If the Flames are still in contention at the Trade Deadline...

[Coach]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Ah, so it sounds like he's genuinely busting as opposed to fans/media seeing too much in him. Hopefully for our sake and his he can still make it in some capacity.

I think it's the opposite actually. Talent and on-ice effort level is there. By all accounts he is willing to put in the work, just needs (or needed) the habits. He went into professional hockey very young.

That said, he's got this year and next try and show he belongs. He does (or at least did) have the skillset to play an effective bottom 6 role as well (speed and grit with scoring touch). I don't know how much of the grit has translated into his pro game though. He was a bit of a s*** disturber in Junior.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Poirier looked like a man against boys in Junior, particularly speed wise. He also had a great AHL showing as a 19 year old which isn't very common. He's still young, maybe he'll come along. But time is running out with Mangiapagne and Shinkaruk entering the system. Klimchu looks to be taking a step ahead of him too.

From listening to AHL coach comments, it seems like his stalling may have been a maturity issue. Junior came relatively easy and so the off ice stuff wasn't there.

Originally Posted by jayswin

Ah, so it sounds like he's genuinely busting as opposed to fans/media seeing too much in him. Hopefully for our sake and his he can still make it in some capacity.

Originally Posted by MattyC

I think it's the opposite actually. Talent and on-ice effort level is there. By all accounts he is willing to put in the work, just needs (or needed) the habits. He went into professional hockey very young.

That said, he's got this year and next try and show he belongs. He does (or at least did) have the skillset to play an effective bottom 6 role as well (speed and grit with scoring touch). I don't know how much of the grit has translated into his pro game though. He was a bit of a s*** disturber in Junior.

I guess I'm a little confused then. You said it sounded like he had maturity issues and that stalled his progression as he had it easy in junior. That is THE definition of busting isn't it (not saying he's there yet)? Maybe I have it wrong, but to me a player that has the tools and then isn't able to put it together due to work ethic/training/attitude issues is what the term bust was made for.

[Jay Random]

More often, a bust is a player who was an early bloomer – very mature physically for his age, and therefore looked better than he was in his draft year. Some kids are just fully grown at 17 or 18, and they look like star athletes compared to kids whose bodies won't finish developing until 21 or 22. But in the long run, the late bloomers may be better players.

This is why the 18-year-old draft is still a crapshoot, and likely always will be.

If Poirier does turn out to be a bust, it will probably be for that reason, rather than any off-ice or training issues. He just matured fast and looked better than he really was.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I guess I'm a little confused then. You said it sounded like he had maturity issues and that stalled his progression as he had it easy in junior. That is THE definition of busting isn't it (not saying he's there yet)? Maybe I have it wrong, but to me a player that has the tools and then isn't able to put it together due to work ethic/training/attitude issues is what the term bust was made for.

Yeah, but he still has time to not bust. For him, (this is my speculation based on coaches interviews) sounds like his step back was due to not-knowing vs not wanting to know, between which there is a large difference. He had a great 1st pro season, and a so-so second season. He's off to a decent start this year. The coach always seems positive about him whenever he speaks of him.

He could still become a top 6 player, he could still become a bottom 6 player. Or he could be a career AHLer. 22 is too young to be talking about busting IMO.

The reason we don't hear about him much is that we as fans tend to discuss the shiny new toys with more interest. Every new draft class brings new surprises and intrigue. So guys like Poirier and Klimchuk get forgotten, but the team brass is still aware of them of course. Eventually though, those shiny new toys actually show to be better, so he's running out of time.

[MarkGio]

Just reading this article regarding the Ducks situation as it pertains to the expansion draft, and it seems the Ducks have some issues with all their NMCs:

http://www.leagueittous.com/2016/07/...otection-list/

If the Flames can acquire Fowler or Vatanen, that would help the Blueline immensely

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Just reading this article regarding the Ducks situation as it pertains to the expansion draft, and it seems the Ducks have some issues with all their NMCs:

http://www.leagueittous.com/2016/07/...otection-list/

If the Flames can acquire Fowler or Vatanen, that would help the Blueline immensely

Thats gonna cost a fortune and then you have to expose one of Gio, Hamilton or Brodie.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by savemedrzaius

Speaking of laughable...Marner is an easier asset to acquire? The 19 year old rookie with 26 points in 32 games? Yeah those guys can be found anywhere. When Gaudreau was a rookie (and older) and put up 64 points in 80 games you all would have been fine with him being traded for a defenceman like Brodie having the season he is having at his age with what..2 more years left on his contract? Seriously?

If the Flames can get Marner for Brodie they should be all over it. Unreal that so many wouldn't. It laughable. He will be a ppg player making less than 2 million a year and more than likely will sign a 2nd deal for 6+ years. Having control over him for the next 8 years vs Brodie who has 3 years left before he has all the control. I love Brodie and think he is a legit top 4 dman with a good contract but he just isn't untouchable. I also think Kadri is much better than most on here are giving him credit for

I also don't think Bennett has cemented himself as a top center and could use a couple years on the wing.

The leafs have 3 2nds maybe we get 1 or 2 with Kadri for Brodie but in end it's a pretty good trade considering how weak our forwards in the system are

I think our d can withstand the loss of Brodie with the players we have coming in the system

[Flames Draft Watcher]

No, just no.

It's harder to find a Brodie than it is to find a Kadri. Plus we're deeper at centre with Monahan, Backlund, Bennett, Stajan and Jankowski than we are at defense.

Who's our #4 dman next year when Wideman is gone? We have nobody right now for that position. And you wanna trade away one of our top 3 defencemen? That's a real head shaker.

What you are sugggesting is god awful for the Flames. Dealing away the more valuable commodity (defenceman) at a position we're weaker at for a completely redundant forward.

Not an intelligent suggestion IMO. Makes no sense given our depth. Makes no sense from an asset perspective. Overall your suggestion is a poorly thought out one.

[Vinny01]

The Flames are not in any position to either be adding a Dman or subtracting one of their top 3 D. As it stands now they have a pretty good setup for expansion with the ability to add a forward or 2 depending how things go (Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Backlund, Frolik are must protects). Ferland also may be on the keeper list but as of today I expose Brouwer and would be fine with the Flames going after another forward.

If they acquired another Dman and went the 4-4 route then say goodbye to Backlund or Frolik who are a great combination and elite penalty killers.

As for the Brodie vs Marner I can easily see why the Flames wouldn't make that deal. Marner is going to be behind Gaudreau as our #2 LW when Brodie is at worst a number 3 but could be our number 1 Dman. Outside of Hamilton he is our only top 4 D under 33 years old. Lastly there is zero chance the Leafs move Marner he along with Matthews are their hope for the future

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

No, just no.

It's harder to find a Brodie than it is to find a Kadri. Plus we're deeper at centre with Monahan, Backlund, Bennett, Stajan and Jankowski than we are at defense.

Who's our #4 dman next year when Wideman is gone? We have nobody right now for that position. And you wanna trade away one of our top 3 defencemen? That's a real head shaker.

What you are sugggesting is god awful for the Flames. Dealing away the more valuable commodity (defenceman) at a position we're weaker at for a completely redundant forward.

Not an intelligent suggestion IMO. Makes no sense given our depth. Makes no sense from an asset perspective. Overall your suggestion is a poorly thought out one.

Problem with your comments are Backlund is a UFA after next season and with the year he is having I would bet he demands more money than Kadri. Stajan is a UFA as well and one that I hope we part ways with once his contract is up. Bennett had played about half his games on Stajans wing and Jankowski is nowhere near automatic. You can make a case Monahan is the only proven top 2 center.

Kadri is a 50 point center who when given the opportunity was nearly a PPG in the lockout year. A guy that has played most of his 5 on 5 mins against guys like Barkov, Jagr, Crosby, Sheary, Mcdavid, Lucic, Sedins, Koivu, Granlund (current top 10) on a line with Brown and Komorov and still finds a way to be an even hockey player on a bad team

I also think if Jankoswki is a player that can be listed as a for sure center of the future than Kulak, Jokkipakka, Anderson and Kylington all could be listed in his group of for sures too, especially Anderson and Kulak. The Flames have much more coming on d and anyone who questions 19/20 year old dmen performing at a higher level in the AHL than a 22 year old center clearly doesn't know his hockey. Much tougher position to be exceling at especially at that age

IMO Bennett can play on Kadri's line until Backlunds contract is up. If Backlund stays it's still not a bad spot to be in to have extra at center considering Kadri won't be paid top dollar for at least 5 years from now.

I also like trade options for dmen with teams that can't protect more than 3 dmen in expansion draft. Anaheim mentioned earlier. Other teams are in similar spots too

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by robbie111

There is no way you trade Brodie. If you don't understand why he is underperforming this year look up the story with his fiancée. Trading him would be one of the biggest mistakes this franchise ever made.

I'm not on board with trading Brodie, and I'm sure someone will lambaste me for being callous but I strongly disagree with the sentiment that Brodie's fiancée being diagnosed with MS is impacting his play.

One of my best friends wife was diagnosed with MS two years ago. It's a terrible thing, but you can still live a pretty normal life for a long time. It's manageable, and I'm sure they have a tonne of support.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I'm not on board with trading Brodie, and I'm sure someone will lambaste me for being callous but I strongly disagree with the sentiment that Brodie's fiancée being diagnosed with MS is impacting his play.

One of my best friends wife was diagnosed with MS two years ago. It's a terrible thing, but you can still live a pretty normal life for a long time. It's manageable, and I'm sure they have a tonne of support.

Isn't it completely dependent on the individual and how bad it is?

[MarkGio]

Looking at Nashville's expansion situation, I wonder if the Flames can nab Craig Smith, assuming the protect the following:

-- Neal
-- Forsberg
-- Arvidson
-- Johansen

-- Subban
-- Josi
-- Ellis
-- Ekholm

-- Rinne

Craig Smith is a 27yr old righty who regularly puts up 20+ goals.

[MarkGio]

Another interesting target is the Wild. Assuming they protect the following:

Koivu (NMC)
Parise (NMC)
Pominville (NMC)
Granlund

Suter (NMC)
Spurgeon
Brodin
Dumba

Dubnyk

That leaves Scandella, Zucker, Coyle, and Nierderreiter exposed or traded away

[sureLoss]

* This is why trading for an exposable player is difficult. Not only do you likely to have to use a protection slot to protect the newly acquired player, you have to make it worthwhile for the team to lose that player in trade and then another player in the expansion draft.

For example look at the players on the Wild you hypothetically exposed. If the Wild trade away Scandella, they are still going to lose one of Zucker, Coyle or Niederreiter. So the trade return for Scandella must be good enough for them to lose Scandella and one of Zucker, Coyle, or Niederreiter.

Not saying it is impossible, but for the expansion draft, teams that trade Player A to avoid losing him for nothing will need to weigh the trade return against losing Player A and one of Player B, C, D, etc.

The only way they do it is a) the trade return is huge and/or b) Player A is a much bigger asset than the other players exposed.

[Coach]

I wonder if Nashville would unload Rinne for futures so they can retain more players.

Don't know what their pipeline is like, but they've always been a goalie factory. He's a mainstay there, but he's getting old and is a big cap hit.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I wonder if Nashville would unload Rinne for futures so they can retain more players.

Don't know what their pipeline is like, but they've always been a goalie factory. He's a mainstay there, but he's getting old and is a big cap hit.

I bet they would like to do just that, unfortunately his play combined with his contract and the market would make that really hard I would imagine.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

* This is why trading for an exposable player is difficult. Not only do you likely to have to use a protection slot to protect the newly acquired player, you have to make it worthwhile for the team to lose that player in trade and then another player in the expansion draft.

For example look at the players on the Wild you hypothetically exposed. If the Wild trade away Scandella, they are still going to lose one of Zucker, Coyle or Niederreiter. So the trade return for Scandella must be good enough for them to lose Scandella and one of Zucker, Coyle, or Niederreiter.

Not saying it is impossible, but for the expansion draft, teams that trade Player A to avoid losing him for nothing will need to weigh the trade return against losing Player A and one of Player B, C, D, etc.

The only way they do it is a) the trade return is huge and/or b) Player A is a much bigger asset than the other players exposed.

Here are the options I see for teams who have good players going unprotected:

1) Trade for an upgrade for their protected players (ie, Scandella + Granlund + Neito for Tavares

-- This requires the trading partner to now protect all their newly acquired assets, so unless a team has few players worth protecting, this is an unlikely possibility

2) Trade for an exempt players and assets (ie. Scandella for Mangiapane + 2nd)

-- This is usually a downgrade for the seller and ruins their playoff chances, but gives them at least some return for a player they might lose anyways. The acquiring team will now have a new asset to protect and therefore this only applies to teams with weak players being protected

3) Give up assets (ie pick and player) so that Vegas doesn't take a specific player

4) Go all in this year and take even more players who go unprotected
-- Since Vegas can only take one player from a single team, becoming a very deep team means that it hurts less when some of your depth is dwindled.

5) Trade unprotected for unprotected
-- You're already taking a loss, why not help your clubs weakness for one playoff run?

6) Trade so that you're a 4-4-1 team to a 7-3-1 team
-- Maximize the number of protected players, but weaken your defense significantly

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I wonder if Nashville would unload Rinne for futures so they can retain more players.

Don't know what their pipeline is like, but they've always been a goalie factory. He's a mainstay there, but he's getting old and is a big cap hit.

I believe every team has to protect a goalie.

[MarkGio]

The worst player the Flames lose is Brouwer if they acquire a player like Neito or Smith, and since they got Brouwer from free agency, it doesn't cost anything. Plus Nashville and Minny would get something for an asset they might lose. They could always look to free agency to shore up any weaknesses up front