[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

My sense, and anyone can correct this if I'm mis-representing things, is that "team tank" wants to see the Flames more proactively strip the team down, by removing some of the well performing vets...both to maximize the return of those assets and so that their 1st can be a higher one, including to maximize the chances of landing McKenna this year.

I think that's basically it?

I'll comment as I am one of the main pro proper rebuild (so probably called pro tank), and someone who doesn't think Conroy and/or the Flames as a whole are doing a great job so far at the rebuild.

I look at who will be with this team when they are most likely to start to compete, their age ranges, and the most valuable assets for the team

Going into last season the most valuable rebuilding assets for the Flames were #1 Wolf, #2 Parekh (Can be argue he has ascended to top valuable asset) and the Flames 2025 first round pick. (I can buy an argument Coranto or Zary heading into the season)

This first round pick had protection on it - meaning there was a risk of losing your 3rd most valuable rebuilding asset heading into last season.


The teams best players/core heading into last season were (age in brackets)

Kadri (34)
Coleman (33)
Backlund (36)
Weegar (31)
Andersson (28)
Huberdeau (32)
Sharangovich (27)

So if I look at a team starting a rebuild and looking 5 years out (2029-2030 season) when they could be emerging from a rebuild who of these best players do I want on the team / will be a core producer on the team?

The two youngest players on the list - Andersson and Sharagovich - were not signed long term. That means the Flames would be paying a premium for their prime years when they aren't contending and in 5 years more likely then not have a post prime player they are paying prime year $$ for who is less effective.

Backlund, Kadri, Huberdeau and Coleman will all be over 37 by that time. They certainly aren't getting better, are a depreciating asset, and won't be a core player.

Weegar is under a great long term contract but will be mid 30s when we are ready to compete.

So going into last season when I look at our core - I honestly don't see a single player who fit into the 5 year from now rebuild team. To me that's A - Big problem and B - The sign it most certainly is a rebuild not a retool.

Knowing this - who provides the most value in a trade / tradeable situation to accelerate a rebuild AND knowing our 2025 first rounder is our 3rd most valuable rebuild asset and has protection on it?

I would have ranked them as follows taking into consideration trade protections before last season.

1. Weegar
2. Andersson
3. Sharangovich (Was a pending UFA)
4. Coleman
5. Kadri
6. Backlund
7. Huberdeau

Now I actually would have loved to see the Flames attempt to trade Weegar for a haul - but 100% understand why they didn't.

But the handling of #2 and #3 on the list was not something I think helps this team long term.

I would rather have walked Shag's to the deadline and traded for picks (yes he had a poor year and wouldn't have returned a ton (For argument let's say a 2nd) but I don't see how he plays into the long term strategy of this team) and move Andersson

Would that have been enough for this team to finish bottom 10? I actually doubt it with how they played - but who knows.

NOTE: I do think the Flames thought they would be bottom 10 last year and that it was part of the plan - so maybe they weren't concerned with keeping the extra talent on the team.

The second rebuild part of last season I did not like was the Frost and Farabee trade. We effectively gave up a 2nd and 3rd for them. Value wise it's fine/arguably a win.

However - To me they are not young enough, good enough, or locked up long term cheap enough that it makes sense to add them now. In 5 years they are post apex. People say Farabee could become the next Coleman - But he's already an expensive Coleman light who isn't "young." Best case he develops into a Coleman, is 30 as we start to enter competitive years and needs a new contract? How does this help now or long term?

So in my perfect(ish) world last year the Flames would have traded Andersson, Shags, and not traded for Frost or Farabee

Assuming that made them bad enough for their own pick (let's say 10th overall for simplicity) the Flames would have entered the draft with

10th overall
16th overall
Two extra 2nds (Shags and Frost traded 2nd back)
An extra 3rd (Kuzmenko trade value)

and whatever they got for Andersson

That is what the draft capital should look like for a rebuilding team IMO. Especially if the Flames really are better and drafting and developing players.

If we are great at drafting that would be a competitive advantage we should lean into.

And if that team was struggling, maybe Coleman and or Kadri asks for a trade and you get more assets at the deadline. Maybe we get to Colorado deal for Kadri.

Now I see the argument you can always trade Coleman next year, Kadri when trade protection gone, Frost in the future, etc. 100% true. However a few things to consider

1. Kadri, Colemans, etc of the world are getting older and can go from asset with value to no value asset (or low) very quickly.

2. If you are planning to trade at some point anyways - why not rip the bandaid off and get to it. They are a depreciating asset AND making the teams 1st rounders worse.

3. If you trade them if future years you are putting off the timeline of the returns joining to team X years. A guy drafted in the 2026 late first isn't making the NHL until 2031 in all likelihood (if at all)

4. They make the team better. This hurts a rebuilding teams most important asset - Their own 1st rounder.

Heading into 2026 one of the Flames most valuable rebuilding asset is the 2026 pick. But again it is a unknown value asset depending where you draft

If the Flames finish 16-20th again next year, trade Andersson for a 1st + scraps, and that's it - In my opinion the last 2 years will have been nothing short of a disaster for a proper rebuild.