Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntingwhale
I like Engelland, but this is a classic case of sell high before he heavily declines. A 34 year old having what looks like a career season screams of Wideman, Glencross, or any other aging vet who should have been traded away for decent pieces to keep the rebuild moving along.
I love what he brings to the team. I love how he's a great leader. I love his toughness. But he's due for a drop off and will quickly become the whipping boy if he's brought back. I don't expect the team to trade him at the deadline if were in a playoff spot, and nor should they. But if BT can get something for him at the draft, he should do so.
If anything I'd be happy with him coming back for 1 year, but no more then that. And for super cheap. But honestly he's earned another decent payday. But likely it's not (and nor should it) be with the Flames.
|
I don't disagree but if you don't bring back Engelland, are you only bringing back the top 3? None of the other guys are any better than fringe NHLers. That seems like too much turnover on the back end for one year.
And yeah, pretty hard to trade Engelland at the deadline if Flames are in playoff contention, as your defense would be a joke outside of top 3. But you're not trading him at the draft as he will be UFA. So that's why I think he's a guy you sign for 2 years. I'm not too worried about a drop-off. In Engelland's case, he's not that high to begin with.
Of course other scenario is Flames trade for a defenseman at the deadline. Someone with term left on their contract. Which is entirely possible.