[Rumour] Friedman: Flames maybe one of the teams interested in Duchene?

[Vulcan]

One thing I notice when looking at Brouwer's stats is that he took only 31 PIMs half of what he took in St. Louis and only 15th amongst Flames players. Sure less PIMs is good but to me it shows he wasn't playing his game.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...000432017.html

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p....php?pid=62527

[Poe969]

How bad did brouwer look in the game that Jankowski played?

[Macindoc]

Only interested in Duchene is if we can trade Brouwer or Stajan for him. Like them, his play doesn't justify his cap hit.

[Mister Yamoto]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Between Day One of the Season and Day Eighty-Three of the NHL schedule Troy Brouwer was top-five among Flames forwards in scoring. I would say he looked like a pretty good fit while he was healthy.

And what was the Flames record during those first 83 days? You know, when Brouwer was kicking ass. I mean top 5 among Flames forwards. Wowsers.

When I say he wasn't a good fit, I meant exactly that. Was he a good fit on the top line? Second line? Powerplay? Third line?

When the Flames were rolling in March Brouwers' roll on the team was reduced to to the fourth line (and he didn't even do that very well). When things got tough in April Brouwer completely disappeared.

Yeah, it's possible he could have a bounce back year but I wouldn't bet on it. Seems to me like the less of a role Brouwer plays, the better the Flames are. He had a good preseason though.

Too bad nothing came of those Brouwer for Ovechkin rumours.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mister Yamoto

And what was the Flames record during those first 83 days? You know, when Brouwer was kicking ass. I mean top 5 among Flames forwards. Wowsers.

When I say he wasn't a good fit, I meant exactly that. Was he a good fit on the top line? Second line? Powerplay? Third line?

Do you think top-five scoring on a team is a middling accomplishment? How curious.

During the first three months of the season I think Brouwer and Bennett were actually a decent fit, in that they provided top-six level offense, which was needed at a time when other players were struggling to find their game.

It is unsurprisingly typical that you would draw such an arbitrary link between Brouwer's offensive production and team performance:

Brouwer, good! = Team, bad.
Brouwer, bad. = Team, good!

So, Sam Bennett was tied with him for fifth in Flames scoring before Brouwer's injury, after which he then scored only five goals and nine points in 45 games. By your measure we should conclude from this that the Flames are much better off with Bennett continuing to play a less offensive role.

When the Flames were rolling in March Brouwers' roll on the team was reduced to to the fourth line (and he didn't even do that very well). When things got tough in April Brouwer completely disappeared.

Do you think then that returning from injury had no effect at all on his performance in the second half of the season?

Yeah, it's possible he could have a bounce back year but I wouldn't bet on it. Seems to me like the less of a role Brouwer plays, the better the Flames are. He had a good preseason though...

See, that's the funny thing about impressions—without all the information at hand they are just as likely to be right as wrong.

Here is what I cannot fathom:

· There is strong evidence to suggest that Brouwer is still a +35-point-producer at his age when healthy.
· There is strong evidence to suggest that Brouwer's injury had a significant impact on his production and effectiveness in the second half of the season.
· There is nothing beyond the fact that he is now a year older after suffering through the worst single season of his professional career to indicate that he has suddenly diminished to the level of a fourth-line checker.

And yet, there are plenty of posters—including yourself—who seem absolutely convinced that the last point completely nullifies the former two. That looks to me like the textbook definition of "irrational" and "obtuse."

Pardon me for believing that the evidence matters.

[Mister Yamoto]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Do you think top-five scoring on a team is a middling accomplishment? How curious.

During the first three months of the season I think Brouwer and Bennett were actually a decent fit, in that they provided top-six level offense, which was needed at a time when other players were struggling to find their game.

It is unsurprisingly typical that you would draw such an arbitrary link between Brouwer's offensive production and team performance:

Brouwer, good! = Team, bad.
Brouwer, bad. = Team, good!

So, Sam Bennett was tied with him for fifth in Flames scoring before Brouwer's injury, after which he then scored only five goals and nine points in 45 games. By your measure we should conclude from this that the Flames are much better off with Bennett continuing to play a less offensive role.


Do you think then that returning from injury had no effect at all on his performance in the second half of the season?


See, that's the funny thing about impressions—without all the information at hand they are just as likely to be right as wrong.

Here is what I cannot fathom:

· There is strong evidence to suggest that Brouwer is still a +35-point-producer at his age when healthy.
· There is strong evidence to suggest that Brouwer's injury had a significant impact on his production and effectiveness in the second half of the season.
· There is nothing beyond the fact that he is now a year older after suffering through the worst single season of his professional career to indicate that he has suddenly diminished to the level of a fourth-line checker.

And yet, there are plenty of posters—including yourself—who seem absolutely convinced that the last point completely nullifies the former two. That looks to me like the textbook definition of "irrational" and "obtuse."

Pardon me for believing that the evidence matters.

What point are you even trying to make? Seriously. I really don't know. That's what you do. You start arguments but only you get to know what the argument is about.

All I said is that Troy Brouwer wasn't/isn't a good fit for the Flames. I stand behind that 100%.

If you want to make it about 83 day segments and what the definition of irrational is knock yourself out with that. I give up.

[Erick Estrada]

Man if Hamonic plus a 1st wasn't going to get it done for Duchesne you have to wonder if the Avalanche are overplaying their hand. There's a fine line between holding out for the best deal and mismanaging the asset. Next offseason with a year left on his deal there's no way they even get a guy like Hamonic on his contract and age straight across for one year of Duchesne. They may be able to get good value up to next season's trade deadline but after that there will be a steep drop.

[Anduril]

A little older but it's not that Hamonic isn't enough value, it's that he's not the right fit that the Avalanche are looking for.
Avalanche looking for good young defensemen or prospects
#3 for the short and sweet bit of it

Hamonic will be basically 30 years old by the time his contract expires. I seriously doubt the Avs intend to compete for anything major within the next 3 years given the massive number of holes all over their roster. He might be a great defenseman on a team that could use any kind of help with a friendly contract, the age is just wrong for a long term reset on the organization. At least when you try to compete in 4 years time, you'll be looking at a 25yo MacKinnon, 28yo Landeskog and maybe a 29yo Barrie as the core pieces to start.

By that point rather than hoping that a 30yo will be a key piece remaining from your core trade asset years ago, might be best to hold out for that piece that can grow with your core and be relevant for several years after the fact. For those saying that they could have gotten the equivalent of what we paid for Hamonic (1st, two 2nds) + another 1st, that's still hoping for a guy that will start to step into the lineup when you want to become more competitive. Not the right timeline again.

Ideally they're looking at a guy who's already got a season or two of pro experience and is ready to step in now or contribute in a more significant role. You can debate about whether that's asking too much but at least the reasoning is understandable. No idea who it'll be. There's always somebody willing to deal valuable defensemen (Hall for Larsson, Johansen for Jones, Drouin for Sergachev) though the last deal is the only one in recent memory with a significant age difference (Sergachev 19yo vs Drouin 22yo).

My best random guess is a team of Columbus, Philadelphia, or Carolina being the best teams with assets. Whether any of them are willing or are even able to make their financials work is another issue.

[Gaudfather]

As has been mentioned here before at the draft Sakic could have structured that deal with the Islanders and then flipped Hamonic to the Flames for a 1st round and 2 second round picks. So if he thinks Duchene is worth more than two first rounders and two second rounders, he may be challenged. If he is serious about rebuilding with youth, he could have really stocked the cupboards with a deal like that.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't get why they haven't moved Duchene yet either. That was a great price for him. I don't think anyone is going to offer Colorado more than essentially two 1sts and two 2nds.

They could have taken those picks and used them as currency to then flip them for young defencemen. How they don't make a deal with Carolina is beyond me. It is like they are trying to make up for their past poor trades and get everything back.

At any rate, this lineup looks like a heck of a good start to build from:

Landeskog - MacKinnon - Rantanen
xxxxx - Duchene - xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxx - xxxxxx- xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxx - xxxxxx- xxxxxxxxxx

Johnson - xxxxx
Barrie - xxxxx
xxxxx - xxxxx

Varlamov
xxxxxx


Problem is that team has crap all left over. Too many poor trades erode all the depth and "can't miss" trajectory that team had. How could they allow Stastny to walk away for nothing?

Now do you ride what they have and try to augment their D through the draft and FA? Too many years. Now you get into a situation where you have to trade good assets to add to your defence, and try to augment your forwards through the draft (easier and faster as they usually develop quicker).

I wouldn't know where to start on that team if I was the GM. That was a miss by Sakic though - 4 picks in the first 2 rounds is something that makes sense to me, or just keep Hamonic and try to move the other 1st for another D. That is what needs the most work on that team.

[Gaudfather]

Four years ago Colorado looked like they were stacked with youth and talent. Sakic seemed to start to lose the grip on things with the O'Reilly offer sheet debacle ( thanks Jay) and he has never really regained his footing since.

[Insufficient Funds]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

Four years ago Colorado looked like they were stacked with youth and talent. Sakic seemed to start to lose the grip on things with the O'Reilly offer sheet debacle ( thanks Jay) and he has never really regained his footing since.

Wasn't Greg Sherman the Avs GM at the time of the offer sheet? I get that things haven't gone well for Sakic, but let's not make it out to be worse than it is.

[Gaudfather]

Originally Posted by Insufficient Funds

Wasn't Greg Sherman the Avs GM at the time of the offer sheet? I get that things haven't gone well for Sakic, but let's not make it out to be worse than it is.

Point taken - he was an executive advisor in the front office starting in May 2011, was named EVP Hockey Operations in May 2013 and then named GM in Sept 2014. To be clear the O'Reilly thing wasn't on him initially.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

Four years ago Colorado looked like they were stacked with youth and talent. Sakic seemed to start to lose the grip on things with the O'Reilly offer sheet debacle ( thanks Jay) and he has never really regained his footing since.

Originally Posted by Insufficient Funds

Wasn't Greg Sherman the Avs GM at the time of the offer sheet? I get that things haven't gone well for Sakic, but let's not make it out to be worse than it is.

Offer sheet was in Feb 2013. Sakic was hired in Sep 2014.

[Strange Brew]

Seriously. 2 1sts and 2 2nds is good value for Duchene. A competent GM could turn those into good players if the picks don't interest you.

The Avs really look like a train wreck right now.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

As has been mentioned here before at the draft Sakic could have structured that deal with the Islanders and then flipped Hamonic to the Flames for a 1st round and 2 second round picks. So if he thinks Duchene is worth more than two first rounders and two second rounders, he may be challenged. If he is serious about rebuilding with youth, he could have really stocked the cupboards with a deal like that.

No way they could do that deal. Sets the franchise back, sends a terrible message to the fans. Those drafts picks wouldn't be contributing for years. They can't trade Duchene for picks, they need a young player who can play now.

Like did you even think about it from COL's perspective?

[Insufficient Funds]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

No way they could do that deal. Sets the franchise back, sends a terrible message to the fans. Those drafts picks wouldn't be contributing for years. They can't trade Duchene for picks, they need a young player who can play now.

Like did you even think about it from COL's perspective?

That would be a really good return for Dushene.

How about using those picks as pieces in a trade for the type of player you described? I think that's part of the problem in COL, they don't seem to have any imagination on approaching this from different angles.

[Poe969]

Why do they need someone young now? They still have some decent t youngish players and they're still a horrible team and they would be a horrible team is you add any player. They're in a rebuild and they're far from being good. They were supposed to be planning for the future, trading one of they're players now shouldn't set then back, it would give them more assets for the future.

Sakic looks really bad here, he only has the job. Evander of what he did as a player...a long time ago.

[starseed]

Side question - now that we can look back with 4 years of hindsight, what happened behind the scenes on that offer sheet to O'Reilly? Did Feaster just not do his homework on the possibility of losing him and the picks? Have we learned anything in the past couple years that sheds light on what that was all about?

[Samonadreau]

I wonder if the Avs could have tried to move Duchene to Montreal for Sergachyev (+). Probably would be a good fit for both sides.

Recent comparables for what Duchene could be moved for:

Hall for Larsson (#2/3 D).
Johanson for Seth Jones (#2/3 D)
Drouin for Sergachyev (cap dump so a little different)

Not sure if Duchene holds as much value as Hall and Johanson. He definitely would have a few years ago.

That being said is there a deal out there for a #3/D? I'm sure there would but he would have to be younger (say 25 or under to fit the Avs trajectory.

I think Sakic has missed the boat here and was asking for a #1D which is insane. Now he will be lucky to get a #3/4 who is still trending up.