RFA Poll: Should the Flames resign TJ Galiardi

[Bingo]

moving on to the RFAs

11 days to the draft!

[IgiTang]

Said No, Young guys surpassing him. And they are.

[bubbsy]

was a bit disappointed by his play this year, though it could very likely be just an off-year.

I see him as a 3rd/4th line option, but am hoping those positions on the depth chart are being filled by grittier, harder to play against guys, hopefully attained thru trade/FA. I think this will be important given that the top6 aren't going to be all that physical.

[Huntingwhale]

No good. Probably the most disappointing player last season. Didn't show any of the size/tenacity or grit that Feaster preached on about when he was brought over. Certainly didn't look like a player who was proud to play for his home team. On a 27th place team, guys like him are very much expendable. No thanks.

[Poe969]

There should be the option "no, he just isn't that good". I guess the young guys passing him is the nice way of saying that

[ForeverFlameFan]

May have had an off year, but regardless, we still have younger options who have played better for his spot.

[Point Blank]

He was awful. It's sad because he was so excited to be in Calgary. Though I suppose having an awful player who wants to be in Calgary is better than an amazing player who hates being in Calgary.

[Parallex]

Yes. No sense letting an asset walk for nothing. He can hold a spot while younger players develop in the AHL and hopefully have a bounce back year and rebuild some value.

[#-3]

I said yes, If you can trade Comeau for a 5th, than he is carrying some value. So hold onto him and see what the future brings.

[Read Only]

He brought very little to the team last year and isn't going to be paid enough to help get us to the floor.

No reason that guys like Granlund, Reinhart, Byron shouldn't be playing the minutes he would likely get if re-signed.

[dammage79]

The fact that he loves it in Calgary is why I voted yes. Off year last year. Id like to see if he can rebound.

[Roof-Daddy]

Yes, and then trade him....or trade his RFA rights.

He's an asset, don't leave him unqualified and let him walk for nothing.

[AC]

I think he's much better than he showed, however I also believe he's the easiest to replace with homegrown promotions.

I'd like to see Max Reinhart make the team over bringing Galiardi back again.

[theoforever]

I think he's much better than he showed, however I also believe he's the easiest to replace with homegrown promotions.

I'd like to see Max Reinhart make the team over bringing Galiardi back again.

Have to agree Galiardi is a good guy but we can use his spot for a young guy. Having said that, if he goes somewhere else he will most likely have a good year. Voted 'No'.

[Erick Estrada]

To me he's one of those guys with lots of hustle and zero finish. Prone to bad plays at times also. If the Flames want to draft McDavid he would be a good player to keep and play as he's not very good but if the objective is to improve then move on.

[Machiavelli]

He doesn't do anything very well. Pass.

[Drury18]

No. He wasn't an asset offensively and he certainly was not an asset off the ice.

Like AC said, rather see the spot go to Max Reinhart myself. Reinhart is probably a better community ambassador for the Flames as well. Both times that I met Galiardi at Flames sponsored events (Fan Fest and another fan event) he was a DB to the extent that Hudler made a comment about TJ's behavior to him. Pre-signed a pile of cards, put them in front of him and pointed to them while looking at his phone as kids walked up asking for an autograph. Rest of the guys at the event were signing them as they kids asked and talking to them. Left a poor impression on me for what was supposed to be a hometown boy living his dream of playing for his hometown team.

[FlamesAddiction]

I said no, but it wouldn't be terrible if they brought him back as long as his roster spot isn't guaranteed and they aren't against putting him on waivers and demoting him if someone else impresses in camp.

[Super-Rye]

I think the Flames should qualify him. He had flashes of strong play, but was unable to do it with any sort of consistency.

Management has already said they want the kids to spend time in the AHL so I don't see the harm in bringing Galiardi back. Either the kids show the're not ready yet and the Flames have an extra NHL body in Galiardi as a place holder until someone is ready, or, someone like Reinhart shows he is NHL ready and the Flames either have to trade or waive Galiardi.

I just don't see a down side to bringing him back, unless management have someone else in mind.

[nik-]

Replace him with youth. I wanted a local guy to succeed, but he just never did anything but skate.

[Anduril]

Loved the trade at the time, but it's time to move on.

[GreenLantern]

Between Reinhart, Knight and Arnold at camp somebody will surpass him whether we sign him or not.

[Ashasx]

Replace him with youth if that youth gets more than 10 minutes per game.

Otherwise, keep him if he's just going to be on the 4th line.

[automaton 3]

I'd say qualify him.

He had a down year last year but I think he'll bounce back.

If the younger players are in fact ready to push him down the depth chart, they'll prove it at training camp.

[Read Only]

What is TJ galiardi bouncing back to?

I guess 14 points in 36 isn't awful in the lockout year but the season before he had 15 point in 69 games and his career high is 39 points which seems like a fluke at this point.

Galiardi was given a shot with Thornton in Sj and looked terrible with him. I think Galiardi last year is what he is and I am not sure there is any think for him to bounce back to.

[kyuss275]

I would say no. That said flames are going to need a press box player or 2. I rather him in the press box instead of youngster.

[Galakanokis]

I was ecstatic when the Flames got Galiardi, just finished watching him beat the Canucks and I thought he played very well. A down year for him no doubt and I do not expect much more out of him but I would re-sign him. Ideally guys like him and Bouma form our 4th line. Size, speed and with some skill. 3rd and 4th line were very important in LA's cup run. You really saw the value of a quality center in Stoll on the 3rd. We need depth with skill.

[Ulrith]

No, the young guys have passed him by.

I was really high on him coming here last year but his play was very underwhelming. He was one of the worst offenders for bad giveaways and plays dying on his stick. Would rather that spot be taken up by a young player.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

What value does he really have when he can't win a solid role on the 4th worst team in the league? I think re-signing him risks wasting a contract spot and having to bury him in the minors. His value should be lower than last summer and last summer it wasn't very high. I think he could be a lot harder to dump in the fall if he falls to make the team than some are giving credit for. He's flat out not a good hockey player. Therefore I wouldn't even qualify him.

[madmike]

I voted no. At this point re-signing him would just be wasting a roster spot that could go to a younger player with more potential.

[mrdonkey]

Blake Comeau 2.0. Dump 'im.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I didn't particularly like Galiardi to be honest. Was expecting a bit more offence from him, and I think we were all disappointed with what he gave.

However, I am a believer in advanced stats. IIRC, Galiardi really pushed the pace when he was on the ice. I wouldn't mind the Flames re-signing him for depth and for a possible 'reclamation' issue (personal loss in the off-season that may have affected him from what I read). I think he will help make that 4th line a bit harder to play against with his speed and tenacity, though one may argue that with Wolf, Bouma, and a few other players that area is covered.

As long as the signing is cheap (and of course it would be) and there is no term (1-2 year deal), I can't see how this would really hurt the Flames. If a rookie or two beat him out there is no harm in having him be the 13th forward that gets healthy-scratched every night until there is an injury.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Good energy guy who can push onto the roster when needed.

Fixed that for you.

He's not going to win the Vezina any time soon, but he is an NHL-calibre player, on a team that has a shortage of those.

[Fire]

Number of prospects in the AHL are already better than Galiardi. Time for him to go.

[united]

Indifferent mostly but I would lean toward re-signing him.

One thing that really got overlooked this past season was how effective he was at drawing penalties: He took 9 minors but drew 26 for a differential of +17. That ties him for 10th in the league despite playing only 62 games. The next closest Flames player was Brodie at +8.

Galiardi also had a mightily unlucky season shooting: His career average prior to this past season was 10.3% and yet this past season he shot just 4%. If he shot at his career average he's a 10-goal 27-point player and probably more as he likely would have seen more ice time as a result.

I guess it comes down to whether his penalty-drawing prowess combined with knowing his shooting will never be worse, plus the fact he's a proud Calgary boy who (it seems) wants to be here is worth another try with him.

I think due to the fact the Flames need to burn some money he would be worth a one-year deal to see if he can right the ship, if he wants to stick around. I also wouldn't be opposed to giving his spot to a youngster who earns it. Regardless, I take him over Westgarth every time. I also know he has been working hard with a skating coach as well as a skills coach this offseason. Whether that is normal or not, and whether it will make a difference or not, is unknown.

[Ozy_Flame]

League minimum, two-way contract? Sure.

Otherwise, hell no.

[Travis Munroe]

If you simply watched last years play, you would vote no. If you have watched him over the years you would be in favor of 1 more year. I vote 1 more year - he is still young, draws a ton of penalties and enjoys being in Calgary. Had a off year, see if it can be corrected and make your decision next year.

[jofillips]

i have to admit his pace suprised me which has got to be an asset.

[kermitology]

Like the guy.. he lives in my neighbourhood, but just didn't show that he belongs in the NHL last season. Total disaster for him.

I said no. But if he was re-signed, I wouldn't cry about it.

[Geeoff]

I'd sign him just because we might be able to get something for him.

[Karl]

He's quite a good skater but there's really nothing else he's shown he can do half-decently other than that.

Whoever says he's Blake Comeau version 2.0 is spot on.

I'd prefer to move on from this sub-mediocre player. He was mostly dreadful last season and the rest of his career hasn't been much of any good either.

[Stay Golden]

No too many young guys have passed him by says it all.

[mile]

Nope - Seems like a good guy and he's been effective before coming to Calgary, but he is the most replaceable forward we have.

Way too inconsistent - Liked him at the start of last season, had small spurts of good play but was producing nothing most of the time in between.

[Calgary '89]

Not sure which young player can play C, RW or LW, kill penalties and forecheck as fast or as hard as Galiardi.

Don't confuse him with a top 6 player just cause he played on Thornton's wing in SJ, he's a very useful bottom 6 do-it-all kinda player and the Flames definitely need that for the next few years.

If Galiardi can average 14 mins a night and score 10-15 points next season while playing against top lines then he's worth keeping around.

[Daradon]

No. I really wanted it to work out with him, and for the first little while it looked like it was, but I went with option three, too many young guys are proving they deserve the time over him.

If all it was about was overpaying a 4th line guy, I'd be ok with that, cause I don't see us being a cap team next year anyway. But I think the minutes could be more wisely spent on someone else.

EDIT: Though maybe it would be good to have an extra veteran in case some of the young guys take a step back or simply aren't ready. As has become gospel in the current NHL age, you can never ruin a guy by giving him too much time to develop, but you can ruin him by bringing him up too early or too often.

I guess I'm option three, but I'm ok either way. The Flames staff probably know the situation better than I. But for me the answer to the question definitely revolves around the progress of the young guys, and is a lot less about T.J.

Sorry T.J. :(

[badradio]

I would rather have Byron in the lineup... I'm not sold on Knight or Reinhart either... but Galiardi is a dime a dozen... depth is a fun thing to have... and strange!

[Tinordi]

He had a gift wrapped opportunity here and didn't take it. Sorry but that's all he should get.

[CsInMyBlood]

No point in keeping him around, we have more than enough bodies that can do anything that Gallardi can do, if not more. I don't want to say he was useless, but he was...useless.

His spot should be filled by one of our young guys. If they can't do more than Gallardi did last year then we at least know they aren't long for this team either.

Figure out what we have with our prospects, now is the right time to do it and TJ Gallardi should not be the kind of player stopping them from getting some NHL experience. He had a great chance with this team last year and he dropped the ball. Certainly explains why the Sharks let him come to Calgary for so little.

Time to move on.

[Enoch Root]

He had a bad season. That impacted the Flames not one lick.

It would cost us absolutely nothing to give him a chance at redemption. If he has a better year, he would be movable at the deadline.

Zero downside for the Flames here.

[TheDebaser]

Galiardi had good possession numbers at least.

[kyuss275]

There should be a poll to see who CP thinks should be our press box players. It better not be youngsters. One reason I voted for Westgarth back was for pressbox. I could see why Galiardi should not be back but he is kind of a good guy to have in and out of pressbox. Can flames get a better pressbox player?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

He had a bad season. That impacted the Flames not one lick.

It would cost us absolutely nothing to give him a chance at redemption. If he has a better year, he would be movable at the deadline.

Zero downside for the Flames here.

There's 2 downsides:

1) He costs a contract space that could later to be used to acquire a player or sign a college UFA
2) If he doesn't improve the Flames may have to pay his 1 way salary in the AHL and he could be taking ice time away from a developing kid in Adirondack.

We're trying to improve. Galiardi is a guy that we should be able to improve on since he was fairly useless last season. Much rather we gave a shot to somebody else, either in the organization or outside of it. He had a whole season of chances on a variety of lines and failed to impress. Why does he deserve more of a chance than kids like Reinhart, Granlund, Knight, etc who actually have impressed?

Let's move on IMO.

[Enoch Root]

There's 2 downsides:

1) He costs a contract space that could later to be used to acquire a player or sign a college UFA
2) If he doesn't improve the Flames may have to pay his 1 way salary in the AHL and he could be taking ice time away from a developing kid in Adirondack.

We're trying to improve. Galiardi is a guy that we should be able to improve on since he was fairly useless last season. Much rather we gave a shot to somebody else, either in the organization or outside of it. He had a whole season of chances on a variety of lines and failed to impress. Why does he deserve more of a chance than kids like Reinhart, Granlund, Knight, etc who actually have impressed?

Let's move on IMO.
1) Very little chance that we're up near 49 contracts this year

2) who ever said he deserves more of a chance than Reinhart or Granlund?

If they are better than him, they'll get their chance.

Better to have someone that they have to outplay in order to make it than simply open the spot up.

Plus, if he plays well, he becomes a tradable asset.

[Read Only]

If the only requirement of signing a guy is zero downside then shouldn't we just sign everyone?

Galiardi didn't have a down year he had a similar season to the last full season he played. In SJ he was given a chance to play with Thornton (who has made a career of making guys look much better than they are) and looked terrible at that. They gave him up for very little and replaced him with Mike Brown who struggled to play with the Oilers and Leafs.

Galiardi struggled to stay in the line-up of the 4th worst team in the NHL and there isn't any reason to think this upcoming year will be better.

I hope the Flames start looking for guys that make the team better and not guys that don't hurt or maybe if they can be something they aren't we can trade them at the deadline.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

1) Very little chance that we're up near 49 contracts this year

2) who ever said he deserves more of a chance than Reinhart or Granlund?

If they are better than him, they'll get their chance.

Better to have someone that they have to outplay in order to make it than simply open the spot up.

Plus, if he plays well, he becomes a tradable asset.

So this is all about hoping he becomes a tradeable asset? Seems a bad reason to re-sign him IMO.

I'm fine with rookies having to outplay guys to make the roster. The guy they outplay doesn't have to be Galiardi. We can sign some depth UFA's in the summer or deal mid round draft picks for some just like we did last year with Galiardi and Russell. Getting rid of Galiardi doesn't mean we have to hand rookies spots. There's lots of time to acquire players via UFA or trade this summer to shore up depth.

Bottom line for me is that I don't see any reason to believe he'll rebound. He's been given lots of chances. We're trying to upgrade the team and we can do it with players from outside the organization or within or a combination of the two. Based on his last season I don't see any reason to retain him.

Glencross-Monahan-Hudler
Baertschi/Gaudreau/Granlund-Backlund-Jones
Byron-Stajan-Colborne
Westgarth-Bouma-McGrattan

With re-signing a guy like Westgarth we could already have four lines while only handing one spot to a rookie. So add in a depth UFA guy, maybe a mid rounder for another depth guy and the rookies will still have to outplay guys to make the team and not have their roles handed to them. Galiardi doesn't need to be in that equation at all. His play doesn't merit another contract on a team looking to improve on the type of mediocrity he brought.

[Enoch Root]

man, a couple injuries and that lineup will be frightening

we need a few more bodies that can play in the NHL

[Flames Draft Watcher]

man, a couple injuries and that lineup will be frightening

we need a few more bodies that can play in the NHL

Sure. As I said you sign one UFA, trade a pick for another player and then we likely have 2 rookies make the team and the depth could be okay if those rookies are impact rookies. Obviously we're not competing for the cup next year. I'd expect at least one substantial roster changing trade between now and next season as well that might reshape things. With our farm team as deep as it's ever been we actually should be in good shape come injuries.

Prospects who should be close to making the NHL include: Baertschi, Gaudreau, Granlund, Reinhart, Knight, Arnold, Agostino, Hanowski, Ferland, Wotherspoon. I don't recall us ever having that many including some high profile guys who could be 1st/2nd liners.

Other potential injury callups include: Poirier, Van Brabant, Billins, Cundari

Tons of good injury replacement and tons of competition in camp for limited roles. What we lack is a bit of 2nd line talent obviously but we have to hope one of our prospects come in and have calder type seasons.

[Enoch Root]

Over-ripening

[ForeverFlameFan]

Imo, I think you pick between either Byron or Galiardi... And I think we all know the answer to that one.

[Karl]

man, a couple injuries and that lineup will be frightening

we need a few more bodies that can play in the NHL

Yes, but Galiardi is a worse player than any of those guys FDW has listed in his lineup except for McGrattan & Westgarth.

Galiardi has really not shown he should be one of those bodies that should be back here. There are some young players here and other UFA guys who can do anything at least as well as what Galiardi does best. To his credit, he hustles & tries hard but he's not very good and most likely is what he is at this point, which is a sub-mediocre hockey player.

[Parallex]

Glencross-Monahan-Hudler
Baertschi/Gaudreau/Granlund-Backlund-Jones
Byron-Stajan-Colborne
Westgarth-Bouma-McGrattan


... How does the team make the cap floor with that forward group? That forward group leaves the Flames needing to spend 10-12 Million Dollars on what amounts to limited icetime depth players.

[Scoreface]

I don't think he sees the light of day in the NHL again. He was awful on a lottery team given lots of chances. Too vanilla for my liking, as he just skates endlessly and accomplishes little, kind of like Comeau. No thanks. Young guys will come up and revel in the opportunity under some good leadership and coaching.

There is only room for one T.J. on this team and it ain't him.

[EldrickOnIce]

... How does the team make the cap floor with that forward group? That forward group leaves the Flames needing to spend 10-12 Million Dollars on what amounts to limited icetime depth players.

Could spend a chunk on defensemen

[Karl]

I don't think he sees the light of day in the NHL again. He was awful on a lottery team given lots of chances. Too vanilla for my liking, as he just skates endlessly and accomplishes little, kind of like Comeau. No thanks. Young guys will come up and revel in the opportunity under some good leadership and coaching.

There is only room for one T.J. on this team and it ain't him.

Exactly, and how many people want or wanted Comeau back? Not many at all and not me either. And that's another reason I do not want Galiardi back either.

[Parallex]

Could spend a chunk on defensemen

You could try. But what d-man is...

A: Worth the kind of scratch it would take to put a dent into that,
B: Would likely sign in Calgary,
C: Wouldn't demand an onerous amount of term (or alternatively would be likely to maintain performance over that term).

[EldrickOnIce]

You could try. But what d-man is...

A: Worth the kind of scratch it would take to put a dent into that,
B: Would likely sign in Calgary,
C: Wouldn't demand an onerous amount of term (or alternatively would be likely to maintain performance over that term).

D - none of the above

[AcGold]

Pass. He's similar to Tim Jackman. Not big, fast or skilled enough for his role. Watching Galiardi get steamrolled by Jamie Benn is when his confidence went to hell.

[Vulcan]

We've had worse 13th forwards than Galiardi. One thing is, do we want one of our prospects in that role, eating popcorn or do we want a proven NHL player who can fit in pretty much in any role?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

... How does the team make the cap floor with that forward group? That forward group leaves the Flames needing to spend 10-12 Million Dollars on what amounts to limited icetime depth players.

Did you read the rest of my post? I suggested we could sign an UFA and trade a pick for a player. We do have some RFA's to re-sign who will be getting raises.

I don't think the cap floor is an issue. The purpose of listing the depth chart was to show that we already have a whole forward group of guys better than Galiardi without even handing many spots to rookies or adding in the inevitable depth guys that we will be picking up this summer. Thus there's no reason to sign Galiardi because he's proven to be a fringe player on our roster and we're trying to improve on that roster.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

We've had worse 13th forwards than Galiardi. One thing is, do we want one of our prospects in that role, eating popcorn or do we want a proven NHL player who can fit in pretty much in any role?

Those aren't the only options. We can have a guy like Westgarth as the 13th and sign or trade for better players than Galiardi.

He's easily improved upon IMO.