Building The 2018/19 Flames Roster

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Do you see a decline?

2014-15: 52 points in 80 games
2015-16: 41 points in 74 games
2016-17: 48 points in 68 games
2017-18: 56 points in 80 games

I see no decline. The Flames' #1 priority is scoring. If they signed Thomas Vanek to contribute to the third line and the powerplay, it would do wonders for this team. Canucks fans raved about what he did with Brock Boeser as a mentor early on in the season. Jackets fans said the same about him and Boone Jenner when he was traded there. I think he'd be a fantastic mentor to Bennett.

Ignoring the character issues is one thing, but sicking him on the younguns?

That is a fricking terrible idea.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Nelson

I agree that the Flames could get RWs or Cs much better than Vanek. But at what cost? Are the Flames to shovel out next year's picks or the team's prospects or trade Brodie and rely on LHD that may not be ready? It's not as simple as saying: we have a need and let's fix it with the best possible solution because the best possible solution will cost a lot.

I think the Flames should aim for a quiet summer of
-trading Stone for a pick or young, speedy and skilled bottom 6 forward,
-picking up undervalued FAs such as Vanek or Grabner for cheap, and
-drafting skilled and speedy players with perceived problems such as lack of size.

If the Flames go in on big FAs or try to acquire big assets via trades, the players and teams will see them coming from a mile away and take advantage of their desperation.

This is exactly what I am hoping for.

Trading Stone would make room for one of the kids. Then the top 4 can still do their thing and allow a younger pair to push for their spots from within the team.

I am all for signing Tavares or Carlson, and then trading from whatever position of strength that makes, but after that dream fails I would like to see the less valued guys like Czarnik, Riley Nash or players of that ilk be the targets.

Drafting, I am fine with whatever Button comes up with. His drafting record has beer better as of late, so continue on...

[Enoch Root]

Yes, the Flames need to improve their offense. But lazy players like Vanek are not the answer. There are 3 things that need to be done, which I believe would all help immensely:

1) get a scoring RW (like a Hoffman, not a Vanek)

2) improve the PP (last year they were a 1520th place team in offense most of the year. A better PP throughout the season, and they probably would have been more like 10-15th)

3) utilize the defense properly, and add tempo to the style of play (passing it back and forth between the D caused the forwards to have to stop in the neutral zone. This killed their offensive flow. Guys like Gaudreau could overcome that, but much of the rest of the team - and the bottom 6 in particular - really suffered offensively as a result of the style)

After a bad year, fans are far too negative about the talent on the team. Playing a better style, and getting the confidence level back, will make all the players look better than they did this year.

IMO, this was a bad year, not: this is a bad team

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

This is exactly what I am hoping for.

Trading Stone would make room for one of the kids. Then the top 4 can still do their thing and allow a younger pair to push for their spots from within the team.

I am all for signing Tavares or Carlson, and then trading from whatever position of strength that makes, but after that dream fails I would like to see are the less valued guys like Czarnik, Riley Nash or players of that ilk.

Drafting, I am fine with whatever Button comes up with. His drafting record has beer better as of late, so continue on...

I don't disagree, but I think the Flames will have more than enough cap space to keep Stone as the 7th Dman, which would be a nice luxury to have. Then they could trade him at the deadline, when his value would be highest (and he would only have a year and a half left on his contract).

That would also buy them a half a year to let Valimaki and Kyllington continue to develop

[Karl]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, the Flames need to improve their offense. But lazy players like Vanek are not the answer. There are 3 things that need to be done, which I believe would all help immensely:

1) get a scoring RW (like a Hoffman, not a Vanek)

2) improve the PP (last year they were a 1520th place team in offense most of the year. A better PP throughout the season, and they probably would have been more like 10-15th)

3) utilize the defense properly, and add tempo to the style of play (passing it back and forth between the D caused the forwards to have to stop in the neutral zone. This killed their offensive flow. Guys like Gaudreau could overcome that, but much of the rest of the team - and the bottom 6 in particular - really suffered offensively as a result of the style)

After a bad year, fans are far too negative about the talent on the team. Playing a better style, and getting the confidence level back, will make all the players look better than they did this year.

IMO, this was a bad year, not: this is a bad team

4) Make sure Brouwer and Hathaway are no more than part-time players next year, if not moved on from entirely. Because one is clearly not good enough anymore to be an NHL level talent, and the other is just not good enough.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I don't disagree, but I think the Flames will have more than enough cap space to keep Stone as the 7th Dman, which would be a nice luxury to have. Then they could trade him at the deadline, when his value would be highest (and he would only have a year and a half left on his contract).

That would also buy them a half a year to let Valimaki and Kyllington continue to develop

There's no way they have Stone as the 7th Dman. Too much money and he's way better than that.

[Roof-Daddy]

If all of Brouwer, Hathaway, Lazar and Shore are in the Flames bottom 6 next season, the Flames will have trouble with depth scoring again, so let's hope that doesn't happen.

Hell, I hope Hathaway and Brouwer don't play a single game, and also hope that Lazar and Shore are 13th/14th forwards. So basically, I hope NONE of those four are penciled into the Flames bottom 6 next season.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by DJones

There's no way they have Stone as the 7th Dman. Too much money and he's way better than that.

It is not at all a stretch to imagine Andersson passing him this season.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I don't disagree, but I think the Flames will have more than enough cap space to keep Stone as the 7th Dman, which would be a nice luxury to have. Then they could trade him at the deadline, when his value would be highest (and he would only have a year and a half left on his contract).

That would also buy them a half a year to let Valimaki and Kyllington continue to develop

I get that having the kids pass Stone is a great thing. But Stone is a solid #4D on a lot of teams and that is worth a lot. So trading him makes a lot of sense especially since he's a RHD with a big shot. I think people are underestimating what the Flames could get in return for him. But that's only worth looking at if we are sure that Rasmus is indeed ready to go as a bottom pairing guy.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

I get that having the kids pass Stone is a great thing. But Stone is a solid #4D on a lot of teams and that is worth a lot. So trading him makes a lot of sense especially since he's a RHD with a big shot. I think people are underestimating what the Flames could get in return for him. But that's only worth looking at if we are sure that Rasmus is indeed ready to go as a bottom pairing guy.

Which is precisely why I think waiting until the deadline makes sense. Also, injuries.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Which is precisely why I think waiting until the deadline makes sense. Also, injuries.

I wasn't disagreeing with you. I agree with that the most adventurous time to sell is the deadline, but hopefully that's the time the Flames need to build up depth at D. So to me Stone needs to be traded after the UFA market dries up on D or then keep him and figure it out.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Which is precisely why I think waiting until the deadline makes sense. Also, injuries.

So Stone plays really well, has good value and we're in a playoff spot.

And then we trade him at the deadline to put in a rookie?

Either trade him now or keep him.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by DJones

So Stone plays really well, has good value and we're in a playoff spot.

And then we trade him at the deadline to put in a rookie?

Either trade him now or keep him.

At the deadline it's reasonable to assume Treliving and Peters will know more about the rookies than they do now. So it's possible they can make a better judgment then.

[RoughRiderRowdy]

Cant believe posters are saying they wouldnt want vanek. Outsife of johnny and mony, we have one of the worst forward groups in the entire nhl. Vanek would automatically be our first line RW.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And I have answered this by agreeing that the Flames definitely need to improve offensively. But I take issue with the insinuation that the team is presently a bottom-five scoring team.

Yeah, this clearly went right over your head—your condescension helps to demonstrate as much. The point is to show a considerable variation in offence which strongly suggests that a team consisting of essentially the same personnel finishing a full ten places below their four-year scoring average is probably an outlier.


I am not interesting in anything more than how we measure the Flames's offensive potential moving forward, which includes other teams's problems. I continue to maintain that the Flames are better than their scoring returns from this past season.

Yeah, you've maintained this for a long time. You thought last year was a down year too, no reason why the team couldn't bounce back. In fact, we talked about the Flames lack of offense in June of last year as well. At the time, you maintained the depth of the roster was it's strength...

Last year they were in the bottom third in league in 5-5 scoring. That happened again this year, right? Maybe that trend has more relevance on what the team can do offensively than something that happened 4 years ago with a team that had Jiri Hudler on it?

Why don't we ever compare the Flames to say, good teams in the league and what those teams were doing and how the Flames could get there? Are you seriously suggesting 16th in the league in scoring over the last 4 years is supposed to be impressive? They made the playoffs in 2 of those 4 years including getting swept.

Why does their average over 4 years have more significance to you than what the roster did last year, especially considering Calgary's top players mostly had career years? Is it truly unfathomable to you that this roster produced less goals because it got less talented up front?

2 years ago the Oilers finished 2nd in the division, had 47 wins and went to the second round of the playoffs. I'm sure you'd have a favourable attitude to an oiler fan poster who claimed the oilers had no issues this year because their 2 year average pointed to last year as just an unfortunate down year.

Let's hold ourselves to some higher standards than blind, totemic optimism. Finishing 27th in the league in scoring this year is where the team finished. They were a bottom 3rd team offensively the whole year. Without a monahan and tkachuk injury maybe they finish 20th in league scoring instead of 27th, but 20th still ain't good enough and still means they need to add scoring.

This time last year:

Textcritic: The previous two seasons the Flames were a top-ten scoring team. I think last year was probably a down year for them offensively.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Let's hold ourselves to some higher standards than blind, totemic optimism.

Such as?

I really enjoy how you just bypassed all the posts on the last page calling out your dreadful outlook and posting style and just used another one as a springboard to slight the team as a whole.

Once again, why are you even a fan? All you do is take shots at the organization dating back decades, the current management, the team, and the fanbase as a whole as though you're separate from it and the smartest guy in the room.

You thanked just about every one of Tinordi's dreadful posts until he was finally banned yet you beat the same drum he did.

Why are you here? Why do you follow this team when it's clear you think it does nothing right and take no enjoyment from it?

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

I get that having the kids pass Stone is a great thing. But Stone is a solid #4D on a lot of teams and that is worth a lot. So trading him makes a lot of sense especially since he's a RHD with a big shot. I think people are underestimating what the Flames could get in return for him. But that's only worth looking at if we are sure that Rasmus is indeed ready to go as a bottom pairing guy.

I just don't see how we don't trade at least 1 dman this offseason.

- We have 6 NHL dmen, under team control, that are all capable of playing a regular shift every night
- We have 3 young guys that are extremely close to being ready, one of which may already be ready come training camp
- We have a dearth of proven top 9 forward talent
- We have a dearth of draft picks
- We hired Peter's who has a track record of developing dmen at a young age in the NHL
- Huska was promoted to be in charge of the dmen on the NHL roster

All of these factors lead me to believe it would be highly unlikely we don't move at least one dman to shore up the forward position, add pick(s), and/or open up an additional roster spot for the emerging youth.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

I just don't see how we don't trade at least 1 dman this offseason.

- We have 6 NHL dmen, under team control, that are all capable of playing a regular shift every night

Is the 6th Kulak or am I drawing a blank?

I don't know if I would consider him and his 10 minutes a night a "regular shift every night" kind of player.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Is the 6th Kulak or am I drawing a blank?

I don't know if I would consider him and his 10 minutes a night a "regular shift every night" kind of player.

Yes the 6th is Kulak and he actually averaged 13mins/game.

I'm just saying I don't see an issue in trading Stone as we have a strong top 4 in place, Andersson is ready now and Kylington and Valamaki are not far behind.

I know injuries can arise but it seems more logical to me to move a guy, and recoup some things we are lacking, rather then scratch one of Kulak, Stone or Andersson every game. The team barely had any injury problems on defense until the end of the season - which was great as Bartkowski isn't a top 6 dman.

[Oling_Roachinen]

I don't necessarily disagree with the overall opinion (of dealing from a position of 'strength' to fill a position of concern), but I think comparing a bonafide NHL defender in Stone to a fringe NHL player in Kulak is nonsense.

There's never going to be a question on who to scratch between the two.

Kulak is the protypical stopgap, 7th defensemen, injury replacement defender. Once Anderson does prove himself, there's no issue sending him up to the pressbox.

With that said, there's no point in trying to move him because no team is going to give much for him while Stone might actually get you some help upfront.