The Calgary Flames 2015-2016 Training Camp Thread

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Feel free to show me any comparables that suggest Monahan and Gaudreau will be making north of 7 mil.

Tarasenko Contract -1 Year (Age 21-22) - 0.672 PPG
Monahan Contract -1 Year (Age 20) - 0.765 PPG
Gaudreau Contract -1 Year (Age 21) - 0.8 PPG
Tarasenko Contract Year (Age 22-23) - 0.948 PPG

I'm not saying the two WILL be making north of 7M but it's very possible. A lot of us are predicting Johnny to be on the threshold of 80 points and a lot of us are predicting Monahan to be in that 35-40 goal range. Even the Hall/Eberle 6x6 is outdated due to cap inflation.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tarasenko Contract -1 Year (Age 21-22) - 0.672 PPG
Monahan Contract -1 Year (Age 20) - 0.765 PPG
Gaudreau Contract -1 Year (Age 21) - 0.8 PPG
Tarasenko Contract Year (Age 22-23) - 0.948 PPG

I'm not saying the two WILL be making north of 7M but it's very possible. A lot of us are predicting Johnny to be on the threshold of 80 points and a lot of us are predicting Monahan to be in that 35-40 goal range. Even the Hall/Eberle 6x6 is outdated due to cap inflation.

I blame the Oilers for paying their 15-27 goal scorers 6x6 before they did ANYTHING in the league. (Hall, Eberle, Nubs)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor

...Part of Treveling's job is to determine who is holding the team back. I hope he thinks it's Engelland...

I thought a huge part of England's struggles last season had to do with the Engelland/Smid pairing. He is better with a partner who can skate.

I will say that given how Treliving has handled the lineup over the course of his tenure—especially in the current calendar year—he absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt here. His job is to build a winning team, and at EVERY OPPORTUNITY Treliving has sounded a ringing endorsement of Engelland as a part of that. Is this him just covering his own ass at the expense of the team's potential for success, or does he actually believe that Engelland provides a better opportunity for the Flames to win hockey games than those other players competing for his job?

I know I am going to get panned by one or two posters for this, but it also seems to me that England's dressing room presence is something that the Flames do take very, very seriously. For Treliving and Hartley, the qualifications of the top 22 players for inclusion on the opening night roster has more to do with just their on ice abilities. So, while I would agree that Wotherspoon, Nakladal, or Wilson are probably capable of doing the same on-ice job as Engelland, is the removal of his dressing room presence enough of a positive trade off? I'm not convinced that it is, because let's face it: the decision about who is manning the bottom pairing and logging 8–11 minutes a night is not going to make or break the Flames' season.

With all that said, it never ceases to amaze me the level of angst some fans experience over the makeup of utility lines on the team.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tarasenko Contract -1 Year (Age 21-22) - 0.672 PPG
Monahan Contract -1 Year (Age 20) - 0.765 PPG
Gaudreau Contract -1 Year (Age 21) - 0.8 PPG
Tarasenko Contract Year (Age 22-23) - 0.948 PPG

I'm not saying the two WILL be making north of 7M but it's very possible. A lot of us are predicting Johnny to be on the threshold of 80 points and a lot of us are predicting Monahan to be in that 35-40 goal range. Even the Hall/Eberle 6x6 is outdated due to cap inflation.

What this analysis is avoiding though is the years of UFA that the contract will eat up. With Tarasenko being older in his contract year it means you are eating up 2-3 more years of UFA eligibility.

[Weitz]

Sure you can bridge Monahan and Gaudreau. Then what if they become consistant 80+ point guys. Can you sign them both to max contracts?

You see lots of predictions of continued growth from these 2 guys this year, yet no one seems to think they will want to get paid.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

What this analysis is avoiding though is the years of UFA that the contract will eat up. With Tarasenko being older in his contract year it means you are eating up 2-3 more years of UFA eligibility.

Yes, there's an extra UFA year bought in Tarasenko's contract relative to what the Johnny/Monny contracts should be. However Monahan will be UFA at 25 and Gaudreau UFA at 27, so we still need to buy UFA years and ideally lock both kids up for a full 8 year term.

[FBI]

I think we need a poll on Engelland, if we think he should be on the team or not.
I vote no, but do appreciate that he's physical.

[dammage79]

Engelland? He's not going anywhere anytime soon. The confidence Hartley shows very publicly in him says as much.

[Conroy4Mayor]

Originally Posted by FBI

I think we need a poll on Engelland, if we think he should be on the team or not.
I vote no, but do appreciate that he's physical.

My suggestion would be ranking of our defencemen for play in the current season. It'd even be interesting to see the relative rankings of Brodie and Hamilton, or Russell and Wideman. When Brodie returns from injury, relative positioning of defencemen will be discussed heatedly.

[D as in David]

On the FAN today, Derek Wills was mentioning the Flames may only keep six defensemen allowing them to keep three extra forwards or two forwards and an additional goalie. Does anyone know what the rules are as far as keeping players around town who are not on the active roster? I believe there has been instances in the past where players were (virtually) sent down but never physically reported to the minor league team or, at least, did not stay down. Would it be possible for a player in this scenario to be added to the game roster if a roster player was injured during warm-up?

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by D as in David

On the FAN today, Derek Wills was mentioning the Flames may only keep six defensemen allowing them to keep three extra forwards or two forwards and an additional goalie. Does anyone know what the rules are as far as keeping players around town who are not on the active roster? I believe there has been instances in the past where players were (virtually) sent down but never physically reported to the minor league team or, at least, did not stay down. Would it be possible for a player in this scenario to be added to the game roster if a roster player was injured during warm-up?

The league checks to make sure that players are sent down. Darryl Sutter told someone in the media asking about paper transactions a few years ago that the league will actually check to see if the team booked a flight, if the player actually reported, etc.

If a player is assigned to the minors the expectation is that they are to report the minor league team in a reasonable amount of time.

Now what is a reasonable amount of time? Not quite sure, but within 1 or 2 days seems to be standard barring weather or other travel issues.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor

Raymond = this year's Setoguchi
Engelland = this year's O'Brien
Bollig = this year's McGrattan

It's not that they're bad. They're just below average. Why keep below average players on your team? Treveling would do well to recognize this, waive them all, and replace them with guys that can think and play the game at a higher level.

you only got 1 of the 3 comparisons right, the first one. Engelland and Bollig are actually useful players. Raymond not so much.

[Conroy4Mayor]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

you only got 1 of the 3 comparisons right, the first one. Engelland and Bollig are actually useful players. Raymond not so much.

There is no right or wrong until the season has been played and the contributions evaluated. Like anyone on this board, I want the Flames to do well, even those guys, if they are on the team.

All three players will undoubtedly be on the roster. Hartley would not draw attention to three bad early Treliving transactions by cutting them from the team. I just have my doubts that any of the three will help the Flames improve this year, whereas one or two of the bubble players might have been able to.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor

There is no right or wrong until the season has been played and the contributions evaluated.

In other words: ‘You can't tell me I'm wrong, because there is no right or wrong. But I'm right anyway.’

[Samonadreau]

They really have to give another two guys a shot (a 5/6 that doesn't include Engelland. Its too bad Brodie got hurt because i believe Kulak would be the best option we have to pair up with him.

Would anyone foresee another trade to get another legit top 4 defenceman? It just seems like Hamilton and Brodie are too good to play with any options we have and I dont want to break up the chemistry Wideman and Russel have. The swedes are a couple years away. That leaves a gap.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Would anyone foresee another trade to get another legit top 4 defenceman? It just seems like Hamilton and Brodie are too good to play with any options we have and I dont want to break up the chemistry Wideman and Russel have. The swedes are a couple years away. That leaves a gap.

I can't forsee a trade for another legitimate top 4 d-man. Would either cost too much in prospects/high picks and/or screw up the cap structure for the next few years with some critical players needing re-signing, IMO.

[Caged Great]

I'd rather have one of the prospects play with Brodie as the quasi #4 than Engelland. I was thinking earlier that Morrison might be that guy, but Kulak has shown more thus far in camp. I don't have a clue on what to do with Smid/Engelland though. It's tough.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I can't forsee a trade for another legitimate top 4 d-man. Would either cost too much in prospects/high picks and/or screw up the cap structure for the next few years with some critical players needing re-signing, IMO.

Ya i know. Looking for a hail mary i guess.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

I'd rather have one of the prospects play with Brodie as the quasi #4 than Engelland. I was thinking earlier that Morrison might be that guy, but Kulak has shown more thus far in camp. I don't have a clue on what to do with Smid/Engelland though. It's tough.

Agreed. Seems like everyone but management can see that the Engelland/Brodie pairing only worked because Brodie is a stud and makes everyone he plays with better, even if they realize this all signs are pointing to Engelland as a #5 right now and 6 When Brodies back. My vote is goes to Kulak play with Brodie (at least gove it a few games) and Engelland would work well as a #7.

Theres a good chance whoever they start with Engelland will show poorly because of him.

[squirtle]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tarasenko Contract -1 Year (Age 21-22) - 0.672 PPG
Monahan Contract -1 Year (Age 20) - 0.765 PPG
Gaudreau Contract -1 Year (Age 21) - 0.8 PPG
Tarasenko Contract Year (Age 22-23) - 0.948 PPG

I'm not saying the two WILL be making north of 7M but it's very possible. A lot of us are predicting Johnny to be on the threshold of 80 points and a lot of us are predicting Monahan to be in that 35-40 goal range. Even the Hall/Eberle 6x6 is outdated due to cap inflation.

I really think that the Giordano contract really set the bar as to what we are to expect as the max for a long term contract for Mony and Gaudreau.