Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

So 2 deals here.

 

42 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

For the record I don't like half the crap Tkachuk does either.

Have to agree Tkachuk's cheap shots, slow skating , and turtling when retribution is due.

So:

To Ottawa

Tkachuk

Kylington

 

To Calgary

Chabot

2020 1st rnd SJS pick

 

Then

To Toronto

Chabot  This works for TO as they shed salary and get a good D on ELC

2020 Calgary 3rd rnd pick

 

To Calgary

Kapanen (1st line RW)

Johnson ( replace Tkachuk 2nd line using lindholm RW)

 

Now we have a little cap and an extra 1st rnd pick in 2020 to upgrade especially if we unload Neal .

 

Then

Share this post


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

So 2 deals here.

 

Have to agree Tkachuk's cheap shots, slow skating , and turtling when retribution is due.

So:

To Ottawa

Tkachuk

Kylington

 

To Calgary

Chabot

2020 1st rnd SJS pick

 

Then

To Toronto

Chabot  This works for TO as they shed salary and get a good D on ELC

2020 Calgary 3rd rnd pick

 

To Calgary

Kapanen (1st line RW)

Johnson ( replace Tkachuk 2nd line using lindholm RW)

 

Now we have a little cap and an extra 1st rnd pick in 2020 to upgrade especially if we unload Neal .

 

Then

 

No.

Share this post


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

So 2 deals here.

 

Have to agree Tkachuk's cheap shots, slow skating , and turtling when retribution is due.

So:

To Ottawa

Tkachuk

Kylington

 

To Calgary

Chabot

2020 1st rnd SJS pick

 

Then

To Toronto

Chabot  This works for TO as they shed salary and get a good D on ELC

2020 Calgary 3rd rnd pick

 

To Calgary

Kapanen (1st line RW)

Johnson ( replace Tkachuk 2nd line using lindholm RW)

 

Now we have a little cap and an extra 1st rnd pick in 2020 to upgrade especially if we unload Neal .

 

Then

 

So we would be moving the two best pieces in the trade (Tkachuk and Chabot) and ending up with two 2nd/3rd liners.

 

Would have to take a pass on that one.

 

Kapanen and Johnsson are a bit over rated IMO. The both have good speed, but benefit from playing with Matthews and being pumped up by the Toronto media. They are good players, but they are Frolik level players.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

So we would be moving the two best pieces in the trade (Tkachuk and Chabot) and ending up with two 2nd/3rd liners.

 

Would have to take a pass on that one.

 

Kapanen and Johnsson are a bit over rated IMO. The both have good speed, but benefit from playing with Matthews and being pumped up by the Toronto media. They are good players, but they are Frolik level players.

 

Agreed.

 

But it would be interesting to keep Chabot and trade Giordano. This leaves us with Chabot, Hanifin, and Valimaki as 3 LD.  Set for the future.  Giordano should bring back an impact player.

Share this post


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

 

So we would be moving the two best pieces in the trade (Tkachuk and Chabot) and ending up with two 2nd/3rd liners.

 

Would have to take a pass on that one.

 

Kapanen and Johnsson are a bit over rated IMO. The both have good speed, but benefit from playing with Matthews and being pumped up by the Toronto media. They are good players, but they are Frolik level players.

In the end it would be:

Kapanen and Johnsson and SJS 2020 1st

for Tkachuk, Kylington, 2020 3rd

We are a better team and better situated for a buyers market over the summer.

Share this post


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

In the end it would be:

Kapanen and Johnsson and SJS 2020 1st

for Tkachuk, Kylington, 2020 3rd

We are a better team and better situated for a buyers market over the summer.

 

I would rather keep Tkachuk. Kapanen and Johnsson would end up costing about the same as Tkachuk in cap hit. I would rather keep the better player.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

So 2 deals here.

 

Have to agree Tkachuk's cheap shots, slow skating , and turtling when retribution is due.

So:

To Ottawa

Tkachuk

Kylington

 

To Calgary

Chabot

2020 1st rnd SJS pick

 

Then

To Toronto

Chabot  This works for TO as they shed salary and get a good D on ELC

2020 Calgary 3rd rnd pick

 

To Calgary

Kapanen (1st line RW)

Johnson ( replace Tkachuk 2nd line using lindholm RW)

 

Now we have a little cap and an extra 1st rnd pick in 2020 to upgrade especially if we unload Neal .

 

Then

I actually think Tkachuk has toned his antics down and will pick his spots as he matures. This organization has good past players lending a voice every now and then to these current players. Honestly I don't see the need for a lot of changes but a few essential ones that move the needle closer to the team BP wants to ice. BP appears to want a speedy talented group that plays a 200' game the right way. Having said this you don't want to give up talented individuals like Tkachuk and Monahan because they are not speedy but have other talents you also need. Same goes for size IMO, small players can be speedy but are not effective when the going gets tough so it becomes a balance. We already have Gaudreau that as talented as he is gets abused and backs off when getting all the attention. The question will always be how to compliment your deficiencies enough to make them productive assets.

Neal was like a fish out of water because we couldn't compliment him with the type of talents he needs to play with in order to be productive and I don't see that happening next season either. BT has to find a way to trade him IMO.

The players for me that really need to be traded are Neal, Frolik, Brodie and Stone. I would also trade Jankowski, Mangiapane and Czarnik because they have some value and with our need to gain some size.

The 3 players I would be after are Kapanen RW, Dzingel LW/C and Connolly RW.

Share this post


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

 

So we would be moving the two best pieces in the trade (Tkachuk and Chabot) and ending up with two 2nd/3rd liners.

 

Would have to take a pass on that one.

 

Kapanen and Johnsson are a bit over rated IMO. The both have good speed, but benefit from playing with Matthews and being pumped up by the Toronto media. They are good players, but they are Frolik level players.

I'd agree, add in there's no way MTL is moving Chabot.

That would be ill-advised. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on what BT wants to do with Frolik.. I think he already has one foot out the door and is as good as gone.

 

What's his value though? I think he is worth a late 2nd, NJ has 3 2nd's, that could be a fit, they will need to add NHL capable bodies to entice Hall to stay. Or does MIN still want him? It will be interesting as I feel there's no way Frolik is back and who fills his role?

Share this post


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

Depending on what BT wants to do with Frolik.. I think he already has one foot out the door and is as good as gone.

 

What's his value though? I think he is worth a late 2nd, NJ has 3 2nd's, that could be a fit, they will need to add NHL capable bodies to entice Hall to stay. Or does MIN still want him? It will be interesting as I feel there's no way Frolik is back and who fills his role?

 

 

Frolik for Jordan Greenway.  That would be a huge win for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The deal I think is worth persuing is Brodie and Mangiapane to STL for Schenn C and Jake Allen G. STL as a number of Cs but could use some lower priced help on LW. I also think Allen would be more than available with the advance of Billington there now. BT could sweeten the pot if Schenn signs an extension with us. Schenn with Tkachuk on our 2nd line should be good chemistry and allow us to leave Bennett on LW with Backlund 3rd line.

Share this post


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

 

I would rather keep Tkachuk. Kapanen and Johnsson would end up costing about the same as Tkachuk in cap hit. I would rather keep the better player.

Are they overrated or are they breakout candidates like Lindholm ? Kapanen has the talent to be a special player, definitely an upgrade to an aging Frolik. Johnsson is Mangiapane. I wouldn't balk at the right deal for Kapanen if one exists for us.

Share this post


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

Depending on what BT wants to do with Frolik.. I think he already has one foot out the door and is as good as gone.

 

What's his value though? I think he is worth a late 2nd, NJ has 3 2nd's, that could be a fit, they will need to add NHL capable bodies to entice Hall to stay. Or does MIN still want him? It will be interesting as I feel there's no way Frolik is back and who fills his role?

This makes me wonder if NJ would have interest in both Neal and Frolik for those 3 - 2nd round draft picks ? Shero I believe had Neal when with PIT and they could use the Leadership as well.

Share this post


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

The deal I think is worth persuing is Brodie and Mangiapane...

 

Why trade Mangiapane in every trade proposal?  If he gets the ice time, then he could be a 20-goal scorer and 45-points for around $1.25-mil.  That's a great bargain.

Share this post


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

 

Why trade Mangiapane in every trade proposal?  If he gets the ice time, then he could be a 20-goal scorer and 45-points for around $1.25-mil.  That's a great bargain.

It's a great bargain for someone else as well to sweeten the deal. You don't understand that aspect ? You have to give to get and I would rather make sure I get Schenn and Allen than worrying about keeping Mangiapane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what I see on this board over the last month or more is:

 

We trade our players that fore check and dig pucks out of the dirty areas (Frolik, Hathaway, Mangipane) or move players to center that do that ( Bennett, Lindholm) then keep or add more players that wait around for a pass to score. (Monahan, Backlund, Tkachuk, Neal)

 

Wow this looks like a winning strategy.

Share this post


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

So what I see on this board over the last month or more is:

 

We trade our players that fore check and dig pucks out of the dirty areas (Frolik, Hathaway, Mangipane) or move players to center that do that ( Bennett, Lindholm) then keep or add more players that wait around for a pass to score. (Monahan, Backlund, Tkachuk, Neal)

 

Wow this looks like a winning strategy.

 

I think Frolik trades are based on cap issues and them already trying to trade him/agent issues.  He plays well enough to form the 3M line, but perhaps he doesn't fit in other scenarios.  Hathaway is a player you can keep if he makes less than $1m.  Mangiapane?  I don't get the rush to move him.  Of the LW's in the last month and playoffs, he did the most with the least amount of time (maybe JH did a little better, but that should be expected).  I would trade Bennett over Mangiapane, just because we have a ceiling for Bennett.  We have no idea if Mangiapane will become a 30g guy or maybe just a 15-20 goal guy.  He's small, but skates like the wind and is like a dog on the puck.  No way I am trading him this soon.

 

I see the moving of Lindholm to C to be a strategy to change the 2nd line into a scoring line as well as taking some of the tough minutes from Backlund.  Maybe that allows you to free up Tkachuk to start scoring more 5v5.  Maybe Backlund's line can be Dube and a RW.  It also allows you to consider using Janko in a trade.  We are short top 6 RHS's.  We have Lindy.  Ryan and Hathaway are bottom 6.

 

I don't think we are far off from being a contender.  We didn't lose in round 1 because of a bunch of holes.  We just need some adjustment in the makeup of the team.  Maybe a RHS RW, as we have plenty to play LW.  I'm not in a rush to trade Bennett, but he has to be more than a threat in the playoffs.  Neal should be able to improve this year, but we can't expect that if we trot out Bennett-Janko-Neal every game.  That trio has done little.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redfire11 said:

So what I see on this board over the last month or more is:

 

We trade our players that fore check and dig pucks out of the dirty areas (Frolik, Hathaway, Mangipane) or move players to center that do that ( Bennett, Lindholm) then keep or add more players that wait around for a pass to score. (Monahan, Backlund, Tkachuk, Neal)

 

Wow this looks like a winning strategy.

OK let's hear what you have for a strategy ?

Share this post


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

 

I think Frolik trades are based on cap issues and them already trying to trade him/agent issues.  He plays well enough to form the 3M line, but perhaps he doesn't fit in other scenarios.  Hathaway is a player you can keep if he makes less than $1m.  Mangiapane?  I don't get the rush to move him.  Of the LW's in the last month and playoffs, he did the most with the least amount of time (maybe JH did a little better, but that should be expected).  I would trade Bennett over Mangiapane, just because we have a ceiling for Bennett.  We have no idea if Mangiapane will become a 30g guy or maybe just a 15-20 goal guy.  He's small, but skates like the wind and is like a dog on the puck.  No way I am trading him this soon.

 

I see the moving of Lindholm to C to be a strategy to change the 2nd line into a scoring line as well as taking some of the tough minutes from Backlund.  Maybe that allows you to free up Tkachuk to start scoring more 5v5.  Maybe Backlund's line can be Dube and a RW.  It also allows you to consider using Janko in a trade.  We are short top 6 RHS's.  We have Lindy.  Ryan and Hathaway are bottom 6.

 

I don't think we are far off from being a contender.  We didn't lose in round 1 because of a bunch of holes.  We just need some adjustment in the makeup of the team.  Maybe a RHS RW, as we have plenty to play LW.  I'm not in a rush to trade Bennett, but he has to be more than a threat in the playoffs.  Neal should be able to improve this year, but we can't expect that if we trot out Bennett-Janko-Neal every game.  That trio has done little.  

You seem to want Mangiapane over Bennett and that just isn't going to happen. You say Bennett only brings it in the playoffs and that couldn't be further from the truth especially this season when he was a force for us all season. I do agree that entire line of Bennett, Jankowski and Neal was ill conceived from a chemistry stand point. Mangiapane showed some hustle but if he isn't top 9 he is good trade material to improve our RS, simply a fundamental switch of a LW for a better RW situation. Dube easily replaces Mangiapane on the 4th line LW if that is where they want him.

Share this post


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

It's a great bargain for someone else as well to sweeten the deal. You don't understand that aspect ? You have to give to get and I would rather make sure I get Schenn and Allen than worrying about keeping Mangiapane.

 

There's no worry when it comes to keeping Mangiapane.  He's not going to be an expensive re-sign considering he was making $800k and scored 13-points in 44-games.  The sweetest deal for us is to bring him back at $1.25-mil over 3-years and watch him perform at $4 to $5-mil.  I would even go to the extent of proposing we identify more Mangiapane-types around the NHL (guys about to perform at $4-to-$5-mil but currently coming off entry level deals) and then we trade our $4-to-$5-mil guys for them.  Do the opposite type of trade you are proposing.

Share this post


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

 

There's no worry when it comes to keeping Mangiapane.  He's not going to be an expensive re-sign considering he was making $800k and scored 13-points in 44-games.  The sweetest deal for us is to bring him back at $1.25-mil over 3-years and watch him perform at $4 to $5-mil.  I would even go to the extent of proposing we identify more Mangiapane-types around the NHL (guys about to perform at $4-to-$5-mil but currently coming off entry level deals) and then we trade our $4-to-$5-mil guys for them.  Do the opposite type of trade you are proposing.

You can do anything you want here, totally hypothetical. My proposals are based on us upgrading a few higher up talent positions and increasing both our size and speed. We could keep Mangiapane and have him play 4th line LW or use his value to upgrade elsewhere. Never a bad idea to trade from your excess positions and ours are LW, C and D.

Share this post


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

 

There's no worry when it comes to keeping Mangiapane.  He's not going to be an expensive re-sign considering he was making $800k and scored 13-points in 44-games.  The sweetest deal for us is to bring him back at $1.25-mil over 3-years and watch him perform at $4 to $5-mil.  I would even go to the extent of proposing we identify more Mangiapane-types around the NHL (guys about to perform at $4-to-$5-mil but currently coming off entry level deals) and then we trade our $4-to-$5-mil guys for them.  Do the opposite type of trade you are proposing.

 

For me, I feel like our team is small but skilled... The Avs may not have played truculent but the played bigger than we did. From game 2 it looked like our team was studded from the word go. Either they believed in the hype that they figured they didn’t need to show up, or they weren’t ready to compete. But what I saw were bigger guys leaning on our team to slow down and take space away from our skilled small players.

 

so I get afraid of having a small group. Fleury made his own space, was a wrecking ball of emotions. We don’t really have that amongst our small guys. Mange could be the closest to that.

 

I don’t mean get bigger for the sake of bigger. 

 

I didn't like Peluso or Prout. That’s not what I mean by getting bigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

For me, I feel like our team is small but skilled... The Avs may not have played truculent but the played bigger than we did. From game 2 it looked like our team was studded from the word go. Either they believed in the hype that they figured they didn’t need to show up, or they weren’t ready to compete. But what I saw were bigger guys leaning on our team to slow down and take space away from our skilled small players.

 

so I get afraid of having a small group. Fleury made his own space, was a wrecking ball of emotions. We don’t really have that amongst our small guys. Mange could be the closest to that.

 

I don’t mean get bigger for the sake of bigger. 

 

I didn't like Peluso or Prout. That’s not what I mean by getting bigger.

When your best players are not your best players you are going to lose. tell you what I saw, in the first half we were hustling on offense and defense to make our own opportunities. After the AS break it was like they were waiting for the opposition to screw up so we could take advantage. Bottom line, we became lazy and got our a_ _ handed to us.

Share this post


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

OK let's hear what you have for a strategy ?

Take a look at the success CBJ and CAR are having playing aggressively with 2 players on the fore check and how easily our defense was rattled by an aggressive AVS fore check. Remember when our 3 M line was successful Ya that was when Frolik and Tkachuk were hard in on the defense with Backlund following in to intercept the shoot out. Their success failed as soon as Frolik was the lone dirty area guy. And you wonder why Frolik has no problems changing area codes AND why I have no problem getting a good return on Tkachuk. Remember Ferland his success crunching defense and stealing pucks in the corners and that all changed when he decided he was worth more as a goal scorer than a grinder (this remind you of anyone currently on our team).

So my strategy  is get rid of  Neal, Tkachuk, maybe Backlund, Monahan and bring in the "Josh Anderson's, Alex Tuch's, Justin William's,Carl Soderburg's" etc.   Not those players specifically but their hard on the puck work ethic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

When your best players are not your best players you are going to lose. tell you what I saw, in the first half we were hustling on offense and defense to make our own opportunities. After the AS break it was like they were waiting for the opposition to screw up so we could take advantage. Bottom line, we became lazy and got our a_ _ handed to us.

 

ya man, that's why we need to consider trading our best players.  Not saying we will and not saying we give them away for nothing.  We seriously have to consider all options because we can't afford another repeat lack of effort next year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...