanifin, Lindholm 

PP2

Tkachuk, Backlund, Czarnik

Giordano, Ryan

 

i feel, Neal should be with the Top line, but as others say, they can get it done with others, and Ryan just has to be better than Ferland. I want Neal on the top line to protect Gaudreau. Maybe the other team will respect that line more with Neal on it. But to spread out the offence this is best. 

 

3M - I took others thought to not fix what’s not broke idea, so there it is. I think having more than Frolik with Backs will actually utilize his skills more. I’d try Lindholm in that spot too.

 

This 3rd line will score, and having this depth will kill the other team. Some will look at this roster and think, gotta have Neal up the lines! He played 2nd line in Vegas, so said the Vegas radio guy. It’s like the Pens having Kessel on the 3rd line. It won them a cup!

 

i feel like Foo, Dube or Mangiapane is going to push for a spot. 

 

 

Lazar is traded or picked up on waivers. Brouwer is an injury sub on the bottom trio but will play against harder teams. Hathaway will be energy when needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...