TSN's Off Season Game Plan for the Flames

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Of course not every team has a Johnny Gaudreau. However, most teams have several prospects that could be top 2 line players but have some flaws that might prevent them from becoming that. We have guys like Agostino, Granlund, Jankowski, and Gaudreau that fall in that group, just like everyone else. I like Gaudreau quite a bit, but even if he sticks in the NHL, he's more of a 2nd line player (Even Briere and Cammalleri have primarily been used as 2nd liners with #1 PP ice time)

So all in all, the Flames have 1 player that is a 1st/2nd line wing (Baertschi), a possible 2nd line wing (Gaudreau), and a 2nd/3rd line Center in Backlund, with everyone else in the prospect pool being at least 2 years away from being possible NHL players or are players that have limited upside (3rd/4th liners).

That is as paper thin of a prospect pool/NHL line up as you can probably get in the modern Cap era.

Until the Flames have 10 forwards with Baertschi/Gaudreau's potential, we are not going to be solid. Realistically, we need to be closer to 15 prospects that have potential in order to become a contender as we will be able to take the best of the bunch and build around them, and deal from the depth of quality to get pieces that are necessary to put the finishing touches on it (see Simmonds + Schenn for Richards trade as an example)

This team is 3-5 years away from that. It's going to be a while.

It does look like it is going to be a while. Unfortunately the prospect base really does not match up that well with organizational needs.

The Flames issues this year were C, third line, D, then G. Wingers are not as much of an issue, relatively speaking.

Backlund and Stajan are both best suited as 2nd line C's, definitely not 3rd line, and that is a problem. If you have a strong enough C to go head to head on the top line like a Datsyuk or Crosby, that is one thing. The Flames don't have this, so the third line has to be built to start in the zone, shut down the other team's top line and move the puck up ice. Backlund could potentially have played on a top line, but this would be fully dependent on two things - firstly on having top line wingers, and secondly on having a third line to handle some heavy lifting. And the Flames third line was built wrong.

C is as much of a problem in the prospect pool as it is on the big team. I don't suppose Reinhart projects to be more than a third liner. Haven't seen much of Granlund, and Jankowski really needs to show growth next year.

The Flames D was also built wrong. If you don't have a tough D that can also move the puck well, pairing a softer mobile guy with a physical defender is an approach. Somebody to clear the dirty areas in front of the net in your own zone, and another guy to man the breakouts and jump in the rush. Also, want to mention that Gio showed that on a good team, his ceiling is 3/4, nothing wrong with that, but he is not great as a top pairing D.

Cundari looked pretty servicable this year. Looking forward, Wotherspoon and Seiloff look somewhat promising as well.

G I didn't see as that big of an issue this year. I point squarely to the above problems with skaters. The article points to save percentage, as always. The team was built wrong and they were outmatched. (Ask Craig Anderson about whether or not scoring chances or shot quality exist. .950 against Montreal and .883 against Pittsburgh. That is what happens when your skaters are outmatched. Sadly, the Flames were outmatched regularly by most teams.) I personally hope Kipper comes back because that was a very unglamorous way to go out and he is better than that.

If one of Ramo or Berra works out, having Gillies and Brossoit waiting does not make the G situation glaring.

But man that C situation is ugly. You are right, it is going to be a while.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by the2bears

Some pretty significant moves before the last trade deadline. Not sure what more you'd want to see?

I agree but i think my wording was poor. I am not sold that ownership wants a rebuild. I believe Feaster when he said ownership wanted to be in the playoffs next year. I will not be surprised if ownership tells Feaster to throw big money at a Horton, Bozak and Clarkson. If they somehow sign 2 of the 3 players then i really would not see how the word rebuild could be used?

The only good thing in my view is that those 3 players probably would not sign in Calgary and ownership will have no choice but to go the rebuild route at least for another year. That is a lot different from going with the plan of a rebuild, rather than a rebuild thrust upon ownership.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

The problem is we have no proof that the flames are doing a rebuild. It's what i want to see, but ownership might see it differently. I will not be surprised if the flames offer big money and try and get Horton and Bozak. Luckily they will probably be turned down.

There's plenty of proof

1. Dealt our franchise player and fan favourite for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move
2. Dealt our best defenceman for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move.
3. Attempted to deal our star goaltender. Obvious rebuilding move.
4. Called up a ton of young guys and actually played them. Rebuilding move.

So saying there's no proof of a rebuild is a highly questionable statement.

Furthermore signing someone like Horton doesn't preclude rebuilding. However I'm not sure why any top end players would sign with us as UFA's.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

There's plenty of proof

1. Dealt our franchise player and fan favourite for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move
2. Dealt our best defenceman for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move.
3. Attempted to deal our star goaltender. Obvious rebuilding move.
4. Called up a ton of young guys and actually played them. Rebuilding move.

So saying there's no proof of a rebuild is a highly questionable statement.

Furthermore signing someone like Horton doesn't preclude rebuilding. However I'm not sure why any top end players would sign with us as UFA's.

This was taken from an article for the draft and is Weisbrods words:


"We're in a little bit of a retooling mode after some of the trades that got us picks, and we have holes in the lineup, so there's going to be a lot of constructive discussion between now and the draft about potential trades for actual players or moving picks around. I think it's certainly a possibility for us that our draft number and picks might not look the same on the day of the draft as they do today, but those are things we'll dig in on between now and then."


A bit of a retooling is an understatement, but he sure as hell does not say rebuild which is different than retooling.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

This would be a good point if Bozak was markedly better than Backlund or Stajan, but I don't think that's the case. I'd say all 3 are at a similar level.

Bringing in Bozak does little more than take away a depth spot from a kid like Horak or Reinhart. Both of whom could very quickly develop into mediocre, middle-6, sub-20-goal-scoring players like Bozak.

Nope, not every move needs to be a home run. Heck, you don't even want to swing at every pitch. And Bozak on a big contract is a baaaad pitch. Just take is as a 'ball', and wait for the next one.

I don't disagree with you. But Feaster has said the team needs to get bigger up front. I don't see how that happens internally. I also don't see management willing to put up with the growing pains of 3-4 rookies in the lineup, while icing a roster that's $15 million below the cap. That's just not how this franchise operates. And I won't believe they've changed until I see it with my own eyes.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I agree but i think my wording was poor. I am not sold that ownership wants a rebuild. I believe Feaster when he said ownership wanted to be in the playoffs next year. I will not be surprised if ownership tells Feaster to throw big money at a Horton, Bozak and Clarkson. If they somehow sign 2 of the 3 players then i really would not see how the word rebuild could be used?

The only good thing in my view is that those 3 players probably would not sign in Calgary and ownership will have no choice but to go the rebuild route at least for another year. That is a lot different from going with the plan of a rebuild, rather than a rebuild thrust upon ownership.

Rebuilding using home grown assets means that you need time for these players to develop in to NHLers. This means that you have a 1-3 year window where you either promote guys from the farm team that may not be ready or you have to look outside.

I don't see a conflict between rebuilding and retooling, supplementing with serviceable NHLers. There are still gaps at the NHL level where solutions are years away, and why not ice a competitive roster?

On the wing, I understand how Horton and Clarkson could help. But the Flames are sure not short on wingers right now. None of these additions above address the C or D situations unfortunately (and I am including Bozak. The Flames have enough second line C's right now)

[ricardodw]

What is big money this year?


Does Horton get offers for 4M over 3 years? Again from what team? and how do they work it into their cap.

In the extensive discussions about Iginla I have seen a lot of guesses that he signs for 4M.

Does he set the market?

I am saying that I feel that the Flames can replace 2 front line players with 4 for the same money.

Fippula is a better player than Hudler. Hudler will be paid more over the next 3 years.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

There's plenty of proof

1. Dealt our franchise player and fan favourite for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move
2. Dealt our best defenceman for a 1st rounder and two prospects. Obvious rebuilding move.
3. Attempted to deal our star goaltender. Obvious rebuilding move.
4. Called up a ton of young guys and actually played them. Rebuilding move.

So saying there's no proof of a rebuild is a highly questionable statement.

Furthermore signing someone like Horton doesn't preclude rebuilding. However I'm not sure why any top end players would sign with us as UFA's.

All of that stuff took place over a month. Rebuilds take years. I'm still not sold this franchise has the stomach or the long-term discipline for a rebuild. I really hope I'm wrong, but I expect a bunch of overpaid UFA signings, and maybe trading one of our first-rounders for an NHL ready prospect.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Rubicant

Those are definitely indicative of a rebuild, but I must admit I am waiting to see what management does (or more importantly doesn't do) this summer before I really believe that they are rebuilding.

I don't like hearing that our GM has marching orders to make the playoffs next season, but will let (in)actions speak louder than what could potentially be ownership merely conveying that they don't want a culture of complacency to set in during the rebuild.

I would submit that every teams marching orders are to make the playoffs next year....realities of rosters etc. don't necessarily line up with the goal but that should be the goal, no?

Should they state the goal is to suck, play to empty buildings and hope for the lottery? Got to have goals.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

G I didn't see as that big of an issue this year. I point squarely to the above problems with skaters. The article points to save percentage, as always. The team was built wrong and they were outmatched. (Ask Craig Anderson about whether or not scoring chances or shot quality exist. .950 against Montreal and .883 against Pittsburgh. That is what happens when your skaters are outmatched. Sadly, the Flames were outmatched regularly by most teams.)

Ask a statistician about small, cherry-picked samples.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Rebuilding using home grown assets means that you need time for these players to develop in to NHLers. This means that you have a 1-3 year window where you either promote guys from the farm team that may not be ready or you have to look outside.

I don't see a conflict between rebuilding and retooling, supplementing with serviceable NHLers. There are still gaps at the NHL level where solutions are years away, and why not ice a competitive roster?

On the wing, I understand how Horton and Clarkson could help. But the Flames are sure not short on wingers right now. None of these additions above address the C or D situations unfortunately (and I am including Bozak. The Flames have enough second line C's right now)

If they ice a competitve roster through UFA they will not be drafting in the 1-5 range next year where they could get ellite players. The flames need a couple of ellite prospects going forward.

I do agree that they need to fill the gaps for the next 3 years, but the Hortons, Clarksons, and Bozaks are probably not going to sign a 3 year contract just to help the flames get through the rough patch. More than likely they would want 5 years at very high money. Nothing worse than having a couple of high priced players on the decline, when in 3-4 years, the flames will need to make moves to fit in the prospects.

[Vinny01]

I wonder if the Flames take a Tallon circa 2011 for free agency. It seems like Florida signed every veteran that summer and won their division in 2012 and finished 30th in 2013.

Flames might throw bucks at Horton, Bozak, Clarkson and buyout candidates like Richards. I doubt they go totally down that route due to the "post apex" comment. I do think if Richards is bought out Feaster will come back with an offer which I am okay with if it is 1-3 years.

I also think that the Flames will trade at least one 1st round pick to bring in a RFA or young player who is under 25. I look at guys like Simmonds in Philly or Bergland in St. Louis.

I am so excited for this summer with the flexibility this team has. It will be an exciting time for the fanbase.

[dammage79]

The buy outs and cap clearing some teams will need to do also make for some potential deals for the Flames.

[The Yen Man]

Flames need to be in on the McDavid sweepstakes, so hopefully they don't do anything too drastic that will improve the team short term. Realistically, any improvement will just mean they finished bottom 6-10 at best vs. bottom 1-5. If that's the case, might as well suck it up and just build properly through the draft.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I agree but i think my wording was poor. I am not sold that ownership wants a rebuild. I believe Feaster when he said ownership wanted to be in the playoffs next year. I will not be surprised if ownership tells Feaster to throw big money at a Horton, Bozak and Clarkson. If they somehow sign 2 of the 3 players then i really would not see how the word rebuild could be used?

The only good thing in my view is that those 3 players probably would not sign in Calgary and ownership will have no choice but to go the rebuild route at least for another year. That is a lot different from going with the plan of a rebuild, rather than a rebuild thrust upon ownership.

Ah, okay. That makes sense. I'm concerned too if the mandate from ownership is to make the playoffs this upcoming season. I would be more comfortable with at least one year of "continue the rebuild".

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

I would submit that every teams marching orders are to make the playoffs next year....realities of rosters etc. don't necessarily line up with the goal but that should be the goal, no?

Should they state the goal is to suck, play to empty buildings and hope for the lottery? Got to have goals.

I would prefer that my team's goal would be to contend in the playoffs rather than just make them.

I am willing to accept that it was simply the team stating they want to be competitive next year and not let complacency set in - but have a nagging doubt in the back of my head that they will shortcut the rebulding process and land back in the purgatory that is NHL mediocrity.

I am more than hopeful that I am wrong and we don't see a bunch of band-aids applied this summer.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

All of that stuff took place over a month. Rebuilds take years. I'm still not sold this franchise has the stomach or the long-term discipline for a rebuild. I really hope I'm wrong, but I expect a bunch of overpaid UFA signings, and maybe trading one of our first-rounders for an NHL ready prospect.

I agree with you, particularly with respect to the bold.

However, there is some middle ground here.

As FDW said, there is nothing wrong with adding some free agents to ice a decent team, provide some leadership and guidance to the kids, etc. I would like to see some size brought in, for example.

That is different than throwing huge money and long term contracts at guys like Bozak, in an attempt to short-cut the rebuild, however. And I agree with you that impatient, insta-rebuild moves are not the way to go. Trading any of our first-rounders for players now would also be extremely discouraging.

My point is, that while a rebuild requires patience, there is also some need to bring in guys who can play now - there are some short-term needs that have to be addressed. The fact of the matter is that it will be years before we have rebuilt a competitive team through the draft and we have to ice a team this year and next, not just 3-5 years from now.

And I hope fans will understand that when the inevitable UFA signings come. (As long as it is short-term leadership and support, not longer-term make-the-playoffs type moves).

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I agree with a lot of what he says in that they really shouldn't be looking for high priced veteran players and should be looking at guys at in the age group of Bozak or Raymond (as long as they aren't overpaying for these guys). As for Mike Smith I think he's going to get a lot more than the $4 million so unless it's one of those long term deals I can't see his cap hit being only $4 million. That said I don't believe the Flames will be looking for goaltending help at least this offseason as it looks like they are going to use 2013/2014 to find out if the two of their european prospects are the real deal.

The worst thing we can do it pick up lazy overpaid players; The last thing our young guys need is a poor example of what it takes to win.

[DionTheDman]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

the "post apex" comment.

As a side note, I like how every year, Feaster comes out with a buzzword that is supposed to define the goals or the philosophy of the organization.

Last year, 'intellectual honesty'.
This year, 'post-apex'.

Next year... 'hail mary'?

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

If they ice a competitve roster through UFA they will not be drafting in the 1-5 range next year where they could get ellite players. The flames need a couple of ellite prospects going forward.

I wouldn't worry about it. They tried that last year and finished 6th overall.

Now there are more holes to fill and they will have a tougher time drawing UFAs.