[News] Flames place Shinkaruk, Poirier, and Wotherspoon on waivers UPD: All 3 clear

[Toonage]

Fan 960 says cuts within the next 90 minutes (I guess this based on info Lou provided)

[calgaryblood]

If the Flames don't miss Granlund then there are literally 8-10 players on this team or fighting for a spot we wouldn't miss.

But yet the same posters saying we don't miss Granlund are the first posters to defend Brouwer and Lazar. Two players we definitely wouldn't miss.

[JFK]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

If the Flames don't miss Granlund then there are literally 8-10 players on this team or fighting for a spot we wouldn't miss.

But yet the same posters saying we don't miss Granlund are the first posters to defend Brouwer and Lazar. Two players we definitely wouldn't miss.

Bro y u so joyless?

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

If the Flames don't miss Granlund then there are literally 8-10 players on this team or fighting for a spot we wouldn't miss.

But yet the same posters saying we don't miss Granlund are the first posters to defend Brouwer and Lazar. Two players we definitely wouldn't miss.

It's been pointed out several times if Granlund was still here (providing he was even on the roster) he'd be playing less minutes and moved from the only position he's shown to be effective at onto the wing with bottom line players.

He wouldn't have those numbers or that ice time on a better team, and if it were here you'd likely be the first in line saying he's the worst player ever to play in the NHL and needs to be waived where no one would pick him up.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think Vancouver did well in that deal, but that does not mean that Calgary made out poorly, or currently would be in a better situation with Granlund in their system than they are today.

This is not a zero-sum game. Granlund is not a player the Flames miss, nor will likely ever miss. I think that is the principle point to be made here.

We'll have to disagree TC. Calgary did make out poorly in that trade. A young player that can score goals in the NHL is of value. He could have helped out this current team on the ice or by getting full value in trade.

I'm not crying myself to sleep over it though. I only do that for Byron.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by JFK

Bro y u so joyless?

Just funny reading that Granlund couldn't make this team when Tanner freaking Glass got a PTO and Stajan is still on this team and Lazar has a shot to make it.

Granlund is a much better player than all three of those guys. He could make the team and likely would. Not like he has strong competition.

[GranteedEV]

[QUOTE=GoJetsGo;6387017Granlund is small[/quote]

He's slightly below average size. There are smaller, elite 4th liners. One of which we had two years ago who would have been our highest scoring bottom sixer last year.

plays soft and was tried at wing when here

Please. Granlund from last year did not play soft. And Granlund was never tried at wing when here at the NHL level. ALso Granlund played his share of wing last year at the NHL level and had success.

and wasn't a good fit. This was stated by Treliving when he was moved.

We have worse fits currently scheduled to be on our opening day roster vs Edmonton.

The way the team is situated now, we already have a 6'5 skilled centre who's trying to push his way into the lineup.

Which really has no bearing on Granlund vs bubble NHLers like Brouwer, Lazar, Gazdic, Glass, etc. All of whom Granlund is better than currently.

We're fine on the PK, and moving a small, soft player like Granlund onto the wing on the 4th line would not be productive or advantageous with the current contracts we have.

How are we fine on the PK? We have four good PKers, two passive over-30 PKers that are being pidgeonholed into the role to maximize their value, and then worse 5 on 5 players than Granlund getting ice time who would ostensibly play on the PK this year.

If you want to say losing Granlund isn't the biggest loss in the world, fine. I'm not losing sleep over it either.

But saying he wouldn't make our twelve best players right now is false. He'd be a shoo-in based on merit.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

It's been pointed out several times if Granlund was still here (providing he was even on the roster) he'd be playing less minutes and moved from the only position he's shown to be effective at onto the wing with bottom line players.

He wouldn't have those numbers or that ice time on a better team, and if it were here you'd likely be the first in line saying he's the worst player ever to play in the NHL and needs to be waived where no one would pick him up.

Granlund played center on the Flames, are you thinking of someone else?

You were the first to defend him so you must know he played center.

[GreenLantern2814]

Who would've thought, with all the consternation caused at the 2013 draft over Shinkaruk v Poirier, the answer would've been 'neither'?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

No. His CHL status eliminates this possibility.

When he was drafted I remember there being a quirk with his selection and status that would allow him to play in either the AHL or CHL. Is this no longer the case?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

If the Flames don't miss Granlund then there are literally 8-10 players on this team or fighting for a spot we wouldn't miss.

But yet the same posters saying we don't miss Granlund are the first posters to defend Brouwer and Lazar. Two players we definitely wouldn't miss.

Yeah everyone on here loves Brouwer lol

[JFK]

99% sure Granlund player wing for a couple stretches/games here in Calgary. IIRC he just looked lost at the position.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

He's slightly below average size. There are smaller, elite 4th liners. One of which we had two years ago who would have been our highest scoring bottom sixer last year.



Please. Granlund from last year did not play soft. And Granlund was never tried at wing when here at the NHL level. ALso Granlund played his share of wing last year at the NHL level and had success.



We have worse fits currently scheduled to be on our opening day roster vs Edmonton.



Which really has no bearing on Granlund vs bubble NHLers like Brouwer, Lazar, Gazdic, Glass, etc. All of whom Granlund is better than currently.



How are we fine on the PK? We have four good PKers, two passive over-30 PKers that are being pidgeonholed into the role to maximize their value, and then worse 5 on 5 players than Granlund getting ice time who would ostensibly play on the PK this year.

If you want to say losing Granlund isn't the biggest loss in the world, fine. I'm not losing sleep over it either.

But saying he wouldn't make our twelve best players right now is false. He'd be a shoo-in based on merit.

When your argument resorts to assuming Gazdic and Glass are on the opening night roster, it speaks volumes about your argument.

We are fine on the PK because we have the four players you bizarrely excluded from the discussion, in addition to Stajan who's done well in that role (one of our better face-off men) and Lazar who I think has a lot of potential.

You can pine over Granlund all you want. No one here is losing sleep over him, and it *is* very much debatable that he'd be an upgrade playing less minutes on the wing with bottom line players.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Why wouldn't Granlund crack the roster? He could be a winger and a great 4th liner. He'd be an upgrade over Stajan that's for sure.

Unless they are in the faceoff circle. Or providing veteran leadership. Or standing up for teammates.

I think you are actually underrating Stajan's skill level based on who he has had to play with. He may hit a wall this year due to age, but while he's not as fast as Granlund or as good at shooting, he has decent instincts, has decent defensive ability and a good zone exit.

Plus he's clutch:

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Granlund played center on the Flames, are you thinking of someone else?

You were the first to defend him so you must know he played center.

I'm not sure where this question even comes from. I said he'd be moved from Centre were he still here now.

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think Vancouver did well in that deal, but that does not mean that Calgary made out poorly, or currently would be in a better situation with Granlund in their system than they are today.

This is not a zero-sum game. Granlund is not a player the Flames miss, nor will likely ever miss. I think that is the principle point to be made here.

Should this be principal? I feel so unsure questioning Textcritic on something like this...

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

When your argument resorts to assuming Gazdic and Glass are on the opening night roster, it speaks volumes about your argument.

Lazar, Brouwer, Freddy Hamilton, Stajan, Hathaway.

All either worse PKers than Granlund, worse ES players than Granlund, or both.

We are fine on the PK because we have the four players you bizarrely excluded from the discussion

...You need more than four players to kill penalties. There's nothing bizarre about saying Granlund would have been our fifth option while playing a PK/Scoring bottom sixer role.

in addition to Stajan who's done well in that role (one of our better face-off men) and Lazar who I think has a lot of potential.

I am one of Stajan's most ardent defenders. But dig into it and you discover that he was consistently one of our least effective PKers last year. Part of that was absolutely playing with Bouma and Brouwer, but part of that can be confirmed with the eye test.

And Lazar is not currently a better player than Markus Granlund. His upside is basically... a more aesthetically pleasing Markus Granlund.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Granlund played a top 6 role putting up his most points with the Sedins. He got 18 minutes of ice time and 2 minutes of PP a night.

The reason Vancouver was ####, was because a player like Granlund was playing that role. Remember when the Flames got 25 goal scorer Blake Comeau? Yeah...crappy teams always have players who are put in a role they shouldn't be, who can do well but your team will be in the basement if they are.

Crying over Granlund is crying over spilled milk.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

It's pretty obvious to anyone with a brain in their heads that a guy who scores 19 goals and 32 points while sporting a $900,000 cap hit is an asset worth having for most teams. The Canucks would pretty obviously be able to trade him for a pick of some description, if they wanted to. Shinkaruk has no value at this point, hence his waiver.

But if your fandom requires never admitting that your team screwed up or never admitting that a rival did something right (even just modestly right; it's not like this was Jagr for Kris Beech) then, well, you do you I guess.

[dino7c]

Joe Colborne had 19 goals 2 years ago when the Flames sucked