Worst team in the league - Are we "OK" with it?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This is the crux of where there is disagreement
Some see ample evidence, based on their actions, that they are re-building
Others don't see it that way, including explaining those actions as only being done against pending UFAs.

Not sure anyone is going to bring those two sides together.
But that's crux of it.

I see no evidence outside of trading one 2nd round pick that they are trying to be competitive in any shape or form.

But then I see 3 first round picks, 4 second round picks, 4 3rd round picks and a 4th, 5th, and 6th that have been added in deals that bring nothing back to help them really compete now and I think they are rebuilding.

I accept the argument that trading one pick is evidence that they are selling the farm to compete now but I then think acquiring 14 picks seems to counter that opinion.

For me the losing one pick and gaining a net 13 picks is not the ample evidence I need that they are trying to compete now and are using future assets to accomplish that goal. But that could just be me.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Bingo

It was said it was an expiring contract, but it wasn't. I'm saying that!

From reports at the time Toffoli wanted too many years and was traded.

And agreed on Andersson and I think he would have had his price been met, but he still wouldn't be an expiring contract.

We are talking literal hours before the deal was in the last year with Toffoli. He was traded on June 28th and technically July 1st he was in the last year of his deal. Great use of technicality but a very weak point when that is the only example outside of Markstrom that you can pull

[blankall]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

The real problem with Calgary’s rebuild is the lack of high draft picks to get elite talent.

That may be changing this year and supplementing their existing prospects with some elite ones will go along way in improving their chances of becoming a contender.

Wolf was a Calder candidate and Parekh, before coming to the NHL, was a consensus top 5 prospect. That's better than a lot of teams do with 4 top 5 picks.

But yes, the Flames could absolutely use a very high end offensive forward prospect. I think some posters are making too big an issue of the centre vs. winger thing. Ovechkin and Kucherov both led teams to 4 of the last 8 Stanley cups with good but not franchise level centers.

And obviously dreaming at this point, but McKenna is the type of player that if Reschny develops into a solid 2 way centre who can put up 70 points, that's good enough. McKenna, while not a centre, does much of the work of a centre, in terms of carrying the puck and setting up plays.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This is the crux of where there is disagreement
Some see ample evidence, based on their actions, that they are re-building
Others don't see it that way, including explaining those actions as only being done against pending UFAs.

Not sure anyone is going to bring those two sides together.
But that's crux of it.

Interesting that Friedman's comments on the team desperately desiring not to be this bad basically defeat the notion that they are intentionally sucking.

All along I have said that we should listen to them, they aren't going to rebuild and aren't going to commit to doing it properly.

We've been fortunate to fall so flat on our faces this season, hopefully it forces their hand more but otherwise it does seem like they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into building the franchise through the top of the draft.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I see no evidence outside of trading one 2nd round pick that they are trying to be competitive in any shape or form.

But then I see 3 first round picks, 4 second round picks, 4 3rd round picks and a 4th, 5th, and 6th that have been added in deals that bring nothing back to help them really compete now and I think they are rebuilding.

I accept the argument that trading one pick is evidence that they are selling the farm to compete now but I then think acquiring 14 picks seems to counter that opinion.

For me the losing one pick and gaining a net 13 picks is not the ample evidence I need that they are trying to compete now and are using future assets to accomplish that goal. But that could just be me.

The Flame are also, all of a sudden, near the bottom of the league in terms of spending.

What the Flames didn't do was pull the plug on a team with some success last year. Honestly, probably the right decision. Better to let guys learn to compete than move up a few draft places in a weak draft.

I guess you could say the team could have purposely juggled that awful Monahan first round pick better, but that was also a nightmare of a deal that was very difficult to navigate.

[Vinny01]

End of the day I don’t care if the Flames are not committed to a tank build and in fact I welcome that but I do want them to realize that this year is on the cusp of being lost so there is an opportunity to lean into this down year and accumulate assets while making their own 1st rounder a potential franchise changing piece.

Next summer get aggressive and spend some cap or some assets on other core pieces but bring in another drafted foundational piece would be huge.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This is the crux of where there is disagreement
Some see ample evidence, based on their actions, that they are re-building
Others don't see it that way, including explaining those actions as only being done against pending UFAs.

Not sure anyone is going to bring those two sides together.
But that's crux of it.

That is fair. I think the litmus test is

1) Did rhe Flames make moves they didn't need to make
2) Are the Flames saying they are rebuilding.

Hwre is anothet test. If Hanafin, Lindholm, Andersson, etc were signed for 2 more seasons, does anyone believe the Flames would have moved them?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Interesting that Friedman's comments on the team desperately desiring not to be this bad basically defeat the notion that they are intentionally sucking.

All along I have said that we should listen to them, they aren't going to rebuild and aren't going to commit to doing it properly.

We've been fortunate to fall so flat on our faces this season, hopefully it forces their hand more but otherwise it does seem like they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into building the franchise through the top of the draft.

Everyone should decide for themselves but for me I'm putting more attention on their actions, not what the insiders say.

I think they were better last year than they thought they would be, and they decided to not pull the plug on the year nor did they do anything at the deadline to improve. They basically gave the team a chance to get in to the playoffs because they earned it.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by kehatch

That is fair. I think the litmus test is

1) Did rhe Flames make moves they didn't need to make
2) Are the Flames saying they are rebuilding.

Hwre is anothet test. If Hanafin, Lindholm, Andersson, etc were signed for 2 more seasons, does anyone believe the Flames would have moved them?

I think the key here is the Flames are not being reckless in their pursuit of winning and we should all be able to agree on that. It is evidenced by the ample cap space they have carried, draft picks acquired and made vs traded away and Conroy really showed restraint last summer when the team came off a surprise 96pts that included an incredibly strong run to end the year.

We know he tried to get better by chasing Miller and Byram this summer but he didnt get them or wasn’t willing to spend the price. I think he will be more aggressive in pursuing those players over the next 2 offseasons to ramp up for the new rink.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by kehatch

That is fair. I think the litmus test is

1) Did rhe Flames make moves they didn't need to make
2) Are the Flames saying they are rebuilding.

Hwre is anothet test. If Hanafin, Lindholm, Andersson, etc were signed for 2 more seasons, does anyone believe the Flames would have moved them?

Depends what they signed for. A decent cap hit would have made them quite attractive. And signing Hanifin doesn't mean "no rebuild" anyway.

If they were staying the course they wouldn't have traded Mangiapane IMO.

here's a question: Was San Jose still rebulding in July 2024? Or were they done?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

How wasn't it a expiring contract?

When it's the last year of the deal that's expiring. They traded him at the draft with 1 year left on his contract. I guess technically it had 1 year and 6 days left on it as contracts roll over on July 1st.

If the Oilers traded McD this offseason it would have been because he had an expiring contract. Isn't this the exact scenario when the Flames trade Toffoli?

What am i missing?

We are entitled to our own definitions but I see expiring contract as a player that will walk roughly 3 months after the trade deadline and is traded as a rental.

Not sure that fits the summer before in the truest sense.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

We are talking literal hours before the deal was in the last year with Toffoli. He was traded on June 28th and technically July 1st he was in the last year of his deal. Great use of technicality but a very weak point when that is the only example outside of Markstrom that you can pull

I personally see a difference between making a decision to trade a guy before the season even begins ... especially if the franchise can only try and be a bubble team according to many ... vs starting the season with the other guys on expiring contracts and moving them before the deadline.

[GioforPM]

It's news to me that a team is only rebuilding if they trade vets with contracts with over a year to go on them. When that gets you lesser returns in many cases.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I think the risk more the other way. If Conroy isn't being given the autonomy to do this the way he thinks it should be done - will he not want to extend.

For instance, if based on the start, he goes to ownership and says they need to lean into the bad season, and they say "no - you have to figure out how to turn this" he could say eff this.

There are only 32 GM jobs in the NHL. Vacancies don’t come around often, and Conroy hasn’t done enough in his short tenure to warrant being snapped up by another team. If he walks away from this job, I’d be surprised if he got another shot at a GM position (though he might get hired as an AGM).

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Everyone should decide for themselves but for me I'm putting more attention on their actions, not what the insiders say.

I think they were better last year than they thought they would be, and they decided to not pull the plug on the year nor did they do anything at the deadline to improve. They basically gave the team a chance to get in to the playoffs because they earned it.

I find it really hard to believe that Conroy thinks/wants to be competitive when they are sitting on such a pile of cap space. That would actually make him a bad GM.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I find it really hard to believe that Conroy thinks/wants to be competitive when they are sitting on such a pile of cap space. That would actually make him a bad GM.

If Conroy actually wanted to win he would have thrown 7.5 million a year at Gavrikov and let Bean walk. Then he could have rolled

Gavrikov Weegar
Bahl Andersson
Hanley Parekh

He also would definitely sign Andersson if he wanted to compete. He did not go after Gavrikov and is not really trying to sign Andersson because he is not trying to compete.

Bill Guerin is trying to compete, that is why he gave Karpizov an ungodly amount of money.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I personally see a difference between making a decision to trade a guy before the season even begins ... especially if the franchise can only try and be a bubble team according to many ... vs starting the season with the other guys on expiring contracts and moving them before the deadline.

I personally see it when the season is over how many years they haven left on their contract is how many seasons ahead they are signed for. Markstrom is the only guy Conroy has trade who had more than 1 year term left.

[CliffFletcher]

The Flames are trying to get younger. They aren’t deliberately trying to finish bottom five, the way some teams are. By all accounts, that recommendation would not go down well with Murray Edwards.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I find it really hard to believe that Conroy thinks/wants to be competitive when they are sitting on such a pile of cap space. That would actually make him a bad GM.

Yeah, a team that's trying to be competitive doesn't start the season with this much cap space and a backup who has a total of 6 previous NHL games played with a 2-3-1 record and a career 4.98 GAA and 0.870 SV%.

[moncton golden flames]

I can deal with the losing, as long the losing culture doesn't come with it. The minute the team and management are ok with being bad (see Sabres), then I am very concerned.