Quote:
Originally Posted by manwiches
Everybody talks about trading Gaudreau to a team where he will flourish with a play driving center.
Food for thought. Why don't we trade for a play driving center, and see him flourish with us? I love Monahan, but he can bump to 2C, and we trade for a bonafide 1c. Yes, I am aware assets need to go the other way, but something to consider
I love Monahan as a 2C, and then see Gaudreau with that real 1C.
Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
Those that think Monahan was doing the dirty work and held back by Gaudreau are going to be in for a rude awakening if the Flames don't find a solid replacement for Johnny on the wing. Monahan can do one thing really well and that's shoot the puck and finish around the net. Everything else in his game is more suited to 2nd/3rd line center role.
|
The Flames’ best case scenario lies somewhere within these two posts. The ideal situation for the flames is to be able to move Monahan to the 2C position (Backlund to 3C then a Ryan or whatever as 4C) and to have a true 1C with Gaudreau. Bennett was likely part of this plan, but, for a number of reasons, it never happened (as many have pointed out).
However, as one reply to manwiches said, it’s near impossible for the Flames to obtain a 1C from outside the org at this point while retaining Monahan as a 2C—unless they consider sacrificing good youth on the backend...even then, 1Cs are super hard to come by.
With all that in mind, it’s frustrating that Lindholm was never really tried at 1C, even just to see what they had. This is especially brutal in hindsight: why not have mixed it up at all, given the constant struggles that entire line had?
As for people looking to trade Gaudreau, I tend to agree with Erick E. He drives that line, for better or for worse. The idea of trading him without substantial return reminds me of Peter and the boat off of Family Guy:
https://youtu.be/yZpIog7e-R4