Get Chiasson OFF the Gaudreau line!

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

He may not have the best hands, but Chiasson does more positive things than Brouwer outside of power play scoring. If you combined the strengths of those two you might even have a competent 2nd liner.

ricardodw-ing

[Enoch Root]

re Iginla...

He is a shadow of his former self, without question.

And there are undoubtedly better options out there.

But Iginla can finish. And Chiasson can't.

Gaudreau needs some players to play with, in order to utilize his skills. Iggy can do that. Chiasson can't.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Where's that number from? Iggy makes 5.3. 50% retained is $2.6.

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Just confirming the numbers again:

The Flames would need $1,204,301 (pro-rated from $5,333,333) of cap space at the day of the deadline if they wanted to fit Iginla in under the cap. Factoring in that Smid's LTIR relief would also be pro-rated and cannot cover the full difference, we'd need to move someone with an total AAV of ~ 2 million.

However, salary retention is certainly a possibility - Iginla's actual dollars paid this year is 500k lower than his first two years, and he's an expiring contract, which may make owners more agreeable in eating a portion of the remaining few months to make it moveable.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That all seems right more or less.

It really doesn't matter what the exact number is. With all the action surrounding the expansion draft, buyers and sellers at the deadline, and teams ability to take on salary.... your assertion that Calgary

"can't fit him under the cap"


Was flat out incorrect.

I'm done with discussing this with you now, as I've said three times what you're doing is trying to get me to waste my time coming up with a trade you think makes sense.

I don't care to do that, because I don't think anything you're saying makes sense, and was rooted in just trying to nix the idea because you don't like it. I couldn't care less if a specific, logical trade proposal isn't suggested to you on a message board that's to your liking. It's irrelevant.

For the last time, there are multiple scenarios that could play out that would make it rather easy to fit in an expiring salary of that nature at the deadline, regardless of who it is. To suggest otherwise is just being ignorant.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

First of all, I agree that it is pretty much impossible in a cap world to have 6 legitimate top 6 forwards. No team does. You have to make do with one or two guys that are less skilled, to fill a role.

I said somewhere else that this works when the legit top 6 guys are playing well. So when Perry and Getzlaf are playing well you can have Penner on the line filling a role (so well he makes Edmonton drool). Unfortunately it hasn't happened that way.

Gaudreau-Backlund-Frolik would be an incredibly dangerous line. It's just too bad it would take MT out of that spot. You'd end up with something like:

Gaudreau-Backlund-Frolik
Versteeg-Monahan-Brouwer
Tkachuk-Bennett-Ferland (at each of their best this is a great line, at their worst, a bad one)
Hamilton/Hathaway/Bouma-Stajan

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

I'm done with discussing this with you now, as I've said three times what you're doing is trying to get me to waste my time coming up with a trade you think makes sense.

I don't care to do that, because I don't think anything you're saying makes sense, and was rooted in just trying to nix the idea because you don't like it. I couldn't care less if a specific, logical trade proposal isn't suggested to you on a message board that's to your liking. It's irrelevant.

For the last time, there are multiple scenarios that could play out that would make it rather easy to fit in an expiring salary of that nature at the deadline, regardless of who it is. To suggest otherwise is just being ignorant.

You can't come up with a trade proposal that makes sense to you, let alone me. I'm not asking for a scenario that makes sense to me. I'm asking for a trade scenario period - not one that I agree with. No one has done that. If it's so easy, why not?

[calgaryblood]

Gaudreau doesn't need a finisher on his line. He needs a Center who is above average defensively.

In case no one has noticed it is the defence on that line which has been lacking, not sure how Iginla helps that. They've been hemmed in their own zone so much and Iginla doesn't improve that. Only place Iginla could contribute is on the pp and our pp has been great lately so wouldn't want to mess with that either.

Just say no to Iginla.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You can't come up with a trade proposal that makes sense to you, let alone me. I'm not asking for a scenario that makes sense to me. I'm asking for a trade scenario period - not one that I agree with. No one has done that. If it's so easy, why not?

What does it matter?

The bottom line, is that we could make any number of moves to fit in salary at the deadline, regardless of who or what it is. It's done every season by multiple teams close to the cap.

So you suggesting something simply "can't be fit under the cap" as a non starter was a waste of time. Just like it is continuing with this discussion.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Gaudreau doesn't need a finisher on his line. He needs a Center who is above average defensively.

In case no one has noticed it is the defence on that line which has been lacking, not sure how Iginla helps that. They've been hemmed in their own zone so much and Iginla doesn't improve that. Only place Iginla could contribute is on the pp and our pp has been great lately so wouldn't want to mess with that either.

Just say no to Iginla.

They are generating nothing offensively. Not from a lack of zone entries, but from a lack of communication - there is literally zero chemistry between Gaudreau and Chiasson.

Gaudreau is our best offensive player. But he's generating nothing. That is partially on him, but it is largely due to the fact that the line does not work together at all. And Chiasson is the primary reason for that, IMO.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

What does it matter?

The bottom line, is that we could make any number of moves to fit in salary at the deadline, regardless of who or what it is. It's done every season by multiple teams close to the cap.

So you suggesting something simply "can't be fit under the cap" as a non starter was a waste of time. Just like it is continuing with this discussion.

The reason it's not easy is that to move bodies out, you need to replace them. Bouma makes the most sense because he's replaceable, as has been seen. If you, by some miracle, move Wideman, you need a #4 D which means you have to spend money, which defeats the purpose. Stajan makes enough, but then you need another C. If the Flames are doing this in a PO push it's probably got to be a veteran C.

So, yeah it's possible, probably only for Bouma because he's the only guy with significant salary that you can move without needing a costly replacement, And then you need to add the part that makes Colorado even want to do it.

These "multiple moves" you speak of are actually quite rare.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You can't come up with a trade proposal that makes sense to you, let alone me. I'm not asking for a scenario that makes sense to me. I'm asking for a trade scenario period - not one that I agree with. No one has done that. If it's so easy, why not?

Here... go nuts


Brandon Bollig
2017 2nd (conditional upon the Flames making the finals)
2017 4th



Jarome Iginla (20% retained)

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They are generating nothing offensively. Not from a lack of zone entries, but from a lack of communication - there is literally zero chemistry between Gaudreau and Chiasson.

Gaudreau is our best offensive player. But he's generating nothing. That is partially on him, but it is largely due to the fact that the line does not work together at all. And Chiasson is the primary reason for that, IMO.

He generated a wide open net just last night that Chiasson missed

[home_sweet_dome]

The in house solution is to bring up Janko and move Bennett to the wing. Bennett not ready to play C yet and moving him to wing doesn't mean he couldn't be moved back to C one day.

Gaudreau - Monahan - Brouwer
Tkachuk - Backlund - Frolik
Bennett - Janko - Versteeg
Ferland - Stajan - Hathaway

extras Bouma, Hamilton, and i guess Chiasson but any of them could be traded/waived/shot into the sun, whatever.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Here... go nuts


Brandon Bollig
2017 2nd (conditional upon the Flames making the finals)
2017 4th



Jarome Iginla (20% retained)

It's a scenario all right. I'm not sure Bollig makes enough. I'm pretty sure they'd jump at Bollig though. Not sure why they didn't grab him for free at waiver time.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They are generating nothing offensively. Not from a lack of zone entries, but from a lack of communication - there is literally zero chemistry between Gaudreau and Chiasson.

Gaudreau is our best offensive player. But he's generating nothing. That is partially on him, but it is largely due to the fact that the line does not work together at all. And Chiasson is the primary reason for that, IMO.

I agree with this 100%. I just don't think Iginla is the answer.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I agree with this 100%. I just don't think Iginla is the answer.

Fair enough - I don't think he's the best answer either, but a better one than Chiasson for that line

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Gaudreau doesn't need a finisher on his line. He needs a Center who is above average defensively.

In case no one has noticed it is the defence on that line which has been lacking, not sure how Iginla helps that. They've been hemmed in their own zone so much and Iginla doesn't improve that. Only place Iginla could contribute is on the pp and our pp has been great lately so wouldn't want to mess with that either.

Just say no to Iginla.

Gaudreau absolutely needs a finisher on his line. In his rookie season he had Hudler and a sophomore Monahan on his line who combined to be one of the best lines in the game at the time. None of those guys were defensive stalwarts either. These guys formed incredible chemistry especially on the rush and as it stands at the moment, it seems these days Johnny is trying to do everything himself because he doesn't have reliable line mates to create space or generate openings for themselves or for him.

[MarkGio]

Harley let Gaudreau, Monahan and Hudler create. They could do whatever they wanted in the offensive zone and it sparked practicing plays and finding their spots. But Gulutzan has been about structure and it's showing on the score sheet.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Harley let Gaudreau, Monahan and Hudler create. They could do whatever they wanted in the offensive zone and it sparked practicing plays and finding their spots. But Gulutzan has been about structure and it's showing on the score sheet.

Your quote is 100% spot on in my opinion and its not just with Johnny this year. Brodie and Gio haven't had the same zip or flow to their games this year under G.G. I understand the need for a structured game to improve defensively but this is also affecting the scoring chances and the offense as well.

I remember reading a Players Tribune piece on this exact thing. The players today have more skill than ever before in a lot of ways but these structured systems kill the fun and creativity out. Here is a link to the article and below is a quote from it. Read the article as its fantastic.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/mir...hockey-russia/

"The problem is more philosophical and starts way before players get to the NHL. It’s easier to destroy than to create. As a coach, it’s easier to tell your players to suffocate the opposing team and not turn the puck over. There are still players whose imagination and creativity capture the Soviet spirit — Johnny Gaudreau in Calgary, Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews in Chicago just to name a few. However, they are becoming exceptions to the rule. Many young players who are intelligent and can see the game four moves ahead are not valued. They’re told “simple, simple, simple.”"

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

re Iginla...

He is a shadow of his former self, without question.

And there are undoubtedly better options out there.

But Iginla can finish. And Chiasson can't.

Gaudreau needs some players to play with, in order to utilize his skills. Iggy can do that. Chiasson can't.

Since Iginla trails Chaisson by two goals this year, I would say Iginla wouldn't be helping much either. Iginla is done and is a worse option than Chaisson. At least Chaisson gets to the net and is great in front of the goaltender. We haven't had a player like that in a long time. Frankly, I think the problem is with Gaudreau's center. They have been crap this year and it shows. Neither is going to the open ice created by the other two. Bennett and Monahan have left a lot to be desired.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Fair enough - I don't think he's the best answer either, but a better one than Chiasson for that line

Must be tough for Gaudreau playing for a coach that doesn't seem to understand his talents. Maybe the coach is not worried about that and wants him to contribute in other ways, but keeping Chiasson on that line when its not working is a head scratcher.