[Rumour] McKenzie: Flames among the teams most interested in Evander Kane

[klikitiklik]

Is there any other reason Calgary is scouting Buffalo? This might not even be about Kane. How about Okposo or Reinhart?

[Roof-Daddy]

When it comes to re-signing a guy like Backlund, or trading for and re-signing a guy like Evander Kane, I don't think people realize just how much cap space the Flames have going forward.

Especially if they clear $3 million with a Brouwer buy out.

You could hit up both Kane and Backlund with "Edmonton specials" (6x6) and still be well under the cap with or without Brouwer. Enough so that long term extensions for Tkachuk, Bennett and Janko wouldn't be a problem down the road either really because Frolik will eventually come off the books, as well some of the high priced D that will eventually be replaced by Andersson, Kylington, Valimaki and Fox cheaply for several years.

[Jay Random]

The thing is, why bother trading for Kane if you can sign him to that ‘Edmonton special’ on July 1? It does look very much like Kane is set on trying free agency, which would make it pointless to give up assets for him this season. And the Flames have a shortage of assets already.

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by Love

Extremely easily

Really? Extremely?

[Vinny01]

I just don’t see Kane coming to Calgary unless they are the highest bidder. Why would he take less to sign in small market western Canada?

Kane plays a style that fits the team so the only way I would want them to take the risk is if an extension was agreed upon in advance and I don’t see Kane doing that in Calgary.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by klikitiklik

Is there any other reason Calgary is scouting Buffalo? This might not even be about Kane. How about Okposo or Reinhart?

Okposo would strike me as really unlikely.

Sam Reinhart’s name has been in the rumour mill over the last few weeks, and he’s who I’d hope we were going after (Buffalo would likely be looking at our D prospects). Given how we’ve worked/been patient with Bennett (as we should have been), it would be great to see the team bring in Reinhart and give him the same treatment.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

Really? Extremely?

In my opinion, yes

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Okposo would strike me as really unlikely.

Sam Reinhart’s name has been in the rumour mill over the last few weeks, and he’s who I’d hope we were going after (Buffalo would likely be looking at our D prospects). Given how we’ve worked/been patient with Bennett (as we should have been), it would be great to see the team bring in Reinhart and give him the same treatment.

What asset could we give up to acquire Reinhart that we'd be willing to part with? I really doubt Mangiapane+Lazar get that done. I wouldn't offer any of our better top9 guys (Bennett / Frolik / Backlund / Jankowski / Gaudreau / Tkachuk / Ferland / Monahan) for him given how slow he is. Hathaway you could probably throw in at risk of being a slower, more skilled team where Hathaway makes that line fast and effective - it would be a now for future trade. We could offer a prospect defenseman I guess.

Okposo is actually realistically acquirable, as he's a good contract but still an older player on a longer term contract. He'd be a good fit as he's flawed enough not to have great value but skilled enough to contribute. IMO he's a better player than Evander Kane anyways. It'd only be realistic from our side if we sent Brouwer off the other way though.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Not really pal. He is trying to change his perception and I am not buying it. Not hard to comprehend and quite far from “mental gymnastics” as you describe it

You’re theorizing fictional and unnatural explanations as to why somebody (you don’t know) is doing a positive act - JUST so that you can continue saying negative things about them. Quite literally the definition of mental gymnastics. Not wanting the player cause of cap reasons or concerns of upgrade is fine, but all of this extra odd fantasy speculation that’s being sprinkled on top of every post is quite unnecessary.

[Machiavelli]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Okposo is actually realistically acquirable, as he's a good contract but still an older player on a longer term contract. He'd be a good fit as he's flawed enough not to have great value but skilled enough to contribute. IMO he's a better player than Evander Kane anyways. It'd only be realistic from our side if we sent Brouwer off the other way though.

If I ignore possible off-ice issues, I'd rather have Kane. I think Okposo has probably peaked; not sure about Kane. The 3-year age difference is another factor

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Okposo is actually realistically acquirable, as he's a good contract but still an older player on a longer term contract. He'd be a good fit as he's flawed enough not to have great value but skilled enough to contribute. IMO he's a better player than Evander Kane anyways. It'd only be realistic from our side if we sent Brouwer off the other way though.

I don't mind the idea of Okposo, he's having an off year but has been fairly steady aside from that. 5 1/2 more years at 6M is kinda scary though, that could be a boat anchor in a couple of years.

[TheScorpion]

Okposo's deal is already terrifying, I'd rather have Brouwer's honestly. That's a guy who was clearly a product of Tavares and has slowed down consistently since leaving Long Island. I could see him being the next Matt Moulson. At least Brouwer's contract is kinda short and cheaper.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

What asset could we give up to acquire Reinhart that we'd be willing to part with? I really doubt Mangiapane+Lazar get that done. I wouldn't offer any of our better middle six guys (Bennett / Frolik / Backlund / Jankowski) for him given how slow he is. Hathaway you could probably throw in at risk of being a slower, more skilled team where Hathaway makes that line fast and effective - it would be a now for future trade.

Okposo is actually realistically acquirable, as he's a good contract but still an older player on a longer term contract. He'd be a good fit as he's flawed enough not to have great value but skilled enough to contribute. IMO he's a better player than Evander Kane anyways. It'd only be realistic from our side if we sent Brouwer off the other way though.

Well, we’d have to give up some quality - and I look at Adam Fox, who is about to be front and centre on Team USA at the WJC and I think he could be the basis for the deal (also, it mitigates some small risk given we have no guarantee Fox will sign).

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Well, we’d have to give up some quality - and I look at Adam Fox, who is about to be front and centre on Team USA at the WJC and I think he could be the basis for the deal (also, it mitigates some small risk given we have no guarantee Fox will sign).

I'm not sure I covet Reinhart enough to give up either Fox or Kylington who have higher ceilings. And due to that uncertainty around Fox, I'd be just as unwilling to give up Andersson without Fox under contract.

Valimaki for Reinhart could be something though.

[Da_Chief]

There's a in house solution available yet they don't try it.

Tkachuk should be on the top line with Gaudreau and Monahan, to add more offence then Ferland. Ferland previously has played well with Backlund, they will still be effective.

Tkachuk-Monahan-Gaudreau
Ferland-Backlund-Frolik
Bennett-Jankowski-Hathaway
Scrubs-Jagr

They continue to waste Tkachuk os a defence first line.

[Heavy Jack]

I think waste is the wrong word to use when talking about Tkachuk and the MMM line. He was part of a line in his rookie season that constantly got tasked with defensive zone starts and top line competition and he still put up 13 goals 35 assists.

Just 33 games into this year and he’s over halfway to matching his goal total and is on pace to 17 goals 32 assists over 80 games ATM and an argument can be made that he is one of our more defensively reliable forwards on the team. He’s getting PP time, he’s got 2nd line duties and he’s a year and a half into his career. I think soon enough yes he will be playing top line mins with Johnny/Mony but to call his developmental path with Backs/Frolik to this point is an insult to all three players.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

There's a in house solution available yet they don't try it.

Tkachuk should be on the top line with Gaudreau and Monahan, to add more offence then Ferland. Ferland previously has played well with Backlund, they will still be effective.

Tkachuk-Monahan-Gaudreau
Ferland-Backlund-Frolik
Bennett-Jankowski-Hathaway
Scrubs-Jagr

They continue to waste Tkachuk os a defence first line.

I'd like to see a line with
Frolik-Backlund-Jagr
I think having 3 guys who play a smart, patient game could pay dividends and Backlund/Frolik would easily cover for any Jagr defensive shortcomings. It also puts Jagr in a position to play with guys who can benefit from his skill and not a waste of it.
I'd push Ferland to the fourth for a couple of games. He's been horrible lately and playing like he's a 5'6" ballerina. After that, you can move him up and down depending on his play.
I'd also keep Jankowski and Bennett together as a power play unit and move Johnny/Monahan off the first unit until they start to find their game. It's so fn'g frustrating watching the coaching staff continue to play them first, regardless of how ineffective they are. prioritize the units by how the guys are playing. Reward the guys playing well and working hard.

[Jimdon]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

I'd like to see a line with
Frolik-Backlund-Jagr.

I don't think putting the slowest guy on the team in a position where he is starting most if his shifts in the defensive zone is a smart idea at all. When I think of Jagr I think of puck protection and offensive savy, not defense.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I don't mind the idea of Okposo, he's having an off year but has been fairly steady aside from that. 5 1/2 more years at 6M is kinda scary though, that could be a boat anchor in a couple of years.

Is he having an off year, or is he having an I-am-no-longer-being-propped-up-by-Tavares year?

His last 3 years in NY: .876 PPG

His 1 1/2 years in Buffalo: .608 PPG

He is now putting up Backlund type numbers (without the high-end defensive centerman part) and yet people would consider giving up assets for him. Yet other people wouldn't give that same money to Backlund, not having to give up assets, and Backlund is younger.

Personally, I have absolutely no interest in Okposo at $6M, even if we got him for free.

[icecube]

Didn't Okposo suffer a stroke or something like that just recently? Probably gonna take him a while to get back to 100 percent assuming that is even possible to get to where he was.