2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

He outlined why it has played out that way

- Bishop probably not interested in coming to Calgary after the events of last summer

- Hawks probably intent on trading Darling east

- MAF seems to be Vegas bound

- Preds unlikely to move Saros



I suspect the Flames have been in on everyone but similar to the summer when they thought they had Jones - it hasn't worked out.



I agree though it needs to be addressed - and I think the trade market is the best way to do that.



Or if they want to bring back Moose, add a guy that can challenge him as opposed to a guy who is for sure just a backup (Johnson)



Elliott & Raanta/Condon



Or swap Moose out for a guy like Smith (not mentioned at all this morning strangely)

The extra salt from my end comes from just how messy the entire Bishop situation played out over the past 12 months. He was who I was hoping for last summer, he was who I was hoping for this summer...and then to hear all rumours of what happened around acquiring him, and watching how our season and playoffs played out...that's just disappointing.

I agree - trade route is the way to go if we're going to at least attempt at truly improving upon last season's goaltending. If we end up going down the path where all we can do is simply replace what we had last year and hope for the best, I'd like to see Steve Mason + someone else who has some perceived potential to be more than what they are (Gillies? Grubauer? Raanta?). The one thing that would be hard for me to stomach would be to watch a 32 year old Brian Elliott and a career backup goalie carry us down the stretch in 2018. It would be tough to be excited about that going into next season.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

He outlined why it has played out that way
- Bishop probably not interested in coming to Calgary after the events of last summer
- Hawks probably intent on trading Darling east
- MAF seems to be Vegas bound
- Preds unlikely to move Saros

I suspect the Flames have been in on everyone but similar to the summer when they thought they had Jones - it hasn't worked out.

I agree though it needs to be addressed - and I think the trade market is the best way to do that.

Or if they want to bring back Moose, add a guy that can challenge him as opposed to a guy who is for sure just a backup (Johnson)

Elliott & Raanta/Condon

Or swap Moose out for a guy like Smith (not mentioned at all this morning strangely)

I just don't get the speculation that MAF is vegas bound? There is no way they have talked to him about it durring the playoffs. I can't see him at his age wanting to go there , when making the playoffs in the next 3 years seems improbable.

As for Elliot coming back I could totally see it. Other than Fleury there is not much out there that is an improvement over Elliot. I wouldn't mind if they brought in a younger back-up like Raanta or Grauber to push him.

[Love]

Raanta is elite.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Why is everyone intent on keeping Johnson? I know he had the stretch that turned it around for Calgary, but he was much worse than Elliott in the second half of the season. His glove hand was terrible. I'd much rather have Gillies or Rittich in as a backup.

Johnson is a backup who gave the Flames about what you expect from a backup. As for Gillies and Rittich, they aren't ready to be handed an NHL backup job. At his stage of development, Gillies needs to be playing 40-50 games, not 20-30.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Johnson is a backup who gave the Flames about what you expect from a backup. As for Gillies and Rittich, they aren't ready to be handed an NHL backup job. At his stage of development, Gillies needs to be playing 40-50 games, not 20-30.

To be fair, I think Gilles and Rittich (particularly Rittich) are both in positions to compete for a backup job. I think you give them that complete opportunity. It's up to the Flames to see how much of a quality "backup" they'll need to buy/trade for prior to training camp.

[Flash Walken]

No. You wait for an injury and then give them spot duty.

The Flames aren't in a position to be wasting Monahan's 24 year old season by giving a goalie who isn't ready more pressure than they can handle.

Dumb dumb dumb. Johnson is the best backup the Flames have had since Cujo. The Flames NEED a goalie to get them wins.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

No. You wait for an injury and then give them spot duty.

The Flames aren't in a position to be wasting Monahan's 24 year old season by giving a goalie who isn't ready more pressure than they can handle.

Dumb dumb dumb. Johnson is the best backup the Flames have had since Cujo. The Flames NEED a goalie to get them wins.

I know the conventional wisdom around here is that they need ripening. But they are hitting their mid twenties, and somehow other teams have young goalies. Murray, Gibson and Saros are 22 now. Pickard was 24 when he came up. Talbot was in the NHL as a backup at 24.

Johnson may be the best backup the Flames have had since Cujo but that just means they've had terrible backups. And wins? He had 4 straight losses, counting playoffs, to end the year and was 5-12 from Dec. 14 on.

[Demetric]

With the goalie situation you have 2 groups of goalies ones that will require an asset (draft pick, prospect or roster player) to acquire and ones that do not:

No asset required (UFAs)
Miller
Bernier
Mason
Pavelec
Johnson
Kuemper
Nilsson
McElhinney
Kinkaid
Copley
Budaj
Condon

few others not listed but they are not really good options

Requires Asset(s)
Elliott requires 3rd round pick if we sign him



The questions is do you want to spend a 3RD on Elliot or do you think you can get the same level of puck stopping from someone that will not cost as asset or if you can swing a different deal to bring in someone better at a reasonable cost?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Why is everyone intent on keeping Johnson? I know he had the stretch that turned it around for Calgary, but he was much worse than Elliott in the second half of the season. His glove hand was terrible. I'd much rather have Gillies or Rittich in as a backup.

Johnson is a legit backup capable of 30-40 games. Rittich and Gillies are unproven and if we do not secure a legit number 1 then we need a legit number 2. 2 question marks in net is far too risky.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Johnson is a legit backup capable of 30-40 games. Rittich and Gillies are unproven and if we do not secure a legit number 1 then we need a legit number 2. 2 question marks in net is far too risky.

If you want a 10-30 record in those 40 games, sure. IMO second half Johnson was the more representative of the two. I think the same regarding Elliott - his good second half was the real Elliott, the poor first half wasn't.

I don't disagree that Rittich and Gillies are unproven. How exactly do you propose that they become proven? I'd be way more comfortable with a decent number one and them than with a number one who plays only 50 games and Johnson.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Demetric

With the goalie situation you have 2 groups of goalies ones that will require an asset (draft pick, prospect or roster player) to acquire and ones that do not:

No asset required (UFAs)
Miller
Bernier
Mason
Pavelec
Johnson
Kuemper
Nilsson
McElhinney
Kinkaid
Copley
Budaj
Condon

few others not listed but they are not really good options

Requires Asset(s)
Elliott requires 3rd round pick if we sign him



The questions is do you want to spend a 3RD on Elliot or do you think you can get the same level of puck stopping from someone that will not cost as asset or if you can swing a different deal to bring in someone better at a reasonable cost?

At this point, this is the best possible tandem available. Nothing out there is really that great. At least you have high upside with Mason and Bernier. Neither cost actual assets other than money, and I don't think either will require more than 3 year term.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

If you want a 10-30 record in those 40 games, sure. IMO second half Johnson was the more representative of the two. I think the same regarding Elliott - his good second half was the real Elliott, the poor first half wasn't.

I don't disagree that Rittich and Gillies are unproven. How exactly do you propose that they become proven? I'd be way more comfortable with a decent number one and them than with a number one who plays only 50 games and Johnson.

What a laughable post. Look at the last 2 seasons of Johnson's stats I think that is what he is capable of not a 10-30 record.

Both Johnson and Elliott are tandem 1b goalies. Johnson came in as the backup and filled the role. Elliott was here to be the number 1 and he failed. Considering we can sign Johnson for likely less money and do not need to surrender a draft pick then he is the logical choice to return.

I propose we give our goalie prospects time to develop especially Gillies who missed a whole year due to injury in the AHL. Rittich may be something or he may he Henrik Karlsson or Reto Berra? I would have been very comfortable with Rittich as a backup if we acquired Bishop, Fleury or any other goalie that is capable of being a 60 game starter. If the Flames are stuck with Elliott, Mason, Miller, Howard, Smith I prefer a more capable backup and Johnson is the right fit

[Roof-Daddy]

So frustrating. You look at the list of UFA goalies and it's just a whole lot of "he might not be too bad, maaaaaaybe he would work out"

Yuck.

It's the same when you look at potentially realistic trade targets.

Flames are going to have to be a resilient team next year, because I don't see a realistic scenario where they get consistently strong goaltending that they can lean on.

[drewtastic]

Originally Posted by Love

Raanta is elite.

Pinder? Is that you?!?

[IgiTang]

If the Flames re-sign Elliot, they clearly aren't serious about going deep in the playoffs and content with players developing more. With that said, sign Elliott to a 2 years deal but make sure Gillies or Rittich are the Backup so they have a chance at taking the starting job or proving they aren't starter material anytime soon.

But they have got to find another goalie coach.

[Lord Carnage]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

What a laughable post. Look at the last 2 seasons of Johnson's stats I think that is what he is capable of not a 10-30 record.

Both Johnson and Elliott are tandem 1b goalies. Johnson came in as the backup and filled the role. Elliott was here to be the number 1 and he failed. Considering we can sign Johnson for likely less money and do not need to surrender a draft pick then he is the logical choice to return.

I propose we give our goalie prospects time to develop especially Gillies who missed a whole year due to injury in the AHL. Rittich may be something or he may he Henrik Karlsson or Reto Berra? I would have been very comfortable with Rittich as a backup if we acquired Bishop, Fleury or any other goalie that is capable of being a 60 game starter. If the Flames are stuck with Elliott, Mason, Miller, Howard, Smith I prefer a more capable backup and Johnson is the right fit

You're overstating Johnson greatly in m opinion. Johnson is nothing more than a backup. Can he fill in at times if the starter goes down? Sure - he's proven that in the past, and even here last year when our starter was down (performance, not injury), but that's a LONG way from saying he's a 1b.

Elliott certainly could be called a tandem 1b though...

I think we learned one thing... if Elliott is brought back, we need someone who could be considered a threat to take the job for us to maximize his performance. Johnson is NOT that guy.

[Lord Carnage]

Originally Posted by Love

Raanta is elite.

An elite backup? Sure thing. An elite starting goalie however, there is ZERO information out there to prove that statement.

I'm going to assume you meant elite backup.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

If the Flames re-sign Elliot, they clearly aren't serious about going deep in the playoffs.

Sorry to cherry pick, but really had they avoided Anaheim who knows how well Elliott may have done. He was great to end the season except for, yep, all those Anaheim games. If the Flames would have got the Oilers or had the chips fallen a different way the last few weeks of the season, San Jose, well who knows what would have happened.

Trying to put the most positive spin I can on this, because the odds of Elliott coming back seem to grow larger every day.

[IgiTang]

If the Flames re-sign Elliot, they clearly aren't serious about going deep in the playoffs and content with players developing more. With that said, sign Elliott to a 2 years deal but make sure Gillies or Rittich are the Backup so they have a chance at taking the starting job or proving they aren't starter material anytime soon.

But they have got to find another goalie coach.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I know the conventional wisdom around here is that they need ripening. But they are hitting their mid twenties, and somehow other teams have young goalies. Murray, Gibson and Saros are 22 now. Pickard was 24 when he came up. Talbot was in the NHL as a backup at 24.

It's not age that prepares a goalie for the NHL, it's number of games of professional hockey played. Almost all NHL goalies had 100+ AHL starts before they stuck in the NHL. Even Murray, who was absolutely lights-out in the AHL, got 72 games. Gibson had 70. Saros was in net for 40+ games for each of two seasons in the Finnish Elite league, before playing 53 games in the AHL. Talbot played 116 games in the AHL. Pickard played 163.

Gillies has played 49 games of pro hockey. If he has a really strong first half of his season in the AHL next year, maybe you spot him in to 10 or 15 games in NHL in the last half of the season.

Gillies was playing in college at the same age most top goalie prospects are playing professionally in Europe or the AHL. Then he basically missed a season of development with his hip surgery. Next season is when he makes up those lost games.