[News] Treliving indicates he wants to bring Engelland back

[sureLoss]

From Friedman's 30 thoughts:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/3...olden-knights/

Other Flames related:

15. The Flames are loading up on young goalies and defencemen. Last week, they signed 2016 second-rounder Tyler Parsons, who backstopped London to the 2016 Memorial Cup and the United States to 2017 world junior gold. Brian Elliott and Chad Johnson are free agents at the NHL level, but Calgary now has five goalies at the AHL and below with NHL potential. Jon Gillies and David Rittich are at AHL Stockton; Mason McDonald is at ECHL Adirondack; Parsons is still in junior as is Nick Schneider with Medicine Hat (so you know Kelly Hrudey loves him).

“Gillies and Rittich are getting closer to playing in the NHL, but I’d rather cook them for another year if we have to than jam them in,” GM Brad Treliving said Monday. “The biggest challenge in goal is finding enough spots for everyone. Is there enough net? A goalie can do well in the ECHL, you’re fine down there. The real question is Parsons. He’ll have played three years of junior, won a Memorial Cup, a world juniors and there is potential for another run now. You don’t want to rush someone, but you do want to challenge him. At the end of the day, you always rather not enough spots than not enough players.”

16. On defence, Calgary is discussing signing Boston University’s Brandon Hickey, a third-rounder in 2014 who has one more year of college eligibility. They just snared NCAA free agent blueliner Jake Healey. They are pretty deep at the NHL level, although there will be free agency questions. Those two join a prospect pool that includes Rasmus Andersson, Brett Kulak, Oliver Kylington and Adam Ollas Mattsson, who just came overseas on an AHL tryout. (The Flames are also excited about Adam Fox, going to the Frozen Four with Harvard.)

“When we got here, the plan was to build down the middle, with goalies, defencemen and centres,” Treliving said. “We’ve talked about goalies. You’d like to have a big four on defence. We have (Mark) Giordano, Dougie (Hamilton) and T.J. Brodie. We’ll see who that fourth is, whether we bring back Michael Stone or it’s somebody else. Ideally, you allow for two kids, maybe one on the third pair and an extra. But the plan is to let them marinate. You don’t have to rush them, although it’s contingent on what we do here. What it gives you is options and depth. They can come and play here, or they give you the opportunity to find other things you need.”

With all of the cooking analogies, I’m betting Treliving spends a lot of his free time watching Chopped.

17. Treliving did indicate he wants to bring back Deryk Engelland, who is a free agent. But, he probably has to sort out the fourth defenceman first, and I can see him not wanting to disrupt an improving, more confident club by picking only one potential contract to solve now.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I already know which posters are going to hate this.

[btimbit]

Focus on getting Stone back first, but if Engelland would do a year or two at half of what he earns now, I'm all for it

[Locke]

Good. For the right dollars, but good.

I'm a huge Engelland fan, I want to see him take a bit of a haircut, but I really want him to stay.

Hes great where he is, he can comfortably step into a top 4 role for stretches and he can defeat two Canucks at the same time with one hand tied behind his back.

Sign me up.

[mrdonkey]

Would like to see all the defense brought back next year (sans Wideman). Adding Stone and Bartkowski has been a huge coup for the back end.

[TheScorpion]

I would be a-ok with this, as long as:

a) it's a one-year deal
b) Stone is re-signed first for under $4 million

Four of the current top-six are signed through next year (Giordano, Brodie, Hamilton, Bartkowski) but Stone needs to be the higher priority.

[getoverit]

Luv England, be nice to see. Stone if price right to round top 4

Bart, ummm no as I think we can upgrade on him or bring someone up from the farm team

[Erick Estrada]

I wouldn't mind him back but not at the current salary he's making and it's possible he may get something in that range on the open market. I think eventually management is going to have to accept that they are going to have to fill bottom roster positions from the AHL affiliate. Every time they overpay a depth guy they make it harder to retain guys like Backlund.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

For the right dollar, right term, and slotting him into the right position there is no reason to not want him back. He's a very good 5/6 for this team and I would expect that would be the case for at least another couple of years.

If one of the youngsters can make him expendable at any point from now and the next couple of years, that's cool too, but that needs to happen before you get rid of him.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I would be a-ok with this, as long as:

a) it's a one-year deal
b) Stone is re-signed first for under $4 million

Four of the current top-six are signed through next year (Giordano, Brodie, Hamilton, Bartkowski) but Stone needs to be the higher priority.

Why would Stone take a pay cut?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I would be a-ok with this, as long as:

a) it's a one-year deal
b) Stone is re-signed first for under $4 million

Four of the current top-six are signed through next year (Giordano, Brodie, Hamilton, Bartkowski) but Stone needs to be the higher priority.

Stone or other solution for top 4 should definitely be the top priority, but sequence of signings has very little to do with that.

[GreenLantern]

No problem with this at a reduced rate.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Focus on getting Stone back first, but if Engelland would do a year or two at half of what he earns now, I'm all for it

No chance. Engelland has established himself as a reliable bottom pairing defenseman who can take occasional shifts or play games in the top four. He will be signing what is likely to be his last multi-year contract, and will be in high demand heading into unrestricted free agency.

Engelland is getting a raise.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by codynw

Why would Stone take a pay cut?

Because he's had an off-year?

His sample size of good play here has been small. In Arizona, he was paid as much as he was since he was operating in a top-pairing role. Here, he's the #4 guy.

[Samuelsson]

Really is a good problem to have. If we can bring back Stone along with either Engelland or Bart, then we're doing good, especially with our talent on the farm. Still can't shake the thought that that Gio contract is going to anchor us sooner rather than later though...

[devo22]

yes please. I hated the signing back then, but he's really won me over. Perfect 3rd pairing guy, plus you never have to ice a fighter with him in the lineup.

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

Would like to see all the defense brought back next year (sans Wideman). Adding Stone and Bartkowski has been a huge coup for the back end.

I'd love to get Engelland back for about half his current salary, but I think Bartkowski is a bridge player. Next year I would much rather see a third pairing of Engelland and one of the young kids( Rasmus, Oliver or Brett) and have Bart as the 7th Dman.

Michael Stone should be a no-brainer and should be cheaper than he is at now.

This Defence core looking forward has tons of potential, really like what Fox and Hickey have done in the NCAA.

[CroFlames]

If Treliving could offer him 3 years at 2 per, I would think both player and club would be happy. He should have 2 more good years left in him, and that third year you can trade him.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Samuelsson

Really is a good problem to have. If we can bring back Stone along with either Engelland or Bart, then we're doing good, especially with our talent on the farm. Still can't shake the thought that that Gio contract is going to anchor us sooner rather than later though...

Bartkowski is signed already through the end of next season on a two-way deal worth $612.5k.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Because he's had an off-year?

His sample size of good play here has been small. In Arizona, he was paid as much as he was since he was operating in a top-pairing role. Here, he's the #4 guy.

Yeah, he's had an off year but he's bounced back in Calgary to re-establish himself in a top four role. 27 years old, UFA, top four blueliners.. he's not going to take a pay cut.

As for Engelland coming back, that's fantastic. It was a great signing by Treliving and the rare type to an older player you wish had an extra year on it. Still have to be careful as you don't want to go longer then one-two years on the next deal.