Conroy on 960 talking deadline and moving the 1st round pick

[sureLoss]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/pinder-...-willing-give/

don't think we will make a huge deal = if something came and it worked out - we would have to pay the person and keep him

probably see us going after a rental

warns about how the Flames acquired Jokinen - team was doing very well before the acquisition but didn't win more than 2 games in a row the rest of the season. It changed the chemistry (which isn't Jokinen's fault)

would like to add small depth here and there

if something big came up they would look at it but for the most part just add small pieces

they believe in this group and they believe in each other

If they are moving a 1st rounder they want that piece to be around for at least 2-3 years after the trade
we have given up a lot of picks
we need to replenish as we move along - good teams that is what they do

to move another 1st rounder (won't say they won't do it) it wouldn't be for a rental or a player for just [this year and next]

makes the point that because the team didn't constantly make the playoffs over the past few years they aren't 100% sure what they need to add to get over the hump in the playoffs

unless the deal blows them away and they have to do it, he assumes they will keep the 1st round pick

this group is doing something special - you don't want to make a huge splash
look at when Washington got Shattenkirk - it moved Carlson off the 1st PP and moved everyone around and didn't' really work

doesn't think acquiring a big piece at the deadline gives the player enough time to gel with the rest of the players

does mention that it did seem to work for Colorado adding a big name player at the deadline (assuming he means the Forsberg/Sakic era)
but it makes him nervous because they haven't seen this Flames group in the playoffs enough

also says that the acquisitions in the 04 cup run were complimentary pieces and they did a great job.
they didn't play on the 1st line or take pp minutes
they needed depth then badly - mentions how the Flames had tried to sign Phaneuf to play in the cup finals because they badly needed depth

[oldschoolcalgary]

makes me happy...

i think you will listen to offers, but the Flames aren't actively looking at anything big... there are probably a few guys they'd consider, but for the most part, sounds like tinkering around the edges.

[BeltlineFan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

If they are moving a 1st rounder they want that piece to be around for at least 2-3 years after the trade

This is what I wanted to hear. Trading a first for anyone who will be gone as a UFA this year is a bad idea in my opinion. No need to go 'all in' this year.

[Psytic]

Yes good. Outside of a backup its hard to see any glaring holes. Small depth moves are all they need right now.

[TheoFleury]

I dont think they really need 2019's version of Nieminen, Nilson and Simon. That would be way overkill and would hurt team chemistry more than one big add imo. We maybe need a backup (debatable) and someone who can play in the middle 6, preferably 2C or 2RW. Beyond that, this team looks real good.

[868904]

Whoa, if they had signed Phaneuf and he joined in the Stanley Cup finals in 2004, that might have been the shot of Adrenalin the team needed.

That team was running on fumes and adding a hot shot rookie like that could have been the difference.

Would have been great to see him lay out St. Louis or Lecavalier too.

[Strange Brew]

The point of not having seen this team in the playoffs much is something I really agree with. It’s hard to know exactly what you need until we see this group, with this coach, perform in the playoffs. This team has relatively few prospects and picks with which to trade, so you don’t want to make a big splash and come to find it wasn’t really what the team needed.

[Bunk]

I wonder how depth is really defined here. On D - it seems pretty clearly a 3rd pair LD only. Goalie - swapping out Smith for another back up, would certainyl qualify.

On forward, is it only 4th line, or would that extend to the ever fluid middle six? Would players like Shenn (one more year left) or rentals expiring contracts like Zuccarello or Hayes be considered "depth"? They would figure into the middle six. Would those players be a risk to upset the apple cart? I'm just not sure.

[Northendzone]

I think right now that moving a guy out and bringing in someone could be very disruptive to the chemistry

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by Psytic

Yes good. Outside of a backup its hard to see any glaring holes. Small depth moves are all they need right now.

I've been thinking about the upgrade on Smith and I think it's actually a really tough trade. The obvious longer term choices like Saros are simply not available at a reasonable cost. Smith's character and experience I am sure would have a chemistry impact. Much like Holtby last year, I also think the Flames probably think that Smith has another gear before his journey into the sunset.

If you:
1. Cannot acquire a long term upgrade
2. Dont feel that the risk of trading Smith for a Talbot, McElhinney etc is a substantial enough upgrade to not risk the chemistry
3. Dont want to risk a 3 headed goalie monster which this team is familiar with...

Then your only remaining option is to trade for a top end or experienced goalie in the AHL that is already waiver cleared. Not a lot of good options come to mind on that front...

[Mitch]

Pretty much everything you would want to hear. Feels nice having good management.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I think right now that moving a guy out and bringing in someone could be very disruptive to the chemistry

I agree. You don’t want to trade a guy and bring in a replacement at the deadline. That is why I would not make a change in net. If something happens, you try and work with what you have and ahl guys.

I would not be opposed to adding some other depth pieces. But want to keep first rounder.

[Kasi]

I love that after there is an article posted about them not wanting to upset their chemistry and they would only trade a first if it got them a multi year controlled players (not just this year and next) then suggest trading for players that would require a first round pick and fail the criteria Conroy laid out. Yeah I know people want to raid the Rangers/Blues but it’s not happening.

[GreenLantern2814]

Don't trade the 1st. The team is currently 2nd in goals for, and they're as good as anyone in the game with six skaters - they really don't need another elite forward. Who is Stone/Duchene taking off the ice in the last minute? Tkachuk? Lindholm? Monahan? Nah.

If I'm the Flames, no way am I comfortable going into the playoffs with Mike Smith as the the 2nd best goalie in the system. Treliving needs to be working Bob Murray's phone every day to get Ryan Miller onto this roster. I know he's got family on the west coast - he can play in Calgary for three months and try to win a ring.

Marcus Kruger is also someone I'd look at - only 7 points, but he's still just 28. Lots of playoff experience, centre, cap hit's only a little over $3M. Chicago isn't doing anything this year.

[Bezer]

Originally Posted by 868904

Whoa, if they had signed Phaneuf and he joined in the Stanley Cup finals in 2004, that might have been the shot of Adrenalin the team needed.

That team was running on fumes and adding a hot shot rookie like that could have been the difference.

Would have been great to see him lay out St. Louis or Lecavalier too.

They couldn’t bring him up other than emergency recall if I remember correctly

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

I dont think they really need 2019's version of Nieminen, Nilson and Simon. That would be way overkill and would hurt team chemistry more than one big add imo. We maybe need a backup (debatable) and someone who can play in the middle 6, preferably 2C or 2RW. Beyond that, this team looks real good.

I agree, the only piece we could really use in our starting lineup is another forward to push Mangiapane out.

Outside of that I feel the rest of the pieces would be depth in case of injury/rookie playoffs struggles.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Bezer

They couldn’t bring him up other than emergency recall if I remember correctly

They could've brought Phaneuf up if they'd been able to get him under contract.

Pre-2004, rookie contracts weren't boilerplate the way they are now. I believe Phaneuf's actual rookie deal paid him north of $2M a season in straight salary (he signed it like the day before the lockout officially started, from what I remember).

I recall Darryl saying something in an interview that 'you don't just hand a player a contract and he signs, that's not how it works'.

[Jacks]

What could have been ....
Dion was a beast as a rookie.

[David Struch]

I've always wondered about this... could Dion have scored that one goal we needed to take game 6 and the Cup.

[868904]

Originally Posted by David Struch

I've always wondered about this... could Dion have scored that one goal we needed to take game 6 and the Cup.

He would have rocked St. Louis unconscious rendering him incapable of scoring the OT winner in Game 6!

Then he would have scored on a slapshot from the point with Iggy screening the net to win it in OT.

Phaneuf is like the Benjamin Button of the NHL, his career trajectory went in reverse. Broke in to the league dominant and now leaving it with barely a whimper.