[Signing] Canes sign Nakladal (1yr, $600k) - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

GioforPM · 10-09-2016, 11:27 AM

Nakladal and Frk = two clever moves my the Canes.

polak · 10-09-2016, 11:32 AM

Seriously, the Flames didn't think he was worth that?

Ugh not impressed. Nakladal would've been our 5th best defenseman.

Treliving is good at signing the marquee players (Depending on how this Gaudreau debacle goes) but he has made some very odd choices with depth players.

Cycling76er · 10-09-2016, 11:33 AM

Happy he found an NHL home. Sad it was not with the Flames. Best of luck Nak!

CSharp · 10-09-2016, 11:34 AM

Dang, I was hoping he'd come back with the Flames for another season. If only the Flames can get rid of Wideman and his contract!

calgaryblood · 10-09-2016, 11:37 AM

I don't get why the Flames weren't all over this.

MrMastodonFarm · 10-09-2016, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

Seriously, the Flames didn't think he was worth that?

Ugh not impressed. Nakladal would've been our 5th best defenseman.

Treliving is good at signing the marquee players (Depending on how this Gaudreau debacle goes) but he has made some very odd choices with depth players.

Gaudreau is probably holding up potential signings like this.

GranteedEV · 10-09-2016, 11:57 AM

Nakladal 2017 When Wideman is gone!

MarkGio · 10-09-2016, 12:06 PM

Yeah I would've preferred Nakladal over Grossman any day.

JiriHrdina · 10-09-2016, 12:08 PM

They don't shoot the same side so likely a factor

Roof-Daddy · 10-09-2016, 12:13 PM

Brodie plays the right side, so because we have Hamilton, Wideman and Engelland all also as RHD there was no way the Flames were going to bring back Nakladal.

I liked him, but he's a depth player and losing him isn't going to be the difference between this team being successful or not. If it was the difference then this team has bigger problems than an AHL/NHL tweener Dman.

Sylvanfan · 10-09-2016, 12:14 PM

I think people's memories of Nakladal are pretty exaggerated. He's a dime a dozen defenceman with minimal upside. Of course you prefer him at this dollar figure to Wideman. But at this point I think you are stuck with Wideman unless you were willing to buy him out in the summer or trade him for Dustin Brown.

But next year I hope someone else in the Flames system is ready to step in as a better option than Nakladal. If not Flames scouting should be called to the carpet.

Good for Nakladal, but it's not a catastrophic loss. But if they do keep Grossman I might question why even if it has no relation to Nakladal.

polak · 10-09-2016, 12:25 PM

If Nakladal is such a dime a dozen player than why don't we have 3 of him to fill out our bottom 3?

He would've been an upgrade on Kulak, Wotherspoon, Grossman, Engelland, Wideman and possibly even Jokkipaka depending on how he does with a bigger sample size.

For 600K on a one year deal, there's no way you're convincing me that letting him walk was a good decision when were playing Grossman, Wideman and Kulak in our bottom pairing.

GranteedEV · 10-09-2016, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If Nakladal is such a dime a dozen player than why don't we have 3 of him to fill out our bottom 3?

He would've been an upgrade on Kulak, Wotherspoon, Grossman, Engelland, Wideman and possibly even Jokkipaka depending on how he does with a bigger sample size.

For 600K on a one year deal, there's no way you're convincing me that letting him walk was a good decision when were playing Grossman, Wideman and Kulak in our bottom pairing.

Kulak has more upside than Nakladal fwiw.

Sylvanfan · 10-09-2016, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If Nakladal is such a dime a dozen player than why don't we have 3 of him to fill out our bottom 3?

He would've been an upgrade on Kulak, Wotherspoon, Grossman, Engelland, Wideman and possibly even Jokkipaka depending on how he does with a bigger sample size.

You are bring pretty over dramatic. You're in love with the salary not the player.

Grossman does not have a contract right now. Kulak, Wotherspoon are close to Nakladal, younger, and have 2 way deals. Engelland and Wideman have heavy deals that are tough to shed. Jokkipaka?? Disagree, I like him much more than Nakladal.

Jiggy · 10-09-2016, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If Nakladal is such a dime a dozen player than why don't we have 3 of him to fill out our bottom 3?

He would've been an upgrade on Kulak, Wotherspoon, Grossman, Engelland, Wideman and possibly even Jokkipaka depending on how he does with a bigger sample size.

For 600K on a one year deal, there's no way you're convincing me that letting him walk was a good decision when were playing Grossman, Wideman and Kulak in our bottom pairing.

Lol. You're making Nakladal sound like he came in and played lights out. He played ok when he came up. Don't forget he was playing on a team that was already out of the playoffs and had no pressure.

btimbit · 10-09-2016, 12:39 PM

Why do so many people seem so sure that we'll sign Grossman now?

N-E-B · 10-09-2016, 12:42 PM

Nakladal is being extremely overrated in this thread. He's a decent #7 guy, nothing more nothing less.

Enoch Root · 10-09-2016, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If Nakladal is such a dime a dozen player than why don't we have 3 of him to fill out our bottom 3?

He would've been an upgrade on Kulak, Wotherspoon, Grossman, Engelland, Wideman and possibly even Jokkipaka depending on how he does with a bigger sample size.

For 600K on a one year deal, there's no way you're convincing me that letting him walk was a good decision when were playing Grossman, Wideman and Kulak in our bottom pairing.

He is not better than Jokipakka or Engelland.

He is definitely better than Kulak and Wotherspoon right now. But they have more potential, and either one or none of them will be on the roster right now anyway.

Wideman is a different case. WIth his salary, he needs to play. And no, Nakladal isn't better than him - just cheaper.

I really like Nakladal and wish the Flames had signed him. I would rather he be the #7 than Grossman. But let's not cloud the facts with hyperbole.

bigrangy · 10-09-2016, 12:52 PM

Nakladal is absolutely better than Jokipakka and Engelland.

Jokipakka has a great hockey name and that's pretty much it. He's not great at generating offense and he's not great at suppressing shots against. There's a reason he was a throw in in a deadline deal.

Engelland has his ups and downs, and is a capable #6. But you're all kidding yourselves if you don't cringe every time a forechecker is rushing him down in the defensive zone. He's no Sbisa, but he has absolutely no break-out ability and is responsible for a lot of zone time against.

Nakladal is an effective puck mover, who actually played with an edge, and on top of that, he was actually useful on the PP.

Brad keeps making the wrong moves with depth guys. I know that Wideman/Smid/Engelland/Stajan's contracts prevent some moves from being made, but having Jooris, Byron, Schlemko, and Nakladal on our 4th line/bottom pairing would lead to a much improved level of play than having Bollig, Chiasson/Hamilton/Vey, Wideman/Engelland, and Kulak.

Brad has come out and said that they want to play a puck possession game, and yet, when it comes down to it the bottom of the roster is filled with plugs that can't move the puck up the ice at the expense of other plugs that can. A possession game can be played by every line, the only difference is that the 4th line will probably have no finish.

ricardodw · 10-09-2016, 01:15 PM

Not hard to see how the 6-4 230 lb Grossman who was a top PK d-man for his career and might fill a bigger need on the Flames than a smaller Nadakal who has a hard shot as his biggest asset.

His hard shot still leaves him at the #5 d man on the powerplay.

Nadakal did not have 1 second of PK time on the Flames last year.