[News] Flames do not qualify RFAs Chiasson, Culkin, and Morrison. Do qualify Wotherspoon

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by tsquared1967

Gaudreau - Monahan - Ferland
Tkachuk - Backlund - Frolik
Bennett - Jankowski - Lazar
Shinkaruk - Stajan - Brouwer
Hamilton, Hathaway

Giordano - Hamilton
Brodie - Hamonic
Kulak - Andersson
Bartkowski

Smith
Rittich/Gillies

Current roster if the Flames don't make another move to improve. Top line worked better with Ferland then it did with Chaisson. Second line re-united as you don't mess with success. Third line is the wildcard in potential.

Chaisson had his numbers last year inflated by playing on the top line and on the powerplay. Ferland quickly surpassed him in goals once Chaisson was dropped to the bottom 6. Even Brouwer past Chaisson in goals in the latter part of the year.

I see the Flames adding to the defense because I don't think you want to play Kulak and Andersson as 3rd pairing for the season in the mix with Bartkowski.

It is time the Flames bring up Jankowski and reward him for his play in Stockton just like the Penguins rewarding Guentzel for his play.

I do want to play Andersson and Kulak as our third pair. I want them to play 82 games together. And that's not even the kicker. I want them to play 15 minutes a night.

[YourMother]

Originally Posted by memphusk

I do want to play Andersson and Kulak as our third pair. I want them to play 82 games together. And that's not even the kicker. I want them to play 15 minutes a night.

What it really sounds like is you want to lose a lot of games.

[Stay Golden]

It was irritating to see a 4th line 6'3 210lb player play soft.
Chaisson there are 200 players eager to play hard. Yes he scored 15 goals but throw in some physical shifts guy that is your job.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Color me surprised but happy that they qualified Wotherspoon. He is great in the NHL, and has been on the bubble for a while. He does well when called up, but then somehow fades. I would rather Wotherspoon be retained and be somewhat of a veteran presence on the blueline in Stockton than have to sign someone else for that role (though there may be a use for that as well).

Chiasson I felt was useful. Here's hoping that the Flames bring him back on another cheap deal. He has size, skates well, produces well with low minutes and even fought a guy or two.

Yes, I want Hathaway up too, but it shouldn't be at Chiasson's expense for that to happen. No need to throw out useful players when you have less useful players in the lineup. I don't think the Flames are going to be riding that close to the cap to make his salary an issue (though, I may be proven wrong on that).

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by YourMother

What it really sounds like is you want to lose a lot of games.

Maybe you're right. I feel the comfort of the top 4 should open the door for some youth. That third pair is going to get time with the other 4 here and there so they should get after it

[Reggie Dunlop]

Morrison was a worthwhile gamble. Didn't work out. Fine with that.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Wouldn't surprise me if Chiasson wasn't qualified because the Flames are signing Foo... supposedly a team offered him an NHL spot.

If the rumour of a promised NHL spot is true, then that's unfortunate because I think there's an almost 0% chance Treliving is the guy to give him that guarantee. Just very out of character for him.

Other thoughts... I think both Stajan and Bouma have spots in the lineup to start camp and will have to either get injured or be incredibly bad for us to see Jankowski, Shinkaruk, Hathaway or any of the other true bubble players take their spots. One might point to a guy like Bollig losing his spot but both Stajan and Bouma are miles better than Bollig is at all aspects of the game.

The one guy I'm really unsure about is Brouwer, with respect to where he sits in the lineup. No doubt he's in and has a spot, but where does he end up say in December or end of the season? No doubt Gulutzan tried to give him the benefit of the doubt last year and a long leash but he too gave up after a while when Ferland overtook Brouwer's place on the top line. Really important year for Ferland to step up because if he remains inconsistent, I can see Brouwer getting another chance. I say he starts on the 3rd though with Bennett.

[circle]

Originally Posted by memphusk

Maybe you're right. I feel the comfort of the top 4 should open the door for some youth. That third pair is going to get time with the other 4 here and there so they should get after it

I don't disagree with having a rookie 3rd D pairing but it is only because the top 4 should eat up ~50 minutes of the game and shelter the 3rd pair. We have an elite top 4 D, we should be taking advantage of it as much as possible.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by YourMother

What it really sounds like is you want to lose a lot of games.

How? We have 2 pairs that will go up against any teams top 2 lines, essentially the Kulak-Andersson pair will play sheltered minutes against 3rd/4th lines. Play more at home with last change then on the road etc. I don't see how they can't play against Kase/Wagner/Shaw or any Arizona or Las Vages line or Cagguila/Letestu/Kassian etc. Similar forward they'd be going up against in the AHL.

This is the best time to break them in, with 4 heavy lifters they can develop at the NHL level.

I want 5-7 be Kulak/Andersson/Wotherspoon. Kulak and Wotherspoon have spent enough time in the minors. Andersson had an outstanding year in the AHL last year, time for promotions. Also, if they don't graduate then you start a logjam at the AHL level too.

[Poe969]

I'm all for letting all of them walk and I'm ok with bringing back Chiasson as I think there is a place for him on the team. I think they should go hard after Grigeranko and have him in the bottom 6 with a chance to move up if he proves himself.

[Bourque's Twin]

Originally Posted by Husky

Completely disagree. Once he was put in bottom 6 role he was a very effective player.

Very effective? I don't think so. He was fine at a checking role but if her were very effective he would've been re-signed. Chiasson is 6'4 and gets pushed around by guys way smaller than him. He has no upside and can be easily replaced. I'd way rather have Hathaway out there who is afraid of nothing and can throw their teams off their game.

[JohnnyTitan]

Dark horse = Klimchuk!

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Wouldn't surprise me if Chiasson wasn't qualified because the Flames are signing Foo... supposedly a team offered him an NHL spot.

If any team offered him a spot on opening night I would expect that to be Detroit. They are awful.

[FlamesAddiction]

NM - wrong thread

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

How? We have 2 pairs that will go up against any teams top 2 lines, essentially the Kulak-Andersson pair will play sheltered minutes against 3rd/4th lines. Play more at home with last change then on the road etc. I don't see how they can't play against Kase/Wagner/Shaw or any Arizona or Las Vages line or Cagguila/Letestu/Kassian etc. Similar forward they'd be going up against in the AHL.

This is the best time to break them in, with 4 heavy lifters they can develop at the NHL level.

I want 5-7 be Kulak/Andersson/Wotherspoon. Kulak and Wotherspoon have spent enough time in the minors. Andersson had an outstanding year in the AHL last year, time for promotions. Also, if they don't graduate then you start a logjam at the AHL level too.

If the Flames have no injuries on the back end then have a bottom pairing with two rookies should be fine, but I would sign a veteran guy to a 1 or 2 year deal as the #5 and have a rookie for the #6. When injuries start then you can have two rookies in the line-up.

[Imported_Aussie]

Clear pattern here by Treliving - avoid any contentious arbitration hearings. Ferland should get signed before, and even if it goes to arbitration he is a player they definitely want to keep around. Chiasson is not worth getting saddled with a bad contract by an arbitration hearing

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Fire

If the Flames have no injuries on the back end then have a bottom pairing with two rookies should be fine, but I would sign a veteran guy to a 1 or 2 year deal as the #5 and have a rookie for the #6. When injuries start then you can have two rookies in the line-up.

Sure 1 cheap vet would be fine. The idea would be to have your younger players getting some NHL icetime so they're getting ready to eventually play more when needed. I don't think anyone expects these guys to jump straight into top 4when needed.

I don't want Bartowski with the big club, he should be in the AHL. He had his moments but mostly he was pretty bad last year.

[locsofblu]

Hopefully we can get Chaisson back on a 1 or 2 year deal with a low cap hit.
Top 6 Chaisson bad. Bottom 6 Chaisson good!

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

A little surprising about Chiasson, but when you think about it not overly surprising I suppose.

Culkin and Morrison were a given, some might be surprised Wotherspoon was QO'ed but I'm not. Very good AHL Dman at the least, where as Culkin and Morrison even struggled down there.

When he was actually in a role that he is more suited for, he was a decent player. The skill set is just so limited and he really should be a guy that can be replaced if your team is any good.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by locsofblu

Hopefully we can get Chaisson back on a 1 or 2 year deal with a low cap hit.
Top 6 Chaisson bad. Bottom 6 Chaisson good!

A player like chaisson should never be on a multi year deal in my opinion. This is how you end up with Bouma and Stajan making a combined salary over 5M per year.