[Rumour] Garrioch: Flames make pitch for Spezza. UPD: Treliving denies offer

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Because even rebuilding organizations need veteran players. I'm not sure Spezza is the right kind of vet, however. It would make more sense - and cost less - to re-sign Cammalleri to a longer term deal.

The Flames have more than enough veteran leadership.

A rebuilding team like the Flames should not be going out of their way to give up assets for a 31 year old UFA, even if he is a top line centre (he's declining fast, by the way).

If the Flames want to keep spinning tires, I suppose this is a deal we should make.

[dammage79]

Honestly, there are other perfectly good options out there with lower costs of acquisition.

I'd like Spezza but the cost of acquisition is too much.

This is why M.Richards should be a target.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Honestly, there are other perfectly good options out there with lower costs of acquisition.

I'd like Spezza but the cost of acquisition is too much.

This is why M.Richards should be a target.

Yeah I do think the flames will be adding a vet through trade. I don't think it will be Spezza. That deal did not make sense for either team. Richards might be an option, but my gut tells me it will be Havlat from the sharks.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Yeah I do think the flames will be adding a vet through trade. I don't think it will be Spezza. That deal did not make sense for either team. Richards might be an option, but my gut tells me it will be Havlat from the sharks.

Could realistically add both and have a well rounded lineup. Those two players would plug the hole on the forward ranks.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Could realistically add both and have a well rounded lineup. Those two players would plug the hole on the forward ranks.

Why are we even discussing trading for 2 veteran forwards, short of them having bad contracts, hopefully meaning we'd be compensated with picks?

Are we rebuilding or treading water?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Why are we even discussing trading for 2 veteran forwards, short of them having bad contracts, hopefully meaning we'd be compensated with picks?

Are we rebuilding or treading water?

Well one only has one yer let and addresses the RW position. Can essentially be had for free. The other is a quality center who plays the game the right way...

It's called building. Theres plenty of time for the young centers to develop the right way with Richards manning the #2 or 3 line center position.

treading water? Havlat when healthy is obviously skilled enough to make the team instantly better as with Richards. Those two moves aren't treading water, IMO they're improvements over D.Jones and Matt Stajan.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Well one only has one yer let and addresses the RW position. Can essentially be had for free. The other is a quality center who plays the game the right way...

It's called building. Theres plenty of time for the young centers to develop the right way with Richards manning the #2 or 3 line center position.

treading water? Havlat when healthy is obviously skilled enough to make the team instantly better as with Richards. Those two moves aren't treading water, IMO they're improvements over D.Jones and Matt Stajan.

We have so many holes in our prospect pool on RW, D, and C that you'd rather give up chances to land those pieces for a short-term solution?

Who cares if another veteran is an improvement over Jones or Stajan. We already have those players in place. We don't need to give up assets to move other veterans down the depth chart.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Also what's with all these Canadian boys that would rather not play in their country? Granted most Canadian teams are terrible but really if you can't handle the pressure of playing in a Canadian market you are pretty soft. Yeah Toronto and Montreal are maybe a little extreme but players get treated very well in Calgary for example. There's something kind of sad about a guy that would rather go to places like Florida so they can disappear and collect their millions than play in a city where fans actually care about hockey. When do you ever hear of players in MLB that wouldn't relish the opportunity to play for the Yankees? Never as most of them dream about it. Yet some Canadian boys can't handle the pressure playing in Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, or Winnipeg? Weak.

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Those are the ones 'we' don't want either - so it's all good.

You wouldn't want Jeff Carter on your team?

In most cases, Canadian teams are shorthand for hockey-mad markets. And it's sadly true that a lot NHLers do not want to play in those markets. They like the money of being an NHLer. They like to play the game. But they don't like media attention and public pressure. More players than we like to think would prefer to play for Tampa, Florida, or Anaheim than Calgary, Ottawa, or Philadelphia.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

We have so many holes in our prospect pool on RW, D, and C that you'd rather give up chances to land those pieces for a short-term solution?

Who cares if another veteran is an improvement over Jones or Stajan. We already have those players in place. We don't need to give up assets to move other veterans down the depth chart.

The Flames have holes in every position, not just the prospect pool. They're going to add players via trade whether you like it or not. and the two players we're talking about are going to come about as cheap as you can get. Which is a better solution than the Garrioch rumors about Spezza.

The aim is to get better and compete for the playoffs. If you don't think the Flames will be looking to do just that, well, I'm sorry for you. They're not going to sit on their hands and ride into next season with an incomplete roster.

Listen to Treliving when he interviews, they're in no rush to get the prospects onto the main roster, to quote, "we want our kids to over ripen".

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by dammage79

The Flames have holes in every position, not just the prospect pool. They're going to add players via trade whether you like it or not. and the two players we're talking about are going to come about as cheap as you can get. Which is a better solution than the Garrioch rumors about Spezza.

The aim is to get better and compete for the playoffs. If you don't think the Flames will be looking to do just that, well, I'm sorry for you. They're not going to sit on their hands and ride into next season with an incomplete roster.

Listen to Treliving when he interviews, they're in no rush to get the prospects onto the main roster, to quote, "we want our kids to over ripen".

The goal is to win the Stanley Cup.

I don't want to be the Toronto Maple Leafs.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The goal is to win the Stanley Cup.

I don't want to be the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Yes, we can agree there. But that's a ways away yet. Havlat gets the Flames through next season, after that they can find another replacement via Poirier or another cheap trade target. Richards will help make the team better for a few years until the Knight's or Jankowski's or 2014 4th pick are ready to go.

The cap implications are also helpful.

Let's face it, they can improve this year with trades like these but they won't become instant contenders overnight. it's a process. As long as they don't get all weird like the Spezza offer I'm cool with whatever they can drum up in trades.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I was going to post the same. However if there is any remote truth to this it's a fair offer as Spezza is by far the best player in the deal and while Backlund had a nice season last year it doesn't come close to what Spezza has accomplished. That said I just can't see why he would accept a deal to the Flames given their situation and his age.

Also what's with all these Canadian boys that would rather not play in their country? Granted most Canadian teams are terrible but really if you can't handle the pressure of playing in a Canadian market you are pretty soft. Yeah Toronto and Montreal are maybe a little extreme but players get treated very well in Calgary for example. There's something kind of sad about a guy that would rather go to places like Florida so they can disappear and collect their millions than play in a city where fans actually care about hockey. When do you ever hear of players in MLB that wouldn't relish the opportunity to play for the Yankees? Never as most of them dream about it. Yet some Canadian boys can't handle the pressure playing in Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, or Winnipeg? Weak.

Tell that to Vernon - who by the way convinced Patrick Roy to request a trade from Montreal based on his own experience in CGY.

[kn]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

In most cases, Canadian teams are shorthand for hockey-mad markets. And it's sadly true that a lot NHLers do not want to play in those markets. They like the money of being an NHLer. They like to play the game. But they don't like media attention and public pressure. More players than we like to think would prefer to play for Tampa, Florida, or Anaheim than Calgary, Ottawa, or Philadelphia.

This is a huge pet peeve of mine. I can understand it though. Up here, your every shift is analyzed and you get recognized wherever you go. In non-traditional markets, you can collect your millions in anonymity. The weather down there is also better and if you've married an American hottie, coming north to play for Calgary isn't high on the list.

That is why we have to draft our core and build a consistent contender, not just sneak into the playoffs. Winning attracts players and can override some of the other factors.

Canadian teams need more guys like Doug Gilmour. He's already huge in Ontario but if he had led them to a Cup, he'd be a God. It's simply too bad star Canadian players cannot accept that challenge. The Olympics pale in comparison since it's a one-off tournament and regardless of the result, they can go hide afterwards.

[AC]

Originally Posted by saillias

Tell that to Vernon - who by the way convinced Patrick Roy to request a trade from Montreal based on his own experience in CGY.

One example from 20 years ago?

[Heavy Jack]

Change Backlund to a budding prospect like Granlund because we still have to give something of value youth wise and make the 2nd Colorado's and I am beginning to become intrigued. It still makes no sense what so ever for the Flames, they need a big skilled center yeah but they don't need him now, if all goes well Monahan becomes our Spezza in a few years time. Still it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a superstar center show Money the ins and outs and I do like a lot of Spezza's game pair that with the fact that getting guys like Wideman off the books and cutting a few of the shorter guys like Huds is most likely what we are going to see anyways in the future and this seems like a good opportunity to change the direction and style of this team dramatically.

To Ottawa
Hudler
Wideman (20 % taken by flames)
Granlund
Col 2nd

To Calgary
Spezza
Ott 4th

It seems like a lot to pay but it is a moot point regardless as I can't see Spezza waiving to come to Calgary.

[Read Only]

hard to see Ottawa having any interest in that package or one with Backlund in it either.

Is Wdieman going to play ahead of any of Karlsson, Cowen, Methot, Phillips, Weircoch, Ceci or Gryba? Maybe as the 6th guy to play on the PP but that is about it.

Hudler doesn't offer much of an upgrade over Michalek as the 2nd line LW and then makes Michalek redundant as he isn't a real fit on the 3rd line.

Hard to see Granlund (a B/C level prospect) and a 2nd being worth giving up their best player and potential PPG player for minimal upgrades at best.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Read Only

Hudler doesn't offer much of an upgrade over Michalek as the 2nd line LW and then makes Michalek redundant as he isn't a real fit on the 3rd line.

Word is Senators aren't going to re-sign Michalek

[Badgers Nose]

If true, this is Treliving's first fail. Flames will suck with or without SpeZza. I'd rather they suck with the guys developed in the system.

I'd rather have Burke calling the shots if these are the kinds moves we can expect from the new GM.

I'd rather believe this rumour is bs.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

Change Backlund to a budding prospect like Granlund because we still have to give something of value youth wise and make the 2nd Colorado's and I am beginning to become intrigued. It still makes no sense what so ever for the Flames, they need a big skilled center yeah but they don't need him now, if all goes well Monahan becomes our Spezza in a few years time. Still it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a superstar center show Money the ins and outs and I do like a lot of Spezza's game pair that with the fact that getting guys like Wideman off the books and cutting a few of the shorter guys like Huds is most likely what we are going to see anyways in the future and this seems like a good opportunity to change the direction and style of this team dramatically.

To Ottawa
Hudler
Wideman (20 % taken by flames)
Granlund
Col 2nd

To Calgary
Spezza
Ott 4th

It seems like a lot to pay but it is a moot point regardless as I can't see Spezza waiving to come to Calgary.

I would much rather see a package like that going to Florida for their first.

Even though I like spezza, I would much rather try to sign him next summer than trade assets for one year of service during the second summer of the rebuild. I still wish we had traded phaneuf for spezza.... Oh well.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

I like how black and white everything has to be. If the Flames were to make this rumoured deal, were back to spinning tires trying to win now.

I'm not actually jazzed about Spezza, but the rumoured deal would actually basically move out a veterans that is already on the team out (Hudler and Wideman) in replacement for a veteran at center, a position where we have a lot more room to accomodate a veteran contact then we do on the wing and at D given where our prospects are deepest.

What we give up is whatever Backlund's potential upside is as he's entering the prime of his career versus Spezza who's playing out the last few years of his. If you think Backlund's a budding star, you'd probably hate this deal, if you think Backlund is going to be at best what he showed he was last year, a good third line center that can be serviced at the 2 spot in a pinch....... Then deal is at least interesting given what Monahan showed last year and with hope for Grandlund.

Anyway, I doubt it's even an option, but I don't think a move like the one proposed means anything as drastic as some would think.