Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-24-2017, 10:19 AM   #41
Fighting Banana Slug
First Line Centre
 
Fighting Banana Slug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Bump:Copied the list from others and amended Deluxe Moustache's list, to save some typing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache View Post

For me, although I know the Murray situation will likely play out differently (so replace with MAF if you will), I have assumed that all NMC remain in effect and teams aren't throwing draft pick asset out to entice Vegas to take some one. I basically worked out from net, taking the best assets for goalies and defensemen, as that is where the talent seems to lie, and where future deals can be made. For the Flames, there should be a pretty decent chance to trade for a goalie and a potential #4 Dman. Also, a slight homer move in having Brouwer selected, but I do think there is a decent chance that happens, and in looking at the talent available, I think it is more likely that a forward is taken, as Kulak doesn't look that great when you see the entire list. I think a few more expensive vets will be taken, along with few younger guys (Shinkaruk is in play for sure). Around $14M in cap space to play with, although there are some RFAs sprinkled in there.

ANA - D - Sami Vatanen
ARI - D - Luke Schenn
BOS - F - Jimmy Hayes
BUF - F - Marcus Foligno
CGY - F - Troy Brouwer
CAR - F - Phillip Di Guisepe
CHI - D - Trevor van Riemsdyk
COL - G - Calvin Pickard
CLB - D - Jack Johnson
DAL - D - Stephen Johns
DET - F - Riley Sheahan
EDM - F - Iiro Pakarinen
FLA - D - Jason Demers
LAK - D - Brayden McNabb
MIN - D - Marco Scandella
MON - D - Tomas Plekanec
NAS - F - Pontus Aberg
NJD - D - Jon Merrill
NYI - D - Thomas Hickey
NYR - G - Amtii Raanta
OTT - D - Mark Methot
PHI - F - Dale Weiss
PIT - G - Matt Murray
SJS - D - Brendan Dillon
STL - F - David Perron
TBL - F - JT Brown
TOR - F - Brendan Leipsic
VAN - F - Brendan Gaunce
WAS - G - Philipp Grubauer
WIN - F - Marco Dano

__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
Fighting Banana Slug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2017, 11:01 AM   #42
savardandjokinen
son of looooob
 
savardandjokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Joel Armia has been pretty damn good for the Jets this season (watched a few games in winnipeg, was impressed) and won't be in the minors.
savardandjokinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 08:59 AM   #43
SuperMatt18
Franchise Player
 
SuperMatt18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Tried to take a somewhat balanced roster and not overload on goalies and d-men.

Think this team is actually not that bad - especially if they can turn the surplus goalies and d-men into a little more immediate talent up front.

Also didn't shy away from higher profile names that were UFA over the next two seasons, think that those players can be great currency at the next couple trade deadlines.

Tried to not take any bad contracts (except for my hope of them taking Brouwer). No reason to do any teams favours via the expansion draft when you still have $18M in cap space to take on bad contracts if it can help the team out.


Last edited by SuperMatt18; 05-31-2017 at 09:02 AM.
SuperMatt18 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 09:02 AM   #44
Roof-Daddy
Franchise Player
 
Roof-Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

Fun to mess around with, but at this point there is so much guess work and unknowns.

Once teams are done moving players around and submit their protection lists you will be able to do this and get a much more accurate peak at what the Vegas team will like post ED. Oh, and once the Vegas UFA period has passed as well.
Roof-Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 11:19 AM   #45
FanIn80
GOAT!
 
FanIn80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Exp:
Default

Looking at what's potentially out there, I really can't see Vegas taking Brouwer over Kulak, without us somehow sweetening that deal.
FanIn80 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 12:08 PM   #46
loob job
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80 View Post
Looking at what's potentially out there, I really can't see Vegas taking Brouwer over Kulak, without us somehow sweetening that deal.
for sure, we definitely have to kick in to get them to take Brouwer. No way would they want an underperforming guy making that money without getting something back.
loob job is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 12:21 PM   #47
Geeoff
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Things will get interesting if the Flames decide to protect Brouwer.
Geeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 12:22 PM   #48
Wild GM
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80 View Post
Looking at what's potentially out there, I really can't see Vegas taking Brouwer over Kulak, without us somehow sweetening that deal.
Kulak probably tops out as a bottom pairing guy - so it really depends on if it makes sense to use a pick and a roster spot up on a guy like that.
I think Shinkaruk is a more likely selection - because the ceiling is a lot higher.
Brouwer is an option because they will need to add guys that can play and lead. Despite his terri-bad season, he can do both.

I still will predict it is Brouwer or Hunter.
I don't see Kulak as a compelling selection for them.
Wild GM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Wild GM For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 12:46 PM   #49
SuperMatt18
Franchise Player
 
SuperMatt18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

It might not be Brouwer but I see them taking Brouwer, Bouma, Stajan, or Shikaruk over Kulak 100%.

The quality of d-men available is >>> than the quality of forwards available throughout the rest of the draft but Las Vegas still needs to draft enough NHL quality forwards to ensure they are not putting themselves at a bad position in a trade (if they don't have enough forwards on the roster the other team can try to drive a harder bargain).

The way I look at it the quality of the forwards the Flames have available when compared to the rest of the forwards available, is better than the quality of our d-men when compared to the rest of the d-men available.

Last edited by SuperMatt18; 05-31-2017 at 12:53 PM.
SuperMatt18 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 01:11 PM   #50
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18 View Post
It might not be Brouwer but I see them taking Brouwer, Bouma, Stajan, or Shikaruk over Kulak 100%.

The quality of d-men available is >>> than the quality of forwards available throughout the rest of the draft but Las Vegas still needs to draft enough NHL quality forwards to ensure they are not putting themselves at a bad position in a trade (if they don't have enough forwards on the roster the other team can try to drive a harder bargain).

The way I look at it the quality of the forwards the Flames have available when compared to the rest of the forwards available, is better than the quality of our d-men when compared to the rest of the d-men available.
I see it as Brouwer v. Shinkaruk, like a lot of others. And that will depend a lot on their picks from other teams. If they are low salary, younger guys, they go with Brouwer, to help hit the cap floor and for experience. As well, if Brouwer turns it around even a little, his salary isn't that far out of line.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 01:14 PM   #51
Weitz
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
I see it as Brouwer v. Shinkaruk, like a lot of others. And that will depend a lot on their picks from other teams. If they are low salary, younger guys, they go with Brouwer, to help hit the cap floor and for experience. As well, if Brouwer turns it around even a little, his salary isn't that far out of line.
They are not taking Brouwer (older veteran on a UFA contract) without being compensated nicely for it. They have already said things to this effect.

They will have no issues meeting the salary demands they need.
Weitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 01:21 PM   #52
Wild GM
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
They are not taking Brouwer (older veteran on a UFA contract) without being compensated nicely for it. They have already said things to this effect.

They will have no issues meeting the salary demands they need.
Did they make specific comments about Brouwer?
Wild GM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 02:37 PM   #53
Fighting Banana Slug
First Line Centre
 
Fighting Banana Slug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
They are not taking Brouwer (older veteran on a UFA contract) without being compensated nicely for it. They have already said things to this effect.

They will have no issues meeting the salary demands they need.
I don't think it was phrased in that way. They will take a camp dump, with a significant asset to go along with. So a team that is up against the cap, Vegas will do them the favour of taking on a more expensive player, but at a significant cost.

Arguably that applies to Brouwer/Pouliot types, but I think Vegas also needs to consider 1) that it must ice an actual NHL team next year, and 2) it must consider who else they could actually pick. For the Flames, Brouwer might be the best guy to step into their line up next year. The alternative (Kulak, Shinkaruk) may not be NHL material next year or any other.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
Fighting Banana Slug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 02:57 PM   #54
Jason14h
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Kulak.....

LV probably doesn't even know who Kulak is. Actually, outside of this board, no one in the NHL probably does.

If Vegas takes Kulak it will be the worst pick of the expansion draft. They could pick Browser, retain salary and trade him for a better return then Kulak.
Jason14h is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 03:18 PM   #55
You Need a Thneed
Voted for Kodos
 
You Need a Thneed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h View Post
Kulak.....

LV probably doesn't even know who Kulak is. Actually, outside of this board, no one in the NHL probably does.

If Vegas takes Kulak it will be the worst pick of the expansion draft. They could pick Browser, retain salary and trade him for a better return then Kulak.
They may or may not take Kulak, but they undoubtedly will take a couple players similar to Kulak's capability from a couple teams.

They will only take around 18 or so players that will actually play for them next season, after that, they will have to take prospects, and trade bait to get prospects (maybe an oppurtunity to get a couple of decent players).

Now it will likely make more sense for Vegas to find a couple waiver exempt prospects, as they will need a couple of those.
__________________
My LinkedIn Profile.
You Need a Thneed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 03:27 PM   #56
FanIn80
GOAT!
 
FanIn80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18 View Post
It might not be Brouwer but I see them taking Brouwer, Bouma, Stajan, or Shikaruk over Kulak 100%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild GM View Post
I still will predict it is Brouwer or Hunter.
I don't see Kulak as a compelling selection for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h View Post
If Vegas takes Kulak it will be the worst pick of the expansion draft. They could pick Browser, retain salary and trade him for a better return then Kulak.
I've been watching/listening to media over the last week, and there are quite a few media folks who believe Vegas will take Kulak over Brouwer, if we're not able to make picking Brouwer worthwhile for them.

Even a super-quick Google News search for "Brett Kulak" shows these articles as the first two responses that come up:

Quote:
Brett Kulak is probably the most appealing player the Flames will expose in the expansion draft. He is only 23, has put up good possession stats in 30 games of NHL experience and is a top-pairing defender in the AHL. Just coming off his entry-level contract, he will not cost very much to sign and he definitely has a lot of upside to be an every day NHL player.

http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.co...golden-knights
Quote:
If Vegas goes the route of selecting a prospect from the Flames, Brett Kulak is the guy. Kulak was unable to crack Calgary’s main roster in a full-time role and split time between the NHL and the minors. At just 23-years-old, he scored 10 points in 22 games with Stockton of the AHL and had an impressive plus-7 rating on a fairly mediocre team.

http://thehockeywriters.com/who-coul...lose-to-vegas/
The trick is not to look at Kulak or the Flames' protected list in a vacuum. When put in context of what will likely be other team's lists, and the draft strategies being suggested, Brett Kulak is very much in the wheelhouse of what Vegas will be looking at from us. (Again, this is barring any deal we make to get them to take Brouwer instead.)

Last edited by FanIn80; 05-31-2017 at 03:32 PM.
FanIn80 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 03:30 PM   #57
Wild GM
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

^With all due respect to those bloggers, I don't consider them to be close to what's actually going to happen. And most bloggers tend to favor younger players/prospects.
GMGM still has to put a competitive team on the ice.
He has to figure out if Kulak helps him win now or in the future.
I don't think he particularly does either
Wild GM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 03:32 PM   #58
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Relooking at the Ducks, is the choice down to Silverberg or Rackell versus Manson? They have to keep Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler and Bieksa (hah). They protect Lindholm, and Fowler. Either they protect both Silvferberg and Rackell and expose Vatanen and Manson, or protect Manson and expose one of the two forwards. Vatanen gets exposed either way IMO.

They need to do a deal.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2017, 03:33 PM   #59
Flames Draft Watcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h View Post
Kulak.....

LV probably doesn't even know who Kulak is. Actually, outside of this board, no one in the NHL probably does.

If Vegas takes Kulak it will be the worst pick of the expansion draft. They could pick Browser, retain salary and trade him for a better return then Kulak.
Guess you haven't heard of pro scouting. Teams have scouts that watch the AHL and evaluate the players there. If they don't have scouting reports on Brett Kulak from the last season then their management and scouts are incompetent. I'm going to assume they aren't incompetent. You massively underrate how much knowledge teams have of the players in other team's organizations. Not to mention some of the scouts that VGK employs will have seen Kulak in his draft year. Some will have watched him later on in the WHL. Some will have watched him in the AHL. Probably some scouting reports were filed on his play in the NHL as well.

Kulak would be the worst pick of the expansion draft? Far from it IMO. Kid has upside to be a 4-6 dman in the NHL. Even the chance at that has some good value.

If VGK doesn't have a good book on guys like Kulak then they are failing at their jobs.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2017, 03:36 PM   #60
FanIn80
GOAT!
 
FanIn80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
Relooking at the Ducks, is the choice down to Silverberg or Rackell versus Manson? They have to keep Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler and Bieksa (hah). They protect Lindholm, and Fowler. Either they protect both Silvferberg and Rackell and expose Vatanen and Manson, or protect Manson and expose one of the two forwards. Vatanen gets exposed either way IMO.

They need to do a deal.
They just need Bieksa to waive his NMC, and then they're all good.

Perry
Getzlaf
Kessler
Rackell
Fowler
Lindholm
Vatanen
Manson
Gibson

Leaving Silfverberg as the consensus pick.
FanIn80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:23 AM.

Calgary Flames
2016-17




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016