Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Report out of the Czech Republic today has Zacha and the Devils close to an extension. 

 

Janko for Zacha would have been a slam dunk trade for the Flames but I don't think the Devils plan on letting him go. Wouldn't make sense unless you got an overpay and he fits right in with what they are building. 

I've been hearing the same. It would be odd if they just let him walk.

Share this post


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

I've been hearing the same. It would be odd if they just let him walk.

You know it as been kind of interesting to read the comments surrounding our own Jankowski, which have him practically out the door. The only real valid complaint I have seen coming from cross16 is he isn't strong defensively in our end. He has demonstrated a number of good qualities one of which is he knows what to do with a good pass by putting them in the net. I wonder if we are overlooking a good C to play with Tkachuk who is a very good playmaker. I'm not sold on Bennett for RW and maybe we need a trade in order to address a 2nd line RHS-RW player by trading Mangiapane LW for a RW. I would prefer to see a line of Bennett LW, Backlund C, Frolik RW as our premier checking line. Just a few thoughts but something has to give involving Jankowski, Mangiapane, Frolik, Ryan, Czarnik and Dube with respect to their use and value to the team going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like Faulk for Kase or something similar.

Supposed to have a trade in place and but waiting on the extension talk with Anaheim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

Why don't the Oilers and Devil's make a Puljujarvi and Zacha trade?  Seems like a good move for both teams and players.

 

I think the Devils like Zacha and realize the KHL thing was just a ploy all along. With how much Puljujarvi's value has tanked I don't see why a team is going to give up a good asset that they like for him because they'll get him cheaper. 

 

I think we, a fans, are making too much out of these negotiations. At the first sign of anything outside what we perceive to be the norm, the thought immediately now is someone is upset and that player needs to go. I think the reality is now we are seeing the impact of players, and agents to a certain extent, that have grown up with this being a business. They are more prepared and more willing to test the system than ever before so these negotiations may seem tense, but I really just think this is the new norm. 

Share this post


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

 

I think the Devils like Zacha and realize the KHL thing was just a ploy all along. With how much Puljujarvi's value has tanked I don't see why a team is going to give up a good asset that they like for him because they'll get him cheaper. 

 

I think we, a fans, are making too much out of these negotiations. At the first sign of anything outside what we perceive to be the norm, the thought immediately now is someone is upset and that player needs to go. I think the reality is now we are seeing the impact of players, and agents to a certain extent, that have grown up with this being a business. They are more prepared and more willing to test the system than ever before so these negotiations may seem tense, but I really just think this is the new norm. 

 

It's so funny Leafs fans are calling Darren Dreger, "Paul Marner".  Everything out of Dreger's mouth and Twitter is a shill piece for Mitch Marner's agent and their tactics. Dreger is now reporting Marner will play in Switzerland by 3rd week of September.   I wonder how much Dreger is being paid by Marner. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the talk about trading Jankowski comes more from the fact that we have a fairly reasonable group of Centres who are more than capable to play the NHL game and we do not have enough space for all of them. Each comment on here has their own ideas of who fits where, why and what can be done to improve the team.

 

I would move Jankowski because I believe that he is a solid complimentary C who does well in the bottom 6 and playing in specific situations (see PK). I don't see him really driving the play offensively or really making a given line better. Was that due last year to how he was used rather than him as a player? I don't think so. I think he is what he is and needs to be accepted as such. This mean that he does carry value, but there are other Flames who have similar skills either already on the team, or in the system who likely have higher ceilings and need space. In the case of a Zacha, by the sounds of things, he plays similar in his own end but has a higher offensive ceiling, uses his body more and as he is younger, still has more room to grow and develop.

 

An example of who could replace Janks on third line C without bringing another C back would be Ryan. We know how much Peters likes and trusts him in pretty much any situation. Dube is a C, as are Quine, Gawdin and Posposil. I see Janks a bit like Joe Coulbourne with a little more offense. Neither one really uses their size they way they should and it hurts their overall game. I am not down on him as a player, but see others who could equal him in the system already and others who may actually fit the role better. If Lindholm is moved back to C, that changes things up even more.

 

I look at guys like Brodie and Frolik in similar ways. I think both are good players but are not the best utilization on the team. Frolik does not have the offense to be solid secondary scoring, he is more of a support / shutdown player now, which is good but not at the price he is at. He is a middle 6 winger, more third line who can fill 2nd line. I think the Flames need more offense on RW on the 2nd line. As ford 3rd liners, the Flames have players who can bring energy and similar offence on the third line for less cap hit already. Brodie is a good D man, but I think Andersson is already similar and will get better at lower cost. The Flames will need to replace Brodie with another RD but there are still some available as UFAs. Both Frolik and Brodie have value in trades. Since they are replaceable in their particular position for less, want not trade them to free up cap space to re-sign Chucky and Mange. 

 

It is not that I want to get rid of them simply to dump them, it is that they can be replaced internally or easily externally at lower cost while still carrying value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zacha’s case is a bit different though.  He’s on a team with significant center depth, and is likely to be their 4C going forward.  He’s unlikely to get the chance to improve his counting totals playing 10-12 minutes a game, which will hurt him financially down the line.  It’s not like he can play his way up the line up either, as Hugh’s and Hirschier are too good to pass and Zajac is unlikely to drop from 1c to 4C that quickly.  It’s not a matter of being disgruntled, just not having the opportunity exist in that organization to move up.

 

That said, he is very likely to resign in Jersey.

Share this post


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

 

It's so funny Leafs fans are calling Darren Dreger, "Paul Marner".  Everything out of Dreger's mouth and Twitter is a shill piece for Mitch Marner's agent and their tactics. Dreger is now reporting Marner will play in Switzerland by 3rd week of September.   I wonder how much Dreger is being paid by Marner. Lol

 

Dreger's sources are not often a mystery. Pretty slanted reporting usually.  He's for sure a mouthpiece for the Marner camp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

I think the talk about trading Jankowski comes more from the fact that we have a fairly reasonable group of Centres who are more than capable to play the NHL game and we do not have enough space for all of them. Each comment on here has their own ideas of who fits where, why and what can be done to improve the team.

 

 

 

And to that, he's been discussed in a deal for Kadri or in situation like Zacha/Puljujarvi (forger top 6 picks). Not exactly giving him away. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

I think the talk about trading Jankowski comes more from the fact that we have a fairly reasonable group of Centres who are more than capable to play the NHL game and we do not have enough space for all of them. Each comment on here has their own ideas of who fits where, why and what can be done to improve the team.

 

I would move Jankowski because I believe that he is a solid complimentary C who does well in the bottom 6 and playing in specific situations (see PK). I don't see him really driving the play offensively or really making a given line better. Was that due last year to how he was used rather than him as a player? I don't think so. I think he is what he is and needs to be accepted as such. This mean that he does carry value, but there are other Flames who have similar skills either already on the team, or in the system who likely have higher ceilings and need space. In the case of a Zacha, by the sounds of things, he plays similar in his own end but has a higher offensive ceiling, uses his body more and as he is younger, still has more room to grow and develop.

 

An example of who could replace Janks on third line C without bringing another C back would be Ryan. We know how much Peters likes and trusts him in pretty much any situation. Dube is a C, as are Quine, Gawdin and Posposil. I see Janks a bit like Joe Coulbourne with a little more offense. Neither one really uses their size they way they should and it hurts their overall game. I am not down on him as a player, but see others who could equal him in the system already and others who may actually fit the role better. If Lindholm is moved back to C, that changes things up even more.

 

I look at guys like Brodie and Frolik in similar ways. I think both are good players but are not the best utilization on the team. Frolik does not have the offense to be solid secondary scoring, he is more of a support / shutdown player now, which is good but not at the price he is at. He is a middle 6 winger, more third line who can fill 2nd line. I think the Flames need more offense on RW on the 2nd line. As ford 3rd liners, the Flames have players who can bring energy and similar offence on the third line for less cap hit already. Brodie is a good D man, but I think Andersson is already similar and will get better at lower cost. The Flames will need to replace Brodie with another RD but there are still some available as UFAs. Both Frolik and Brodie have value in trades. Since they are replaceable in their particular position for less, want not trade them to free up cap space to re-sign Chucky and Mange. 

 

It is not that I want to get rid of them simply to dump them, it is that they can be replaced internally or easily externally at lower cost while still carrying value.

Not a bad summary of Jankowski.  Personally I believe he has more potential, but as he is not aggressive by nature, it seems, and the Flames already with 1C & 2C filled, he's been instructed, and filled the third line role along with PK specialist asked of him.  Just my opinion.  I believe he has a lot more ceiling but unless he is challenged, ie with a promotion/expectation it may not happen.  I've also never gotten the sense that the Flames were frustrated with him, although the near trade for Kadri obviously may say otherwise.  I might like to try him at 1RW if BP tries out Lindholm at 2C with Tkachuk.  Of course, if Tkachuk refuses to sign before the season, causing his Cap to artificially go up every day he sits and makes it ever more likely he sits all season,  the 2LW spot may be just the thing....

Share this post


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

I might like to try him at 1RW if BP tries out Lindholm at 2C with Tkachuk. 

 

Same same.  Didn't he have that 4-goal game with Gaudreau?  Why not play Jankowski with Gaudreau?  Worth a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GM_3300 said:

You know it as been kind of interesting to read the comments surrounding our own Jankowski, which have him practically out the door. The only real valid complaint I have seen coming from cross16 is he isn't strong defensively in our end. He has demonstrated a number of good qualities one of which is he knows what to do with a good pass by putting them in the net. I wonder if we are overlooking a good C to play with Tkachuk who is a very good playmaker. I'm not sold on Bennett for RW and maybe we need a trade in order to address a 2nd line RHS-RW player by trading Mangiapane LW for a RW. I would prefer to see a line of Bennett LW, Backlund C, Frolik RW as our premier checking line. Just a few thoughts but something has to give involving Jankowski, Mangiapane, Frolik, Ryan, Czarnik and Dube with respect to their use and value to the team going forward.

I agree with that. But Mangiapane doesn't have enough value to be in a trade of any significance. I'm not ragging on Jankowski, but I would go a step further than not strong defensively. Almost HAVE to have Bennett with him for Bennett's D responsibility.

It's Jankowski's indecisiveness in the D zone that drives me crazy. He needs to take his first instinct and run with it. Too many times I see that indecision and in the blink of an eye he's in no man's land. If he makes the wrong decision I could give him a pass, at least he made a decision. The coaches must be telling him this stuff.

With him, it seems like there's one blown coverage, he turns from his man to help, there's two blown coverages. Kinda 2-on-1 logic. You take a guy, your goalie takes a guy.

If your goalie can't pick up on who your taking in a fraction of a second, he's screwed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it's not just his defense, I just don't think Jankowski sees the ice particularly well and in addition to that i think his agility or short area quickness is a little lacking as well. So i find it's a bad combo that really gets exposed in the D zone because not alone is the decision to pick up a man slow, his ability to get there is hampered too. It's a big reason why, combined with this age, I don't really share optimism that he is still has room to improve. 

 

What he does do well is get north - south, kill penalties and shoot the puck which all scream winger to me. My critique of Jankowski lies in that I don't thikn he is an NHL center, but he can still be a useful part of an NHL team so if someone is willing to give you good value for him do it, or change his position here. Best of my knowledge though, he's never played RW. 

Share this post


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

I agree with that. But Mangiapane doesn't have enough value to be in a trade of any significance. I'm not ragging on Jankowski, but I would go a step further than not strong defensively. Almost HAVE to have Bennett with him for Bennett's D responsibility.

It's Jankowski's indecisiveness in the D zone that drives me crazy. He needs to take his first instinct and run with it. Too many times I see that indecision and in the blink of an eye he's in no man's land. If he makes the wrong decision I could give him a pass, at least he made a decision. The coaches must be telling him this stuff.

With him, it seems like there's one blown coverage, he turns from his man to help, there's two blown coverages. Kinda 2-on-1 logic. You take a guy, your goalie takes a guy.

If your goalie can't pick up on who your taking in a fraction of a second, he's screwed.

 

 

Play Janko on Wing so his D zone responsibilities aren't so complicated.  He also has the team's best breakaway speed as proven in skills competition and on the PK.  He's also got one of the best wrist shots on the team.  Let him loose offensively and i think we've got a 25-goal scorer here.

Share this post


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

 

Play Janko on Wing so his D zone responsibilities aren't so complicated.  He also has the team's best breakaway speed as proven in skills competition and on the PK.  He's also got one of the best wrist shots on the team.  Let him loose offensively and i think we've got a 25-goal scorer here.

I'd have to agree. His long stick is better playing the defence point. He's good at backchecking. I'd do it.

But can we move him to RW? Because I assume that if he moves out of the C bracket, Lindholm moves to C.

And the the giant hole at 1st RW continues...I'd actually consider:

JG-Mony-Tkachuk

Bennett-Lindholm-Jankowski

Criss-cross applesauce on the wings, whatevs.

The Calgary Lefties.😂

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I agree with that. But Mangiapane doesn't have enough value to be in a trade of any significance. I'm not ragging on Jankowski, but I would go a step further than not strong defensively. Almost HAVE to have Bennett with him for Bennett's D responsibility.

It's Jankowski's indecisiveness in the D zone that drives me crazy. He needs to take his first instinct and run with it. Too many times I see that indecision and in the blink of an eye he's in no man's land. If he makes the wrong decision I could give him a pass, at least he made a decision. The coaches must be telling him this stuff.

With him, it seems like there's one blown coverage, he turns from his man to help, there's two blown coverages. Kinda 2-on-1 logic. You take a guy, your goalie takes a guy.

If your goalie can't pick up on who your taking in a fraction of a second, he's screwed.

 

Interesting comments.  Have to admit I haven't followed him that closely, but will have too.  So when he's with Bennett, is it Bennett losing HIS guy first that causes the negative chain reaction?  Or perhaps Neal?  If Lucic ends up with those two that would be a big upgrade and Lucic is supposed to be quite competent defensively.

Share this post


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

Interesting comments.  Have to admit I haven't followed him that closely, but will have too.  So when he's with Bennett, is it Bennett losing HIS guy first that causes the negative chain reaction?  Or perhaps Neal?  If Lucic ends up with those two that would be a big upgrade and Lucic is supposed to be quite competent defensively.

Even dmen. No one in particular. Watch him. He's bad at D coverage for a 2 way C.

I've been saying this for a long time.

He backchecks well, which is the odd part. Once they enter the zone, he tends to get kinda turned around and confused.

He just kinda panics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that CAR-ANA trade falls through, I would look at a Brodie-Kase trade, although I doubt it happens as ANA is likely our biggest rival. Brodie is a couple seasons older than Faulk, but would be cheaper for ANA to extend. Brodie and Faulk are also very similar players.

 

Faulk had one more point than Brodie, but Brodie played 3 less games, Brodie played less PP time and more shorthanded time than Faulk on average.

 

https://frozenpool.dobbersports.com/frozenpool_compare.php?players[]=4734&players[]=2822&period=2018-2019%3AR%3A99

 

Kase is a player I would love to get, he has injury concerns, but has already scored 20 in a season

Share this post


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

Even dmen. No one in particular. Watch him. He's bad at D coverage for a 2 way C.

I've been saying this for a long time.

He backchecks well, which is the odd part. Once they enter the zone, he tends to get kinda turned around and confused.

He just kinda panics.

What I see when i've watched Janko is his D coverage is one of his strongest assets. He played most of the season with Bennett -8 Neal -5 and he was a +6. He was also a Way better choice in his draft year than the 1st OA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

What I see when i've watched Janko is his D coverage is one of his strongest assets. He played most of the season with Bennett -8 Neal -5 and he was a +6. He was also a Way better choice in his draft year than the 1st OA.

Do you really want to redo that draft?

Vasilevsky was ranked 23rd, because he was Russian. He was Price-like superb.

We needed life after Kipper. But no, let's trade the 14th pick because we want Jankowski and Seiloff...

Yzerman didn't have to be a good GM, he just had to watch the others get messy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If that CAR-ANA trade falls through, I would look at a Brodie-Kase trade, although I doubt it happens as ANA is likely our biggest rival. Brodie is a couple seasons older than Faulk, but would be cheaper for ANA to extend. Brodie and Faulk are also very similar players.

 

Faulk had one more point than Brodie, but Brodie played 3 less games, Brodie played less PP time and more shorthanded time than Faulk on average.

 

https://frozenpool.dobbersports.com/frozenpool_compare.php?players[]=4734&players[]=2822&period=2018-2019%3AR%3A99

 

Kase is a player I would love to get, he has injury concerns, but has already scored 20 in a season

Sounds like Faulk put the veto in unless Anaheim offers an extension.  Could be they would consider Brodie, but as you say, same division makes that unlikely.

 

Mtl was apparently in on Gardner.  Offered more than Carolina and still lost.  A Brodie trade there could still be doable.  Maybe Philip Danault?

Share this post


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

I agree with that. But Mangiapane doesn't have enough value to be in a trade of any significance. I'm not ragging on Jankowski, but I would go a step further than not strong defensively. Almost HAVE to have Bennett with him for Bennett's D responsibility.

It's Jankowski's indecisiveness in the D zone that drives me crazy. He needs to take his first instinct and run with it. Too many times I see that indecision and in the blink of an eye he's in no man's land. If he makes the wrong decision I could give him a pass, at least he made a decision. The coaches must be telling him this stuff.

With him, it seems like there's one blown coverage, he turns from his man to help, there's two blown coverages. Kinda 2-on-1 logic. You take a guy, your goalie takes a guy.

If your goalie can't pick up on who your taking in a fraction of a second, he's screwed.

 

I hear you but you have to think with how good he is with his anticipation and quickness on the PK he could overcome a lack of defense decision making in our end 5 on 5. I think the dilemma we have on this team is how they are choosing to use Backlund and now paying him to be that #2 C with more production. I would say try this for a change and if it doesn't spark more offense go back to the 3M line.

Tkachuk, Backlund, Bennett

Lucic, Jankowski, Frolik

Mangiapane, Ryan, Czarnik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ABC923 said:

Sounds like Faulk put the veto in unless Anaheim offers an extension.  Could be they would consider Brodie, but as you say, same division makes that unlikely.

 

Mtl was apparently in on Gardner.  Offered more than Carolina and still lost.  A Brodie trade there could still be doable.  Maybe Philip Danault?

 

Is Brodie for Gallagher possible?  

Share this post


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

 

Is Brodie for Gallagher possible?  

 

Depending on how Poehling does in camp, they could consider trading Danault.

Bumps up Domi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...