[News] Flames place Shinkaruk, Poirier, and Wotherspoon on waivers UPD: All 3 clear

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Joe Colborne had 19 goals 2 years ago when the Flames sucked

Yep Colborne is like a 6'5 Granlund. And how valuable of an asset was he? We didn't even qualify him.

I think we did fine in the Granlund deal at the time the trade was made. Granlund was probably worth a 2nd rounder at most at the time we dealt him. Getting back a recent 1st rounder who still had NHL upside but people were skeptical about is probably worth about at 2nd rounder. Shinkaruk has disappointed but that's on Shinkaruk. The Flames knew he was a gamble, knew he was a small one-dimensional scorer that would only make the NHL if he could score at that level. So far he hasn't panned out and it doesn't look promising but it was a gamble like all draft picks are.

Crying over Granlund is pointless. He was never going to be a critical piece here. And Treliving is happy to waive, not-qualify or buyout non-critical pieces. And we actually got something back for him. If you're crying about Granlund leaving then you should be crying about Colborne and his 19 goals cause we got absolutely nothing for him. Guess what? Both guys are soft non-critical pieces on winning teams. Both guys are not worth lamenting the loss of. We have better pieces IMO.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Exactly. Nobody is saying Granlund is a top line center. Just that we lost the trade and it's possible Granlund would make the Flames as our bottom 3-4 is up for grabs.

Corsi is a Canuck fan, and no one is debating the (minor, inconsequential) trade was tilted to the Canucks.

But for the 5th time, the debate about Granlund maybe slotting in in a much more minor, limited role at present is futile, as he moved mostly because he wouldn't have cleared waivers.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

There was no room for Granlund and it made sense to trade equivalent prospects from an area of strength to address an area of weakness. Add in that Shinkaruk had extra waiver exemption and that made it make more sense.

How I remember it, is Granlund was tried at centre exclusively. He was very inconsistent, showing at times a really good shot but other times he would bobble the puck in a prime spot or kinda be a non factor for many games.

I recall Treliving saying they tried him at wing but it didn't fit and Granlund himself said he prefers playing centre. So they shipped him off to Canucks.

When he arrived there he played centre and then he played with the Sedins (I think) and he started scoring goals.

The issue of the Flames not really having a spot for him makes sense if you only looked at him as a centre. The Flames signing Versteeg at the last second showed there was a spot for a skilled winger.

I'm not trying to run down the Versteeg signing at all because he's been good here but if Granlund was moved to wing (where he's shown to play well) then he would've had Versteeg's spot.

The issue with moving Granlund is one of the return. Was Shinkaruk the best option to trade for? I think its safe to say Treliving would have scoured the market looking for a fix but Granlund's perceived value with the rest of the league was not as high as Vancouver's (with Weisbrod knowing the player).

[calgaryblood]

Yeah Colborne a year ago was part of the core according to 95% of CP.

Now he's a 6'5 Granlund.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Robbob

My last comment on this Granlund debate. Him being a Flames probably means he wasn't sent down for fear of being lost on waivers and it means we don't sign Versteeg. Who would you rather have?

Different niches. One is an offensive winger / PP specialist. The other is a two-way forward / PK specialist. You're manufacturing a dilemma when there is none.

I'm not saying Granlund deserved to be handed a roster spot two years ago. I'm saying that the people saying last year's Granlund wouldn't make our current team are out to lunch.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Funny when a player is a Flame nobody can see that a player sucks.

Yea it's just great how we have you here to point out which players on the Flames are the worst players ever. Only thing missing is the old "the management obviously agrees with me" qualifier.

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Yeah Colborne a year ago was part of the core according to 95% of CP.

And boom goes the dynamite. This is exactly why it's not worth discussing anything with you.

[Bourque's Twin]

Who would've thought the 2013 draft dilemma of the Flames picking Poirier instead of hometown Shinkaruk would come down to having both on the team being put on waivers 4 years later?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Apart from everything else and the "realness" of clutchness, Stajan shouldn't be in a position to be "clutch" there are 10 forwards on the roster who should be out there at the end of the game before him.

FTR: I really like what Stajan brings.

Look at that picture and name two Flames who you'd want out there in the clutch situation now?

BTW, there was 5 minutes to go. You probably are still in 4 lines mode at that point, and you need to keep lines going in case of playoff OT.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Yeah Colborne a year ago was part of the core according to 95% of CP.

Now he's a 6'5 Granlund.

Part of the Core?

LMAO.

No. Never was.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

And? Don't you remember you said it would be insane not to qualify him?

I remember clearly I was one of a few ppl who thought he wouldn't be qualified and you laughed at that. Now everyone knew Colborne sucks. Just how you now know Granlund sucks.

Funny when a player is a Flame nobody can see that a player sucks.

Problem is you complain about everybody on the team...so when someone drops off you can say I told you so.

Bottom line is Calgary had no room for him at the time so they traded him for a waiver eligible player to buy some time

Sure it worked out for Vancouver...for Calgary it was better than losing him on waivers for nothing. To say he could play of the fourth line of today's roster isn't really relevant because he would have had to be on the NHL roster these past few years or we would have lost him on waivers.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Yeah Colborne a year ago was part of the core according to 95% of CP.

Link please

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Man can't wait until the next round of cuts is announced this afternoon so we can discuss something more productive than Markus Granlund.

[Gizmo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Different niches. One is an offensive winger / PP specialist. The other is a two-way forward / PK specialist. You're manufacturing a dilemma when there is none.

I'm not saying Granlund deserved to be handed a roster spot two years ago. I'm saying that the people saying last year's Granlund wouldn't make our current team are out to lunch.

Last year's Granlund was developed on a brutal Canucks team that saw time with the Sedins on the powerplay. Our top 3 lines have no place for him and he isn't the type of energy guy you want playing on your 4th line. Guys like him and Baertschi have top 6 spots sealed with the Canucks who are going to finish last in the division with lack of depth being a big reason for it.

I'll grant you that his pk skills would be an asset, but that argument isn't nearly enough since he wouldn't be putting up offensive numbers like last year if he was still a flame.

[dino7c]

He couldn't make the team at THAT TIME

it was trade or waivers (lose him for nothing)

Today's roster is irrelevant, he wouldn't still be here

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Gizmo

I'll grant you that his pk skills would be an asset, but that argument isn't nearly enough since he wouldn't be putting up offensive numbers like last year if he was still a flame.

Which isn't the base line expectation.

He would very likely be expected to put up better offensive numbers than we will expect from Garnet Hathaway, Troy Brouwer, Freddie Hamilton, Curtis Lazar, Luke Gazdic, Tanner Glass, and Matt Stajan*(goals, maybe a ceiling on ES points). While being a better penalty killer than Matt Stajan, Troy Brouwer, Luke Gazdic, Tanner Glass at the very least.

The question is not if he could repeat what he did in Vancouver, it's if he can outdo what we realistically expect from those above options. The only guy with a real chance at outperforming Granlund is Lazar, and that's more of a faint hope than a real likelyhood.

Originally Posted by dino7c

Today's roster is irrelevant, he wouldn't still be here

Not with respect to the following claims:

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

He'd be on waivers just the same as Shinkaruk.

He put up some meh numbers on a pathetic team with minutes way above what he'd get here. I don't miss Granlund at all, and you can bet the second the Canucks pull themselves out of the toilet he won't have a place with them either.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Shinkaruk hasn't been able to take the next step to this point. So be it.

That does not make Granlund any better of a hockey player. There is no spot on the Flames roster for Granlund, so who cares?

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Hypothetically swap he and Shinkaruk right now (before this morning) and where do you slot Granlund in?

Wing of the 4th line? It makes us smaller and softer.

He's playing a bigger role on a very weak team that he wouldn't be afforded here.

No thanks.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

that does not mean that Calgary currently would be in a better situation with Granlund in their system than they are today.

The above claims are simply false.

[GioforPM]

Granlund got over 17 m per game last year to get his points. He also got a couple minutes per game of PP time. He gets neither of those in Calgary. He gets probably no PP time and maybe 9 minutes per game.

Plus, while +/- is a crap stat, within the team it has a bit more relevance. He was -19 (the third worst forward) whereas Sven was -6, Horvat was -7, Gaunce was -3, Burrows was -3 etc.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Which isn't the base line expectation.

He would very likely be expected to put up better offensive numbers than we will expect from Garnet Hathaway, Troy Brouwer, Freddie Hamilton, Curtis Lazar, Luke Gazdic, Tanner Glass, and Matt Stajan*(goals, maybe a ceiling on ES points). While being a better penalty killer than Matt Stajan, Troy Brouwer, Luke Gazdic, Tanner Glass at the very least.

The question is not if he could repeat what he did in Vancouver, it's if he can outdo what we realistically expect from those above options. The only guy with a real chance at outperforming Granlund is Lazar, and that's more of a faint hope than a real likelyhood.

Waivers...he wouldn't be here anymore. The FACT is he didn't make the team at the time

Unless you think gifting him a spot on the team for 3 years was a good idea

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

If the Flames don't miss Granlund then there are literally 8-10 players on this team or fighting for a spot we wouldn't miss.

But yet the same posters saying we don't miss Granlund are the first posters to defend Brouwer and Lazar. Two players we definitely wouldn't miss.

The problem with throwing Granlund in there with Lazar and Brouwer is they don't fill the same need as each other.

The Flames don't need Granlund because they have enough players that can do what Granlund does, but those players do it better. What the Flames need are players like Lazar and Brouwer, who play that style and roll well.

Very fair for you to say that at this point, Lazar and Brouwer aren't getting it done. It might also be fair for you to suggest that Granlund does what he does better than Lazar and Brouwer are currently doing what they do................but that still doesn't equate to Granlund being something this team needs. We need players to play the Lazar / Brouwer roll well...............Granlund doesn't do that, and substituting Granlund for either of those two doesn't make us better. Building a team isn't quiet as simple as take top 12 players and dress, there are roles that need to be filled.

[Love]

Markus Granlund >> Curtis Lazar

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Love

Markus Granlund >> Curtis Lazar

Time will tell whether that always holds true. Klimchuk, Shinkaruk and Poirier are from the same draft and aren't finished products yet. Lazar still has time to grow and room to grow. He was projected as a 2nd liner by many draft sources or a 3rd liner if his offence didn't pan out.

I think some people are thinking this is the best we may ever see from Lazar but he's still very young. If you still believe Klimchuk or Poirier has upside then you should treat Lazar in the same light cause he's from the exact same draft class.