Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

I think Rittich’s rise to starter will prove to be a boon later down the stretch and in the playoffs....especially should BSD get injured. It’s a blessed tandem to have right now, I think the added pressure of holding the team down should Rittich go down would raise Smiths game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lou44291 said:

Ive been thinking the exact same thing. I think replacing Smith would have a negative effect on the team right now. Even in games where he’s giving up soft ones, the team seems to rally around him to show him they’ve got his back. 

Its not so much the whole team I'd be worried about. It's the effect on Rittich. How many times have we seen Smith come out and just talk to Rittich this season (I mean, we saw it in Columbus when Rittich got pulled, that before heading to the net, Smith pulled Rittich aside and talked to him a bit, but he's also done that when he got pulled and Rittich was put in). I think Smith has really been a big part of Rittich's success this season, so trading off Smith might actually hurt Rittich's play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Its not so much the whole team I'd be worried about. It's the effect on Rittich. How many times have we seen Smith come out and just talk to Rittich this season (I mean, we saw it in Columbus when Rittich got pulled, that before heading to the net, Smith pulled Rittich aside and talked to him a bit, but he's also done that when he got pulled and Rittich was put in). I think Smith has really been a big part of Rittich's success this season, so trading off Smith might actually hurt Rittich's play.

Goalies do that when they're pulled, who's hot, what to watch for etc.

But I tend to agree. Rittich having a grizzled vet like Smith keeping him balanced for a season's not a bad thing.

 

We brought Smith in as a 2 yr placeholder. He's passing the mantle admirably.

I'd keep him on when he retires, personally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Goalies do that when they're pulled, who's hot, what to watch for etc.

But I tend to agree. Rittich having a grizzled vet like Smith keeping him balanced for a season's not a bad thing.

 

We brought Smith in as a 2 yr placeholder. He's passing the mantle admirably.

I'd keep him on when he retires, personally.

I mean yeah, goalies do that. But I've seen Smith pull Rittich aside after a loss and after a win and say some things to him as well. Like, he's honestly been doing a bunch of coaching for Rittich. And if he's down for it, I'd replace Sigalet with Smith if Smith is interested in staying with us in an off-ice capacity.

Share this post


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

 

Really glad this trade didn't happen.

 

It's actually a miracle the Canucks GM and staff thought Joulevi was more worthy than Tkachuk.  Had they taken Tkachuk, then i guess we would've taken Keller.

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Really glad this trade didn't happen.

 

Honestly at the time I think I would have applauded this trade. Flames would have got Tkachuk, lost Wideman's Salary and picked up a 2nd. As much as losing Backlund would have sucked, at the time I actually can see how it made a lot of sense. Interesting in that Keller's name was in there too but it's so hard to know what the truth is. I believe Burke has also said publicly that they had Puljujarvi ahead of Tkachuk and had they made the trade to 4 and he was there they would have taken him.

 

Pretty crazy how many moving pieces there were to that draft though. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross mentioned this earlier and I have been giving a lot thought to moving Brodie or Hamonic in the off season. The more I think about it the more it makes sense, and the only reason it makes sense is because of all the young talent we have on the Blueline. 

 

I think Andersson, who I must admit has proven me to be completely wrong about, is a guy who can handle top 4 minutes next year. I also think you will see Hanifin and Valimaki getting more minutes next year as well. I think you can move a Hamonic or a Brodie out, though my preference would be to move Hamonic just because I see Brodie aging better than Hamonic, and still have a quality group of defense. In return you will have more cap space to address other areas, such as adding some more skill to the 2nd line.

 

Giordano-Brodie

Hanifin-Andersson

Valimaki-Stone

 

That's still a pretty good Blueline.

Share this post


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

Cross mentioned this earlier and I have been giving a lot thought to moving Brodie or Hamonic in the off season. The more I think about it the more it makes sense, and the only reason it makes sense is because of all the young talent we have on the Blueline. 

 

I think Andersson, who I must admit has proven me to be completely wrong about, is a guy who can handle top 4 minutes next year. I also think you will see Hanifin and Valimaki getting more minutes next year as well. I think you can move a Hamonic or a Brodie out, though my preference would be to move Hamonic just because I see Brodie aging better than Hamonic, and still have a quality group of defense. In return you will have more cap space to address other areas, such as adding some more skill to the 2nd line.

 

Giordano-Brodie

Hanifin-Andersson

Valimaki-Stone

 

That's still a pretty good Blueline.

 

What's impressed me the most is Kylington being a viable bottom pair guy.  I thought he wasn't smart enough and too raw.  He still might not have top pair potential but he could potentially develop into a second pair offensive Dman.

 

What this means is I think we should be comfortable trading Hanifin.

 

The reason is, we are short RHS RD and so, I want to keep Hamonic until we have a replacement.

Share this post


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

Cross mentioned this earlier and I have been giving a lot thought to moving Brodie or Hamonic in the off season. The more I think about it the more it makes sense, and the only reason it makes sense is because of all the young talent we have on the Blueline. 

 

I think Andersson, who I must admit has proven me to be completely wrong about, is a guy who can handle top 4 minutes next year. I also think you will see Hanifin and Valimaki getting more minutes next year as well. I think you can move a Hamonic or a Brodie out, though my preference would be to move Hamonic just because I see Brodie aging better than Hamonic, and still have a quality group of defense. In return you will have more cap space to address other areas, such as adding some more skill to the 2nd line.

 

Giordano-Brodie

Hanifin-Andersson

Valimaki-Stone

 

That's still a pretty good Blueline.

You are one trade happy character JT with a busy mind. Personally I would ride out our veteran defencemen for this and the next season. Why ? because we do have a chance for a SC in here I believe. Call me sentimental but Brodie has endured so much here as a Flame it would be great to see him win a SC alongside Giordano. Hamonic loves being here and gives us that "toughness" we need within our defense. All 3 of Giordano, Brodie and Hamonic are ideal for Hanifin, Andersson, Valimaki and Kylington to learn from now. Let's not be in such a rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friedman mentioned today in 31 thoughts that he thinks the Flames will have some interest in Kunitz. Adds playoff experience, playoff producer, plays with an edge as we saw with the elbow on Hamonic as well in his Pens days. 

 

However I don’t even know if at this point I would want to give up even a 7th for a soon to be 40 year old with 3 points this season. Maybe I would give up a player like Josh Healey who does not figure to be in the teams plans going forward 

Share this post


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

Friedman mentioned today in 31 thoughts that he thinks the Flames will have some interest in Kunitz. Adds playoff experience, playoff producer, plays with an edge as we saw with the elbow on Hamonic as well in his Pens days. 

 

However I don’t even know if at this point I would want to give up even a 7th for a soon to be 40 year old with 3 points this season. Maybe I would give up a player like Josh Healey who does not figure to be in the teams plans going forward 

Na, I think the 40 yr old Kunitz and his 3 pts would look better playing for Friedman's Leaf's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

Cross mentioned this earlier and I have been giving a lot thought to moving Brodie or Hamonic in the off season. The more I think about it the more it makes sense, and the only reason it makes sense is because of all the young talent we have on the Blueline. 

 

I think Andersson, who I must admit has proven me to be completely wrong about, is a guy who can handle top 4 minutes next year. I also think you will see Hanifin and Valimaki getting more minutes next year as well. I think you can move a Hamonic or a Brodie out, though my preference would be to move Hamonic just because I see Brodie aging better than Hamonic, and still have a quality group of defense. In return you will have more cap space to address other areas, such as adding some more skill to the 2nd line.

 

Giordano-Brodie

Hanifin-Andersson

Valimaki-Stone

 

That's still a pretty good Blueline.

 

I like looking into the idea but I do think Hamonic makes more sense over Brodie just due to RS and the heavier game but this in the future so not a huge argument now. 

 

I just think it's why good organization due, cash in on assets and cash in on your depth. I think Brodie could probably net them a younger players or pick or prospect that could aid them in depth for next year and I honestly believe he woudln't be missed with how much depth the Flames have. Good organization do this. 

 

That being said I also think a huge factor is how the season ends and why does it end. I can get behind hte rationale that if you get super close, bring everyone back and give them a shot even if it means letting someone like Brodie walk for nothing. How much it costs to get Tkachuk done and can they move guys like Frolik/Stone would be a big factor as well. 

Share this post


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

Friedman mentioned today in 31 thoughts that he thinks the Flames will have some interest in Kunitz. Adds playoff experience, playoff producer, plays with an edge as we saw with the elbow on Hamonic as well in his Pens days. 

 

However I don’t even know if at this point I would want to give up even a 7th for a soon to be 40 year old with 3 points this season. Maybe I would give up a player like Josh Healey who does not figure to be in the teams plans going forward 

 

Not someone I'd target but also not someone i'd complain if they did get. Ya he only has 3 points but Chicago is god awful especially in their bottom 6. He had 13 goals just last year. If you want to get more physical, he's probably one of the few guys that makes sense because at least he can keep up with the pace of a game in the playoffs. He actually has some promising numbers that make me think he could actually fit quite well here. 

 

If the desire is thre to get more physical it's really slim picking out there. Afer my conversation with People the other day about getting tougher guys I went through and look a long look at guys I thought could be A-acquirable B- reasonably priced and C- actually able to play an effective Flames style game. I can tell you I turned up very, very few names.

 

So i have to agree with Friedman, Kunitz makes alot of sense if their is a desire to get someone who can play the game harder. 

Share this post


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

Cross mentioned this earlier and I have been giving a lot thought to moving Brodie or Hamonic in the off season. The more I think about it the more it makes sense, and the only reason it makes sense is because of all the young talent we have on the Blueline. 

 

I think Andersson, who I must admit has proven me to be completely wrong about, is a guy who can handle top 4 minutes next year. I also think you will see Hanifin and Valimaki getting more minutes next year as well. I think you can move a Hamonic or a Brodie out, though my preference would be to move Hamonic just because I see Brodie aging better than Hamonic, and still have a quality group of defense. In return you will have more cap space to address other areas, such as adding some more skill to the 2nd line.

 

Giordano-Brodie

Hanifin-Andersson

Valimaki-Stone

 

That's still a pretty good Blueline.

 

I think overall both Brodie and Hamonic have played about the same as far as abilities.  Brodie's a much better skater, but Hamonic is less prone to losing guys in the D-zone.  Brodie is a piece that would net a good return.  I would tend to replace Stone.  He's okay, but I think we need to get a little faster.  Not an expensive 3rd pairing guy.  Just a vet that can skate and defend.  Needs little offense.

Share this post


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

 

Honestly at the time I think I would have applauded this trade. Flames would have got Tkachuk, lost Wideman's Salary and picked up a 2nd. As much as losing Backlund would have sucked, at the time I actually can see how it made a lot of sense. Interesting in that Keller's name was in there too but it's so hard to know what the truth is. I believe Burke has also said publicly that they had Puljujarvi ahead of Tkachuk and had they made the trade to 4 and he was there they would have taken him.

 

Pretty crazy how many moving pieces there were to that draft though. 

 

 

 

I had Keller at 3 tbh. Most had him later top 10.

I had grievances on Tkacuk at the time in jr competition. lol

Time heals all wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklund/Zuccarello-could-Push-Calgary-over-topBruinsHoward/1/97286

 

Eklund with another post about us being in on Zuccarello. 

 

I actually don't mind Zuccarello and he could really help our skill on the 2nd line and 2nd PP. He is listed as left shot RW something we have a few of already, so if he could play LW I think he would slot nicely on the 3rd line setting up Neal.

 

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm

Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik

Zuccarello-Bennett-Neal

Jankowski-Ryan-Hathaway/Czarnik

 

That's a much deeper looking top 9 and gives Neal a proven playmaker to play with.

Share this post


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

https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklund/Zuccarello-could-Push-Calgary-over-topBruinsHoward/1/97286

 

Eklund with another post about us being in on Zuccarello. 

 

I actually don't mind Zuccarello and he could really help our skill on the 2nd line and 2nd PP. He is listed as left shot RW something we have a few of already, so if he could play LW I think he would slot nicely on the 3rd line setting up Neal.

 

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm

Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik

Zuccarello-Bennett-Neal

Jankowski-Ryan-Hathaway/Czarnik

 

That's a much deeper looking top 9 and gives Neal a proven playmaker to play with.

Throwing darts?

Share this post


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

Throwing darts?

 

Probably, but Calgary was scouting the Rangers not that long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2019/01/dallas-stars-dangling-mattias-janmark-in-trade-talks.html

 

Dallas is apparently dangling Janmark, Ritchie and Nichushkin. Janmark is a speedy two way player and could help our lineup. Ritchie isn't much of an upgrade on Hathaway so I don't see him as a fit.

 

Nichushkin is interesting he's still only 23, but he is struggling in Dallas and is playing 4th line minutes. His value is at an all time low, good time to take a flyer on him? The problem is his $2.95m price tag for next year, that's a lot of wasted cap space if he can't find his way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have concerns about Janmark as well.

He only has 15 points playing with Stamkos on the first line, he will have RFA arbitration rights, and already makes $2.3M.

I think that I'd pass on all 3 of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 420since1974 said:

I have concerns about Janmark as well.

He only has 15 points playing with Stamkos on the first line, he will have RFA arbitration rights, and already makes $2.3M.

I think that I'd pass on all 3 of them.

 

Stamkos?  Do u mean Seguin?  

 

But nothing to be concerned about.  I think Janmark is a secondary scorer who provides lots of speed.  He could be an effective bottom 6 player.

Share this post


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

 

Probably, but Calgary was scouting the Rangers not that long ago.

 

I've been thinking more about trading a D and thinking about the Rangers.  

 

For an off-season move, can we get Zibanejad with Hanifin?  Our LD has Valimaki and Kylington pushing up the depth chart and our ageless captain seems like he's not slowing down for another 3 years.  Our LD would still be stacked if we move Hanifin and the salaries of both Zibanejad and Hanifin are a push.  Zibanejad would give our second line a legit offensive threat to play with Tkachuk.  He's only 25 and a RHS C.  This lets us move Backlund onto the 3rd line and focus purely in a shut down role... or trade Backlund entirely if we feel his salary is too much for a 3rd line C.

 

Why would the Rangers do this?  Well, they need to rebuild and Hanifin is 3 years younger signed to a longer deal.  Their D could use a player like Hanifin to build around.  Brady Skjei is a good one but outside of that, everyone else is old and declining fast.  

Share this post


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

 

I've been thinking more about trading a D and thinking about the Rangers.  

 

For an off-season move, can we get Zibanejad with Hanifin?  Our LD has Valimaki and Kylington pushing up the depth chart and our ageless captain seems like he's not slowing down for another 3 years.  Our LD would still be stacked if we move Hanifin and the salaries of both Zibanejad and Hanifin are a push.  Zibanejad would give our second line a legit offensive threat to play with Tkachuk.  He's only 25 and a RHS C.  This lets us move Backlund onto the 3rd line and focus purely in a shut down role... or trade Backlund entirely if we feel his salary is too much for a 3rd line C.

 

Why would the Rangers do this?  Well, they need to rebuild and Hanifin is 3 years younger signed to a longer deal.  Their D could use a player like Hanifin to build around.  Brady Skjei is a good one but outside of that, everyone else is old and declining fast.  

Get off the pot, we are not trading Hanifin, quit being ridiculous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at Janmark when i was looking around at potential 3rd line center upgrades but I don't think he really fits. I don't see what position Janmark would upgrade other than just giving them added depth and you can do that for cheaper. There isn't a player in the top 9 I would take out for Janmark and his price tag, both for salary and trade cost isn't really worth it for the 4th line IMO. 

I do like Ritchie but the fit just isn't there again. RW who isn't a clear upgarde over Hathaway and while i'm not a big Hathaway fan I wouldn't take him and his PK ability out of the lineup unless you get a clear upgrade.

I'm a hard no on Nichuskin. I've never really been a fan and I don't see the upside some see in him so I don't think he is wroth a flyer, nor the type of guy you should look at during the TDL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...