[Trade] Flames trade a conditional 2014 4th for Joe Colborne

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Jason Deforest ‏@FAN960Jason 27m .@FriedgeHNIC tells @Sportsnet960 that for Joe Colborne to really find success, he'll likely need top 6 minutes in Calgary. #Flames

For Colborne to find success, he needs to learn to play as an effective 3rd liner.

[Poe969]

SOrry, I really disagree. Let someone like Stempniak or Jones move down to the third line and let Colborne show his worth in the top 6. Colborne is either top 6 or minors, he isn't bottom 6.

[Savvy27]

I think the Flames have the personnel to use Stajan's line as a unit that goes head to head to the first line from other teams, while the next two lines can be more like traditional top 6 lines. Colborne should play with some combination of Baertschi, Cammalleri, Hudler, Jones, and Galiardi.

[Hells Bells]

Originally Posted by Poe969

SOrry, I really disagree. Let someone like Stempniak or Jones move down to the third line and let Colborne show his worth in the top 6. Colborne is either top 6 or minors, he isn't bottom 6.

Baertschi isn't bottom 6 either but looks like that's where he's playing.

The Flames will basically have three 2nd lines. No true 3rd line because the Stajan line will get most of defensive assignments.

Personally, I have Colborne playing with Cammalleri/Hudler but even if he plays 3rd line, he can still produce with the likes of Baertschi/Jones IMO.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Poe969

SOrry, I really disagree. Let someone like Stempniak or Jones move down to the third line and let Colborne show his worth in the top 6. Colborne is either top 6 or minors, he isn't bottom 6.

Jones definitely should be playing in the bottom 6 despite being paid as a top 6. Stempniak can play anywhere. Having said that, both of those players are wingers and Colborne is a centre. I'd rather not have any of them playing out of position.

The NHL is full of players that were drafted to play one roll, but had to learn a different roll in order to stick in the NHL. It's not like his production in lower leagues was off the charts.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Poe969

SOrry, I really disagree. Let someone like Stempniak or Jones move down to the third line and let Colborne show his worth in the top 6. Colborne is either top 6 or minors, he isn't bottom 6.

Seems to me that the top 6/bottom 6 conversation is a bit dated. Most teams have a #1 line (not Calgary) and then a top 9 group of forwards. The 4th line is usually the only one that is really absent of any skill. Who cares if Colborne is on the 2nd or 3rd line. You don’t just get top 6 minutes – you earn them, in practice and by showing what you can do with any opportunity you get. And probably more critical isn’t whether is on the 2nd or 3rd line – but whether he is getting offensive starts and PP time.

Top 6/Bottom 6 – is just far too simplistic way of looking at his opportunity.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Seems to me that the top 6/bottom 6 conversation is a bit dated. Most teams have a #1 line (not Calgary) and then a top 9 group of forwards. The 4th line is usually the only one that is really absent of any skill. Who cares if Colborne is on the 2nd or 3rd line. You don’t just get top 6 minutes – you earn them, in practice and by showing what you can do with any opportunity you get. And probably more critical isn’t whether is on the 2nd or 3rd line – but whether he is getting offensive starts and PP time.

Top 6/Bottom 6 – is just far too simplistic way of looking at his opportunity.

I still think there is some relevance to the "top 6 / bottom 6" debate.

If you look at most rosters, as things shake out and players "earn" top 6 minutes, there does tend to be a filtering of talent down the roster (it's not all merit from effort, nor should it be). The most talented players also tend to be the ones that "earn" the top 6 minutes, and that is no accident. The players that then play down on the 3rd line need to know how to do other things than score. The less likely a line is to score, the more they need to be doing the little things that would be typical of a "checking line".

You can get away with not doing those things religiously on the top 2 lines provided that your line is at least on the plus side more often than not, but after the natural talent filter of the top two lines gives you the 3rd line by default, players cannot get away with not having a two-way game. The only caveat being that the team has an extraordinary amount of talent that the trickle down has little effect, but I don't think there are more than maybe 4 or 5 teams that fall into that category.

[cannon7]

Realistically we don't have a clear cut top six and bottom six.

Instead we have five top-six vets: Cammalleri, Glencross, Stempniak, Hudler, Stajan.

Three quasi-top-six guys who need top-six minutes to be successful: Backlund, D. Jones, Baertschi.

A rookie who should be playing top-six or in the minors: Monahan

A couple guys somewhere in the middle: Galiardi, Colborne

And then some legit bottom-six: Bouma, Jackman

Either Hartley needs to clearly define roles, or he should just roll the lines and see what happens.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I still think there is some relevance to the "top 6 / bottom 6" debate.

If you look at most rosters, as things shake out and players "earn" top 6 minutes, there does tend to be a filtering of talent down the roster (it's not all merit from effort, nor should it be). The most talented players also tend to be the ones that "earn" the top 6 minutes, and that is no accident. The players that then play down on the 3rd line need to know how to do other things than score. The less likely a line is to score, the more they need to be doing the little things that would be typical of a "checking line".

You can get away with not doing those things religiously on the top 2 lines provided that your line is at least on the plus side more often than not, but after the natural talent filter of the top two lines gives you the 3rd line by default, players cannot get away with not having a two-way game. The only caveat being that the team has an extraordinary amount of talent that the trickle down has little effect, but I don't think there are more than maybe 4 or 5 teams that fall into that category.

That is the case on teams that use the third line to match up against other teams top lines. That won't be the case with the Flames this year.

Our "First Line" is technically going to be the Glencross-Stajan-Stempniak line, but they will act more like a traditional "Third Checking Line". They will take all the hardest matchups and will have the biggest defensive responsibility.

Our "Third Line" is going to get some offensive opportunities because I believe Hartley will try to shelter them from the hard defensive match-ups. It will likely be a younger line (Monahan, Colborne, Baertschi, Horak, etc) and will get a chance to play offensive minutes in a sheltered role.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Jones definitely should be playing in the bottom 6 despite being paid as a top 6. Stempniak can play anywhere. Having said that, both of those players are wingers and Colborne is a centre. I'd rather not have any of them playing out of position.

The NHL is full of players that were drafted to play one roll, but had to learn a different roll in order to stick in the NHL. It's not like his production in lower leagues was off the charts.

If Stempniak isn't scoring he basically worthless. You look at the definition of some one who has to be top 6 and you see Stempniak's picture.... 82 out of 307 NHL pts on the PP. career -20.


Unfortunately there is also Cammalleri's and Hudler's and Stajan's ( from last year Tanguay's and Iginla's and Cervenka's) so much skill and so little success.

[cannon7]

We only really have one legit #1 line guy, which is Cammalleri.

Glencross, Hudler, Stempniak and Stajan are all second line guys.

If D. Jones bounces back and Backlund has a breakout year, they could be considered second line guys, too.

But we're really a quantity over quality team this year. Just hoping something clicks.

[Dienasty]

I would like to see:

Glencross-Stajan-Stempniak
Baertschi-Colborne-Galliardi
Hudler-Backlund-Jones
Jackman-Horak-Bouma

McGrattan

Cammy- I am assuming are injured to start the year.
Monahan- Maybe play his 9 then send back to the OHL.

Jackman to the AHL when Cammy comes back.

Wideman-Giordano
Brodie-Smith
O'Brien-Butler
Russel

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

If Stempniak isn't scoring he basically worthless. You look at the definition of some one who has to be top 6 and you see Stempniak's picture.... 82 out of 307 NHL pts on the PP. career -20.


Unfortunately there is also Cammalleri's and Hudler's and Stajan's ( from last year Tanguay's and Iginla's and Cervenka's) so much skill and so little success.

I would have agreed with you prior to the last year and a half.

Stempniak has really improved his 200ft game and become a good all-around player. His play in his own zone, board play, and physicality has improved immensely, largely due to his improved strength.

[Knut]

I like Stempniak's play as long as he is not relied on for consistent points. solid Vet to have around that may be worth something at the deadline to someone.

[Anduril]

Definitely approve of this trade with the absence of a JML included.

Glencross-Stajan-Stempniak
Baertschi-Colborne-Jones
Galliardi-Backlund-Hudler
Bouma-Horak-McGrattan

Jackman

Can be very interchangeable but minutes will be pretty even for the top 3 lines, some players getting more for PP.

[Robo]

does anybody know the average size of our team this year compared to last year?

[CaptainCrunch]

Thank god the Flames showed no interest in JML. We don't need him and he doesn't fit in here at all and his contract is terrible.

sure if we took him we might get a good asset. But to trade him away with his contract and ntc we'd wind up packaging a bigger asset at the trade deadline. On top of that clearly no other team showed interest in him which tells me that we wouldn't have been able to move him at the trade deadline. The market for a vanilla midget soft low producing offensive defenseman at the age of 33 with a long term overpayment contract is pretty small.

Nothing about JML in conjunction with the Flames followed any logic.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I would have agreed with you prior to the last year and a half.

Stempniak has really improved his 200ft game and become a good all-around player. His play in his own zone, board play, and physicality has improved immensely, largely due to his improved strength.

2012-2013 Season guys on ice with Stempniak: MATTSTAJAN 57.8 CURTISGLENCROSS 44.5 MARKGIORDANO 40.8 DENNISWIDEMAN 38.2 JAYBOUWMEESTER 32.6 T.J.BRODIE 31.1 CHRISBUTLER 25.2 MICHAELCAMMALLERI 23.0 MIKAELBACKLUND 15.6 ALEXTANGUAY 14.3

25% of his time with Butler and 15% of his time with Backlund..... other than that he was on the ice with the best highest skilled players the Flames had.


2011-2012 Season where he sucked ( 23 even strength pts in 61 games) BLAKECOMEAU 39.4 JAYBOUWMEESTER 38.8 CHRISBUTLER 35.3 MIKAELBACKLUND 31.4 SCOTTHANNAN 31.3 T.J.BRODIE 21.1 MARKGIORDANO 20.0 CORYSARICH 19.4 DEREKSMITH 19.4 OLLIJOKINEN 18.2

He looked (was) better last year playing under the protection of Glencross.


He isn't bad ... he just isn't good... There are very very few teams where he slots in as a top-6 #2 RW.

He needs to play with better players to make him look good.

He isn't the guy that would carry a Baertschi/Backlund line.

[HerbalMagic]

Scott Cruickshank ‏@CruickshankCH 2m
#Flames Brian Burke: Colborne "is going to undergo a religious conversion" and become a defence-first centre like David Steckel. #nhlpn

[PeteMoss]

Uhhh... I'd hope he'd max out at higher than 20 pts in a season.