Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
JTech780

Seattle Expansion Draft

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Alternative would've been,

 

Gaudreau

Tkachuk

Lindholm

Mangiapane

Giordano

Tanev

Hanifin

Andersson

Markstrom

 

We lose one of,

Monahan

Backlund

Dube

 

I have to question if Monahan even gets us a 1st round pick in a trade.

 

Backlund shouldn't get us a 1st.

 

Dube possible.  I would pick Dube here if I was Seattle.  Dube vs Giordano...

I think they made the right call. Jeff Marek reported that Seattle required a 1st and 3rd in order to stay away from players. 

 

The only issue is now the Flames will need to acquire a top 4 D. They would have needed to next year anyway, so this just expedites that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think they made the right call. Jeff Marek reported that Seattle required a 1st and 3rd in order to stay away from players. 

 

The only issue is now the Flames will need to acquire a top 4 D. They would have needed to next year anyway, so this just expedites that.

Exactly and Gio is questionable as a top4 now anyway…they should have moved him out when the opted out of Brodie…those two had a particular chemistry, it’s not a surprise to see Gio fade so fast the year after Brodie was gone…so instead of getting a 1st + for Gio now we get nothing for him…piss poor management oh and let’s not forget they let Brodie walk for squat too…kinda hard to be competitive when you keep loosing high end players for noting…and then let’s not forget the next to zero return on Iggy too…man this team is a mess! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

Exactly and Gio is questionable as a top4 now anyway…they should have moved him out when the opted out of Brodie…those two had a particular chemistry, it’s not a surprise to see Gio fade so fast the year after Brodie was gone…so instead of getting a 1st + for Gio now we get nothing for him…piss poor management oh and let’s not forget they let Brodie walk for squat too…kinda hard to be competitive when you keep loosing high end players for noting…and then let’s not forget the next to zero return on Iggy too…man this team is a mess! 

Well, due to the nature of the expansion draft, you’re losing someone. It would be impossible to trade every possible player seattle would want. I doubt that at any point there would have been 1st round picks on the table for Gio. They made the right call. It will suck to see him go but this is the biggest shakeup the team could make. We all clamoured for change, this is that.

 

Brodie wasn’t such a big loss. Tanev essentially filled Brodie’s role and was very good. 
 

The Iginla trade was botched, sure but it was also 8 years ago. Every team has made trades that haven’t worked out. We just tend to focus on the Flames ones because they’re the team we follow the closest.

Share this post


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

I think they made the right call. Jeff Marek reported that Seattle required a 1st and 3rd in order to stay away from players. 

 

The only issue is now the Flames will need to acquire a top 4 D. They would have needed to next year anyway, so this just expedites that.

 

100%... 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 but it would've been nice to have sold Giordano at the TDL.  We missed the playoffs anyways.

Share this post


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

 

100%... 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 but it would've been nice to have sold Giordano at the TDL.  We missed the playoffs anyways.

 

That's what I would have done. But teams wouldn't have been able to handle the 6 this next season who would have wanted him... I'd have retained, but I just don't see how the Flames could if they want to use the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

That's what I would have done. But teams wouldn't have been able to handle the 6 this next season who would have wanted him... I'd have retained, but I just don't see how the Flames could if they want to use the cap.

Yes but whichever team that took him could have exposed him, and it probably would have been a classy move by Cgy to send him to a contender and add a draft pick or prospect.

 

It would have not only been smart asset  player management by Cgy but also a win for Gio (getting a chance to compete for a cup) a win for Cgy (picks and or prospects) and a win for a contender (solid vet and Norris winner D, can be cotter fire for exposure in the expansion draft, which in a way is kinda insurance protection for other players on their team too) 

 

again, piss poor asset management by BT, I think he’s too personally invested with players and makes bad decisions based on sediment and misplaced loyalty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

100%... 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 but it would've been nice to have sold Giordano at the TDL.  We missed the playoffs anyways.

Hindsight? We all

seen this coming, missing the playoffs, loosing Gio for nothing as many of us had been saying to trade him last summer, there is no hindsight here it’s 100% piss poor asset management by BT.

 

now having said this, I’d like to see if he can dig him self out of this hole, it’s actually kinda worth while to

let him try as it’s kinda a win win…

 

on one had if he is able to dig out of this then we have a team able to compete, and I do think if BT makes the right moves he can and also opens the door to move some key pieces of the team in 2-3 years for futures and succession planing.

 

now on the other hand, he fails, and the odds are that he will, we should at least nail down a few high draft picks and with any luck move out BT and bring in a GM who will burn it to the ground next season and hopefully add a bunch of first round picks in two deep and highly skilled draft years.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MP5029 said:

Hindsight? We all

seen this coming, missing the playoffs, loosing Gio for nothing as many of us had been saying to trade him last summer, there is no hindsight here it’s 100% piss poor asset management by BT.

 

My thoughts exactly, but I think @The_People1 actually knew this before he wrote it and was trying to appeal to the broader base.    It's a catch 22 because it sounds snotty to say this stuff is predictable but...well... there is a line somewhere between that and the facts that we all saw this coming.      It's short term thinking.     Now, a short term thinker will say look.... what you do is incremental improvements.   A few incremental improvements each year and the cup is always possible.    

 

The problem with those incremental improvements is they are in Most cases highly over-priced, preventing your team from ever getting an edge.   Most of the value-add moves are not incremental improvements, they are one step back for two steps forward.

 

If we had traded Gio 3-4 years ago like I would have liked (or even much earlier), it would have been for a big return.    However......then we wouldn't be in the position we are, heading into two of the NHL's most notable drafts in its history.   There isn't a better time to nosedive.   Now if we could credit BT with doing that on purpose, I'd want to keep him lol.  But we know that's not the case.

 

6 hours ago, MP5029 said:

 

now having said this, I’d like to see if he can dig him self out of this hole, it’s actually kinda worth while to

let him try as it’s kinda a win win…

 

on one had if he is able to dig out of this then we have a team able to compete, and I do think if BT makes the right moves he can and also opens the door to move some key pieces of the team in 2-3 years for futures and succession planing.

 

now on the other hand, he fails, and the odds are that he will, we should at least nail down a few high draft picks and with any luck move out BT and bring in a GM who will burn it to the ground next season and hopefully add a bunch of first round picks in two deep and highly skilled draft years.

 

At this point I don't think we need a GM to burn it down, in fact I think BT's already done exceedingly well at that, screwing up literally every position except LW (the least valuable position in hockey).

 

But, I do agree we need a GM, as BT clearly isn't the man to lead a rebuild.  

Share this post


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

Well, due to the nature of the expansion draft, you’re losing someone. It would be impossible to trade every possible player seattle would want. I doubt that at any point there would have been 1st round picks on the table for Gio. They made the right call. It will suck to see him go but this is the biggest shakeup the team could make. We all clamoured for change, this is that.

 

Brodie wasn’t such a big loss. Tanev essentially filled Brodie’s role and was very good. 
 

The Iginla trade was botched, sure but it was also 8 years ago. Every team has made trades that haven’t worked out. We just tend to focus on the Flames ones because they’re the team we follow the closest.


i get Brodie wasnt a big loss to the team with Tanev, but I agree with MP that the team should have traded him at the deadline for something. Maybe they tried but still, be nice to get assets for some of these players in which we see other teams get for expiring deals at times. There are a lot of examples of players leaving at UFA, but the team wasn’t really competitive so I’d have but the loss and got something for it. 

Share this post


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


i get Brodie wasnt a big loss to the team with Tanev, but I agree with MP that the team should have traded him at the deadline for something. Maybe they tried but still, be nice to get assets for some of these players in which we see other teams get for expiring deals at times. There are a lot of examples of players leaving at UFA, but the team wasn’t really competitive so I’d have but the loss and got something for it. 

The Flames did make the playoffs in 19/20, so I wouldn’t say they weren’t a competitive team.

 

I get that it sucks to lose players for nothing, but you have to remember hokey ops has their jobs at stake. They can’t just trade every player for futures or else they’re out of a job. We all know Flames ownership puts a premium on making the playoffs, so management likely felt they needed to hang on to Brodie

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The Flames did make the playoffs in 19/20, so I wouldn’t say they weren’t a competitive team.

 

I get that it sucks to lose players for nothing, but you have to remember hokey ops has their jobs at stake. They can’t just trade every player for futures or else they’re out of a job. We all know Flames ownership puts a premium on making the playoffs, so management likely felt they needed to hang on to Brodie


ok, your view of competitive and my view is different. I didn’t see them being able to win a round. To me that’s not competitive. They made it look a tad bit better than the year before, but I don’t and haven’t seen this team as competitive for years. Even in the year they were 2nd overall, I saw the same holes, and a lot of comeback wins. But that was argued to death. But they just haven’t been a good team since before Christmas of that year. Record will suggest something different but their performance was not up to standards that denote competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! M

they really need this many days to freeze the nhl for the expansion draft? You’d think all of the talk would have been done by now. 
 

I guess Seattle needs a few days to assess the exposed players, but you’d think they’d have a sense already.

Share this post


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

The Flames did make the playoffs in 19/20, so I wouldn’t say they weren’t a competitive team.

 

I get that it sucks to lose players for nothing, but you have to remember hokey ops has their jobs at stake. They can’t just trade every player for futures or else they’re out of a job. We all know Flames ownership puts a premium on making the playoffs, so management likely felt they needed to hang on to Brodie

 

Yeah, there have been a lot of posts these past few days that have been pretty unfair in my opinion. It is a drag losing players for nothing, but I don't think that it is at the sole discretion of the GM. I don't think that Darryl Sutter was a Treliving hire, and I suspect that it was a mandate that came higher up the chain. I would suspect that they also would not have permitted him to trade the captain for futures when they believed that they were in the playoff race - despite what fans may think. They were never going to go out quietly, and they played right up until the end of the season. They missed, and it cost them. They'll probably lose Giordano, and their draft position is not optimal. We've seen this movie before, but the ownership group has the same mandate every year. They didn't hire Darryl Sutter to rebuild, and they're probably going to pay the price for that.

The other thing that I have a hard time with when it comes to the asset management debate is that sometimes a player retires. I suspect that Mark Giordano would have happily played out his entire career in Calgary, and while I'm sure that he isn't totally stoked to (probably) be going to Seattle, he might have been even less excited about having been moved at the deadline for a second and third round pick. The guy doesn't owe us picks from Florida or Carolina, he gave us his entire career. I don't have any problem with these guys riding off into the sunset with some grace. Losing Gaudreau for nothing during his prime would be terrible asset management, but allowing a guy to play out his career in the colours that he loves is good for business, good for fans, and good for the organization.

Love.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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


ok, your view of competitive and my view is different. I didn’t see them being able to win a round. To me that’s not competitive. They made it look a tad bit better than the year before, but I don’t and haven’t seen this team as competitive for years. Even in the year they were 2nd overall, I saw the same holes, and a lot of comeback wins. But that was argued to death. But they just haven’t been a good team since before Christmas of that year. Record will suggest something different but their performance was not up to standards that denote competitive.

Ok so whos the culprit that can't see and steer the ship and do something about all those holes why did the culprit let TJ walk for nothing and give away Kulak for a bag of pucks let Bennett go for 1 second who will probably never see NHL time perhaps not even AHL and now we have to hope and prey we hit on next yrs second rounder. We are now letting GIO go for nothing so far any way and why are we not working towords getting a pick and perhaps a D man like say some one would love to move and we can use that D as our expansion pick>

 

Share this post


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

 

Yeah, there have been a lot of posts these past few days that have been pretty unfair in my opinion. It is a drag losing players for nothing, but I don't think that it is at the sole discretion of the GM. I don't think that Darryl Sutter was a Treliving hire, and I suspect that it was a mandate that came higher up the chain. I would suspect that they also would not have permitted him to trade the captain for futures when they believed that they were in the playoff race - despite what fans may think. They were never going to go out quietly, and they played right up until the end of the season. They missed, and it cost them. They'll probably lose Giordano, and their draft position is not optimal. We've seen this movie before, but the ownership group has the same mandate every year. They didn't hire Darryl Sutter to rebuild, and they're probably going to pay the price for that.

The other thing that I have a hard time with when it comes to the asset management debate is that sometimes a player retires. I suspect that Mark Giordano would have happily played out his entire career in Calgary, and while I'm sure that he isn't totally stoked to (probably) be going to Seattle, he might have been even less excited about having been moved at the deadline for a second and third round pick. The guy doesn't owe us picks from Florida or Carolina, he gave us his entire career. I don't have any problem with these guys riding off into the sunset with some grace. Losing Gaudreau for nothing during his prime would be terrible asset management, but allowing a guy to play out his career in the colours that he loves is good for business, good for fans, and good for the organization.

Love.

 

I don't disagree with your concepts.

What I would suggest is that not trading him at TDL and then exposing him isn't exactly a plus for how you treat the player.

BT knew we were going to miss the playoffs and that we would need to expose Gio.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe that Gio wasn't a little disappointed that Management didn't see fit to try and make a trade for some players rather than just letting him go for nothing what does that say about his worth in my mind any way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, zima said:

I can't believe that Gio wasn't a little disappointed that Management didn't see fit to try and make a trade for some players rather than just letting him go for nothing what does that say about his worth in my mind any way

 

I don't think it's quite that simple.

They can still make a deal to have Seattle take someone else.

It comes down to cost though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, zima said:

I can't believe that Gio wasn't a little disappointed that Management didn't see fit to try and make a trade for some players rather than just letting him go for nothing what does that say about his worth in my mind any way

Who has said they didn't try?  Not sure we have access to every conversation had in the past few weeks between Brad and other GM's.  But its not really that simple, some teams have no use for Gio on their roster, some have no cap space to take him on, some have their own issues with protection, some don't have enough to offer to entice the Flames and some teams are on his no-trade list.  I think there are teams far worse off than the Flames right now, would I rather be looking at losing a 38 year old for nothing over a pretty recent 1st round pick like Carolina (Bean) and Tampa (Foote) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all his faults if Gio gets taken this can not fall on BT. I am in the corner that we need a better GM, but also make that with minimal objective views of what we see not what happens behind the sceen. I would speculate that BT tried to get assests for GIO but could not. The price tag to save him was outrageous, hence the expose decision. Will GIO get taken most likely, once it happens this organization actually has a hole to fill. We have waited for Valimaki and Anderson to step up and IMHO have fallen short well short in Valimakis case to meet or exceed expectations. WHen you look at the players who were exposed, If Seattle were to convince some UFA's to sign they could have a hell of a team, Vegas 2.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

With all his faults if Gio gets taken this can not fall on BT. I am in the corner that we need a better GM, but also make that with minimal objective views of what we see not what happens behind the sceen. I would speculate that BT tried to get assests for GIO but could not. The price tag to save him was outrageous, hence the expose decision. Will GIO get taken most likely, once it happens this organization actually has a hole to fill. We have waited for Valimaki and Anderson to step up and IMHO have fallen short well short in Valimakis case to meet or exceed expectations. WHen you look at the players who were exposed, If Seattle were to convince some UFA's to sign they could have a hell of a team, Vegas 2.0

 

TMac, what happened to you?  🙂 

One thing about Seattle, they won't just take a bunch of players that they think will allow them to win now.

They will scoop players that they can trade to other teams for a big haul.

The thing about making a deal to leave a player alone may actually be less than one made for the player after the fact.

Very few teams will ante up a 1st and 3rd to save a player.

It's a sucker bet.

Take the player you want and those that can get you the best return.

 

We got away with murder last expansion draft, so overall we will lose just one good player.

 

As much as I would have liked to trade Gio when he was worth a 1st and top prospect, that time has probably comes and gone.

When he had a Norris season, he was important to the team, more so than a trade.

You have to be extremely lucky to make a franchise player trade when their value is sky high.

Ovi 2 years ago.  Crosby when he was 30.  Gaudreau after 99 points.  Wheeler 2 years ago.

It doesn't happen very often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think they should have allowed Seattle to start drafting as soon as they were accepted into the NHL. At least the last draft… Their players could have taken one year in Junior… and their prospect pool would have a small jump start. 

Share this post


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

I really think they should have allowed Seattle to start drafting as soon as they were accepted into the NHL. At least the last draft… Their players could have taken one year in Junior… and their prospect pool would have a small jump start. 

 

Well, can't really change the rules that Vegas had to deal with....

Traditionally, expansion teams sucked.

Vegas managed to have a good 1st year because teams were so afraid of losing players they overpaid to not lose them.

Share this post


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

 

Well, can't really change the rules that Vegas had to deal with....

Traditionally, expansion teams sucked.

Vegas managed to have a good 1st year because teams were so afraid of losing players they overpaid to not lose them.

Teams could protect 9F-5D-1G prior to Vegas, that was a big part to the sucking, teams had very little to choose from.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, sak22 said:

Teams could protect 9F-5D-1G prior to Vegas, that was a big part to the sucking, teams had very little to choose from.  

 

Smaller pool of good players too, eh?

We are talking about an era when US and Euros played a lot less in the NHL.

Share this post


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

 

Smaller pool of good players too, eh?

We are talking about an era when US and Euros played a lot less in the NHL.

 

I think generally, but Sak has a point. Vegas only said yes to expanding and making it worth their while because the 90s expansion teams sucked so bad and took too long to get to the levels of some teams. They said they needed to be competitive right away to build their market faster, especially after spending so much on the expansion fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...