2025/26 season: The Flames' (non)-rebuild

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Ya but they they cannot afford to trade many more salaries away otherwise the Flames will have serious cap problems. But you are correct, they could easily overpay a number of vets and then just bury young guys like Mews in the minors while those vets play in the NHL.

Mews is more than 2 seasons from being a top 6d. Also extremely unlikely to have all off Mews, Hunter B, and Parekh as offensive rh dmen

[Vinny01]

I would prioritize moving the top 3 assets the following way

1. Andersson - obvious reason being a UFA he needs to go
2. Coleman - retain 50% and let a team get 2 runs for $2.45M. We have an endless supply of left shot wingers in the organization. I think he is more valuable for 2 runs vs being a rental. Difference between a 1st and 2nd in my opinion.
3. Kadri - if he is as valuable as the insiders imply then I think the flames have to look at it. As others have stated he plays a position of need and has stated his love for the city. With the most term left I am not sure he has to go now unless the offer is too good to pass up. If they are getting the Ritchie+1st type offers they need to look at it.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

I think most fans know they need to trade Kadri, Coleman and Andersson by the deadline.

The question really is: will the organization actually be proactive and do it? Will they try to set themselves up for the future, and will Murray Edwards allow it.

I am afraid to find out the answer. But I am hopeful.

Why would Edwards block any moves at this time? He's not stupid, and it's clear that the team will not make the playoffs this season, or likely the next two or three.

Conroy will make moves when the returns make sense for the organization, and not a moment sooner. At this point, there's no rush, unless someone makes him an offer he can't refuse. He has the luxury of waiting for the right returns.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Itse

I've changed my mind a bit on the trade issue.

As long as we're already safely in last place, there isn't really a massive urgency to trade anyone... except Andersson because I don't like the idea of being one injury away from losing all returns from him.

I strongly agree that we should retain salary wherever possible. I think even Huberdeau might be tradeable at 50% his current salary.

As things are, we're kind of sitting in a sweetspot of being last without looking like we're actively trying. Getting some wins here and there is probably good for player and fan morale, as is not getting blown out. We lose a lot of games by 1-2 goals, which is kind of optimal.

The rebuild is gonna take multiple years anyway. You should get all the picks you can, but whether we get that extra pick now or next year isn't a deal breaker.

Key question would be whether those vets are helping or hurting development. Are they taking spots from kids that would benefit from NHL playtime, or are the vets sheltering them and teaching them?

Let's say we draft McKenna, who is gonna be his center, if Reschny isn't ready to be #1C? Having someone with skill to play with would probably be good for his development, especially to begin with.

Now, I'm obviously not opposed to trading vets, but I don't think we're in a massive rush to trade everything. I think there's time to look for the best possible trade, even if that moves some trades past this years trade deadline.

...unless the team threatens to move up the standings. Management should put their foot down if that happens. Tank properly, no half-assing.

Huberdeau's contract has too many years left to retain, the Flames can't keep a retention slot locked up that long. Taking back a shorter term bloated contract/cap dump would be an acceptable compromise.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Huberdeau's contract has too many years left to retain, the Flames can't keep a retention slot locked up that long. Taking back a shorter term bloated contract/cap dump would be an acceptable compromise.

The 27/28 season is the season they are really in a bad spot for making the cap floor on. They could hope there are injured guys that they could pick up and just put on IR to take up cap space for the year but they basically have to be longterm injured guys that exist and can come relatively cheap. Only downside to this approach is it takes up some of the 50 contract spaces so you would have young guys that you probably don’t sign because you are using contract spots to make the cap floor.

Other option is to trade a 2nd or 3rd round pick for a guy on a bad contract and hope you can recoup the pick later in the year.

Easiest way for them to make the cap floor for 27/28 is to sign functional UFAs to contracts to play on the team. If they trade Kadri they simply will not have enough big contracts in 27/28 to make the cap floor with the composition as it is now.

[Robbob]

Makar being a UFA would solve some problems getting to that floor.

[Camronius]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Why would Edwards ...?

A question that many before you have asked, and many still continue to ask.

[Calgary4LIfe]

"Stick with the guys that got you here." - no reason to feel rushed in moving vets to try to solidify your last place visit. They are doing a great job so far.

I see the rest of the season as:

The Next ~40 Games:
Asset management. Stick with the vets that brought you here. Try to put those vets in a position to succeed. You don't know when a guy like Hanley suddenly becomes an attractive asset to a team or two, and a 7th round pick gets flipped to the Flames, and it turns out to be another Wolf. Sure, the chances of that are slim, but what's the rush? Manage your assets, maximize value.

Rest of the season after the next ~40:
Youth movement. Give the kids the prime opportunities. Rotate a bunch through the team and give them a taste of the NHL - guys like Stromgren, Basha, Grushnikov, etc. - guys that aren't eligible for waivers yet, but will be soon (though Basha isn't eligible soon - but I would give him a taste of the NHL). However, I would make sure the bulk of them are assigned to the Wranglers for the AHL playoffs. That means a maximum of 4 recalls after the deadline. I would want to rotate a bunch of them through the Flames before then to give them some experience.

I know everyone wants all the prospects in right away, but I do think the smart approach is to manage your assets first, and then slowly bring in the prospects and put them in positions to succeed as best as possible. No pressure to really win, so it is easier to accept mistakes.

For all the flack that Huska gets, I bet at this time he flips the focus away from giving the team the best chance to win, and straight into focusing on player development. Sure, he is still going to try and get this team wins, as he should, but you will see more kids being given more opportunity. It won't be a free-for-all, but it will be closer to how the Flames operated during the middle-years in Hartley's tenure here. That's what I would like to see anyway - giving some kids more responsibility and opportunity.

I am curious how many players end up traded, however.

Andersson in my mind is 100% liklely.
Kadri now seems to me like a 95% certainty - he certainly didn't contradict any rumour either.
Coleman - with all the interest out there as being reported - I am starting to think there may be over 50% chance?


Everyone else in my mind has less than a 50% chance (and some significantly less so).
Weegar - I only think he moves if he asks for a trade. Let's call it 5%.
Hanley -Teams look for depth defencemen as insurance for the playoffs, and Hanley has been fine this season again. I see him as a deadline-day, 1:00pm eastern time move. He has another year on his deal, however, which makes me believe he won't move.
Bean - He is a whipping boy on these forums (and I think unfairly). He is on an expiring contract. His underlying metrics have been impressive. I think there is a chance he moves at the deadline for a low pick (obviously). If there is another defencemen dealt by the deadline, I think it will be him.
Lomberg - expiring deal, but I think he stays.
Frost - market is red-hot for centers this year. However, when is it not red-hot for centers? I think Frost isn't a piece that the Flames identify as important moving forward, so I bet he goes next season.
Farabee - 2 more years at $5 Million after this season says he doesn't move. That's ok - he has been great this season even if overpaid given his level of production.
Sharangovich - year 1 of a 5 year 5.75 million says he stays. I would keep him and hope for a bounce-back next season. I don't think the Flames will get offers unless it is a negative contract coming back.
Miromanov - Doubtful - expiring deal. He has been great in the AHL - maybe he can parlay that into a good stint back on the Flames, and then maybe attract a 7th round pick? Maybe? Probably not.
Cooley - I haven't even considered Cooley being moved until someone brought him up in the trade and speculation thread. If he gets more starts and continues doing well, maybe the Flames trade him. Bring up Prosvetov who hasn't looked all that great and lose a few more games? Next season, maybe it will be Wolf and Say, with Sergeev getting the net as the starter on the Wranglers? I don't see it personally, but who knows? He is a UFA after this season.

Those are my thoughts anyway - next part of this season should be a focus on asset management, and once that is dealt with, a youth movement with a focus on development and gifting spots for prospects - putting them in a position to succeed.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Makar being a UFA would solve some problems getting to that floor.

It would. I suspect the likelihood that Makar signs with Calgary when it looks like Calgary is years away from competing for a Cup are low. Move out his buddy Kadri and they get lower.

[SuperMatt18]

Lomberg should not be re-signed and should be shopped to a contender that needs a bit more grit.

He has no place on this roster longer term and all he does is waste a roster spot a younger player should hold on a rebuilding team past this season.

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Lomberg should not be re-signed and should be shopped to a contender that needs a bit more grit.

He has no place on this roster longer term and all he does is waste a roster spot a younger player should hold on a rebuilding team.

Did he run over your dog or something? It seems almost personal how much you have brought him up in almost every post.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Did he run over your dog or something? It seems almost personal how much you have brought him up in almost every post.

Great guy, great locker room guy, wish we had him through the prime of his career.

But that's the problem. We didn't have Lomberg for those prime years because he didn't get the opportunity in Calgary, because we prioritized giving time to guys like Tobias Reider (55 games), Zac Rinaldo (20 games), Alan Quine (9 games) and others more games over those 18-19 and 19-20 seasons and he got 4 NHL games in that time.

Then Lomberg decided to sign elsewhere as a free agent that season to get more opportunity, and became a good player for Florida.

Now Lomberg is on the other end of that equation - he's the veteran that's playing too many games, and taking spots from the Morton, Kerins, Stromgren types.

It's nothing against the guy personally as he seems like an awesome guy, but doesn't mean he needs to dress all 82 games, or be a guy they prioritize re-signing.

This organization in their constant need to try to focus on the short term instead of the long term has always leaned towards playing no upside, low risk veterans, instead of younger players developed internally that might come with a bit more risk, and personally I really just want to see a shift in that. Flames have lots of internally developed players looking for an opportunity right now - the Kirkland, Hunts, and even Lombergs of the world don't need to be taking roster spots.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Lomberg should not be re-signed and should be shopped to a contender that needs a bit more grit.

He has no place on this roster longer term and all he does is waste a roster spot a younger player should hold on a rebuilding team past this season.

The Flames need Lomberg because the NHL is a bullies game, and someone needs to keep the play clean around Parehk, Honzek and Coronato.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

The Flames need Lomberg because the NHL is a bullies game, and someone needs to keep the play clean around Parehk, Honzek and Coronato.

Then go get a guy to do that - Lomberg isn't that either IMO - if guys want to run those guys they aren't going to be intimidated by Lomberg.

Lomberg is a perfectly fine energy 4th line player that is best suited to be 13th forward that can play every other game or every third game and bring some energy, or slot in against lineups that have a bit more grit.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

It would. I suspect the likelihood that Makar signs with Calgary when it looks like Calgary is years away from competing for a Cup are low. Move out his buddy Kadri and they get lower.

Potentially, I do think if they can add a couple of blue chips to the prospect pool in the next couple years will help. A team with some really good corners stones and a new building might be enough.

At the end of the day the next couple years I don't think it will be too tough to hit the floor. Just another reason the Huberdeau contract start to become less a negative asset for the flames. Especially after GMs throw out some crazy contracts with all the new cap space.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Then go get a guy to do that - Lomberg isn't that either IMO - if guys want to run those guys they aren't going to be intimidated by Lomberg.

Lomberg is a perfectly fine energy 4th line player that is best suited to be 13th forward that can play every other game or every third game and bring some energy, or slot in against lineups that have a bit more grit.

Lomberg to me is a fine guy to have around for a rebuild. If Lomberg is the reason you can't make the team after they trade away Kadri/Coleman whoever else - the odds of you becoming anything is next to nothing.

All those guys you mentioned playing over Lomberg were during a time when they were trying to win - so the roster was full. This is going to be a bad roster with open slots all over it.

Lomberg isn't intimidating but he'll stand up and take a fight that most guys won't.

[Robbob]

I do wonder how the daily cap works over the Olympic. Does it temporarily stop during that break? That could impact when a GM tries to start making those pre-deadline trades before or after the break. I could see it as a benefit for a player not playing to help them get situated in their new city if it is done before the break.

[traptor]

I've been curious about something and wonder what yall think.

I think it's fair to say Huska intentionally coaches a low event style, based on the idea that we need to play like that to have a chance to win because of skill descrepency.

Say we add McKenna and he makes the team next year. Gridin ends up over a PPG in the AHL and makes the team too next year. Then we have Parehk in D+3 on the backend.


Will Huska drastically shift the way we play? Because that will be alot of offensive youth injected into the group.

With where we are at this year, I wonder if they should start that shift now. The season is lost. Lets open things up. it's probably funner for the players.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by traptor

I've been curious about something and wonder what yall think.

I think it's fair to say Huska intentionally coaches a low event style, based on the idea that we need to play like that to have a chance to win because of skill descrepency.

Say we add McKenna and he makes the team next year. Gridin ends up over a PPG in the AHL and makes the team too next year. Then we have Parehk in D+3 on the backend.


Will Huska drastically shift the way we play? Because that will be alot of offensive youth injected into the group.

With where we are at this year, I wonder if they should start that shift now. The season is lost. Lets open things up. it's probably funner for the players.

Or you could teach kids a 200 foot game so they don't end up like a lot of one dimensional guys.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by traptor

I've been curious about something and wonder what yall think.

I think it's fair to say Huska intentionally coaches a low event style, based on the idea that we need to play like that to have a chance to win because of skill descrepency.

Say we add McKenna and he makes the team next year. Gridin ends up over a PPG in the AHL and makes the team too next year. Then we have Parehk in D+3 on the backend.


Will Huska drastically shift the way we play? Because that will be alot of offensive youth injected into the group.

With where we are at this year, I wonder if they should start that shift now. The season is lost. Lets open things up. it's probably funner for the players.

I don't think you can start to make that shift now based on a series of assumptions that may or may not be true. When the team has more skill, then you adapt, either with the current coach (if he can) or a new coach.