[Rumour] McKenzie: "conceivable" that James Neal could be moved. Lots of TJ Brodie trade talk

[FlameX]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

I agree that we should keep him for one more year.
The problem is that if he has another year like the last, we won't be able to trade him; he'll be a buy-out candidate.
Right now, there are probably some teams that might be willing to gamble that he had an off year, but those possible suitors definitely won't be interested in taking the gamble that he just had two off years.

There's no really good solution unfortunately, but I think patience may be the best course.

I actually never thought of that situation. I think there would be some desperate teams that would still want to trade for him IF he did have another bad year, but realistically I agree with you. I don't think anyone would want to trade for him.

I'd be willing to take a gamble and see if Neal will produce.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

A little too optimistic in my opinion. I 100% agree on Brodie but not sure a team will give assets and not send back salary in a Frolik or Stone deal.

Frolik had 16g in 65 games. A lot of teams would give up a later pick for him. Stone is a solid depth Dman, we wouldn't have to retain salary IMO... look at recent deals, there is a market for him.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Frolik had 16g in 65 games. A lot of teams would give up a later pick for him. Stone is a solid depth Dman, we wouldn't have to retain salary IMO... look at recent deals, there is a market for him.

I will believe it when I see it. With the free agent class this year and teams facing cap crunches the flames will not easily move 4.3 and 3.5M cap hits b

If the Flames can dump the $12.45M of Brodie, Frolik, and Stone without taking salary back or sending sweeteners I will be shocked. All 3 players have some form of NTC as well that complicates things.

Personally I think Brodie is moved for picks and I could see picks packaged with Frolik for a top 6 forward similar to the attempted Zucker trade

[SuperMatt18]

Frolik and Stone are likely better moves after free agency than on draft day.

Teams will be able to look at the UFA market see what is available and see what the prices are. With UFA players are usually looking for term, 1 year of Frolik or Stone may be appealing.

Frolik especially since he has only 1 year at a $4.3M cap hit but only $3M of real money for budget teams.

He had 16 goals and 34 points in 65 GP - good enough for 0.52 PPG.

There are only 14 free agents with better than 0.52 PPG last year:

Panarin
Duchene
Pavelski
Zuccarello
Nyquist
Dzingel
Thornton
Williams
Lee
Connolly
Ferland
Vanek
Chiasson
Johansson

Outside of Vanek/Chiasson I doubt any of those guys are taking 1 year deals for less than $5M dollars.

And then on defense the UFA class just isn't that deep or good. So a team may take a flyer on 1 year of Stone (although i think you may need to retain $1M with him).

Edler (Likely to re-sign in Vancouver)
Gardiner
Myers (Want to keep him in Winnipeg)
Stralman
Kronwall
Gunnarsson
Hainsey
Engelland
Methot

Not really an elite Free Agent class for d-men.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

It's very disappointing that Neal pretty much took the year off. It affects the attitude of other players on his line, it takes a spot from somebody who could be playing and developing. During the playoffs you're going to be motivated by the guys around you but if some players don't bring it ,it is that much harder to advance. Like Bouwer, Neal got too much leeway. I don't know if it is because they were guys BT invested in but they took advantage.

Brad does a good job and talks about doing his due diligence when searching for players. I just don't understand why he keeps making the same mistake and keeps finding a player that sets us back and in some cases handicaps us either financially or on the ice. It would be really interesting to hear what some people think Brad could, should have done differently; or why he keep making the same mistake. That probably deserves a different thread, I don't know.

It's pretty simple, stop signing middle 6 forwards who are 29+ years old to 3+ years for $3+ million unless they are strong utility players like Ryan.

Signing Raymond, Brouwer and Neal as aging players to play top 6 roles when they either weren't really ideal top 6 players ever in their careers (Raymond, Brouwer) or aren't the best skaters (Neal) is foolish.

I felt the same way when all 3 were signed, feeling we would soon regret it. My level of anger varied but in each case I knew it was a mistake.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I will believe it when I see it. With the free agent class this year and teams facing cap crunches the flames will not easily move 4.3 and 3.5M cap hits b

If the Flames can dump the $12.45M of Brodie, Frolik, and Stone without taking salary back or sending sweeteners I will be shocked. All 3 players have some form of NTC as well that complicates things.

Personally I think Brodie is moved for picks and I could see picks packaged with Frolik for a top 6 forward similar to the attempted Zucker trade

Frolik was included in the proposed Zucker trade because of the Flames desire to move out $'s, not because he was adding value to the deal from Minny's perspective IMO.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

It's pretty simple, stop signing middle 6 forwards who are 29+ years old to 3+ years for $3+ million unless they are strong utility players like Ryan.

Signing Raymond, Brouwer and Neal as aging players to play top 6 roles when they either weren't really ideal top 6 players ever in their careers (Raymond, Brouwer) or aren't the best skaters (Neal) is foolish.

I felt the same way when all 3 were signed, feeling we would soon regret it. My level of anger varied but in each case I knew it was a mistake.

Personally I don't think it's really an age thing, I honestly believe it has more to do with the situation (linemates, minutes, PP). I refuse to believe that James Neal just lost his ability to play hockey after a few months. He had a good playoffs all the way until June and then in September he looked like trash. I don't buy that one bit.

I've honestly had enough of our management group looking at support players who've made a career leaching off of better players. I mean anyone can succeed if put in the right situation. Just look at Alex Chiasson last season. Goes from a 4th liner, in and out of the line up to a 20 goal scorer.

At the end of the day, for me, I'm ok with signing players in their 30's as long as they have a history of driving a line. If they have the right skill set of making plays, creating their own shot and generating something out of nothing, I'm all in. Enough of these players who need someone to get them the puck in order to score. They just end up being expensive mistakes in the end.

[calgarygeologist]

Vancouver needs defensive help and apparently they might be willing to trade their first round pick. Is Brodie good enough to get that first round pick? Brodie plus other assets for the pick?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Vancouver needs defensive help and apparently they might be willing to trade their first round pick. Is Brodie good enough to get that first round pick? Brodie plus other assets for the pick?

Brodie+Jankowski for 10?

Brodie+26 for 10 and 41?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Brodie+Jankowski for 10?

Brodie+26 for 10 and 41?

I think the second deal makes more sense. But are you saying that 26 is worth more than Jankowski? I guess I can buy that.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by FlameX

I would keep Neal for one more year. If Neal doesn't produce then that's when we trade him.

I would't mind trading Brodie. He has cost us a few "key" games whether it be during the regular season or during the ploffs. We also have up and coming Defensemen who can make the flames roster or take his place.

Andersson can move up and Valimaki can slide into the roster plus we have that new D-man we signed from Europe.

There's likely no trade to be made now, but if he doesn't produce two years in a row there is definitely no trade to be made. Likely not even with a brutal contract coming back.

If we keep him and he sinks twice it's a costly buy out while we're supposed to be contending with this core. That would be a major failing.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think the second deal makes more sense. But are you saying that 26 is worth more than Jankowski? I guess I can buy that.

Jankowski on his own is not worth a first round pick.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Brodie+Jankowski for 10?



Brodie+26 for 10 and 41?

There are some very good players available this year at 10. One year of Brodie won’t headline a deal for that pick.

A d-man like Valimaki might though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

There are some very good players available this year at 10. One year of Brodie won’t headline a deal for that pick.

A d-man like Valimaki might though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Valimaki would go top 5 against this draft class given his current development. About as untouchable as you get.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Personally I don't think it's really an age thing, I honestly believe it has more to do with the situation (linemates, minutes, PP). I refuse to believe that James Neal just lost his ability to play hockey after a few months. He had a good playoffs all the way until June and then in September he looked like trash. I don't buy that one bit.

I've honestly had enough of our management group looking at support players who've made a career leaching off of better players. I mean anyone can succeed if put in the right situation. Just look at Alex Chiasson last season. Goes from a 4th liner, in and out of the line up to a 20 goal scorer.

At the end of the day, for me, I'm ok with signing players in their 30's as long as they have a history of driving a line. If they have the right skill set of making plays, creating their own shot and generating something out of nothing, I'm all in. Enough of these players who need someone to get them the puck in order to score. They just end up being expensive mistakes in the end.

Firstly, while I agree with most of this, I have to say this is hilarious to me coming from a poster named Classic Sniper, which is essentially what Neal is.

On a more serious note... for me the approach should fall somewhere in the middle. I agree the Flames need to target players in free agency that are able to drive a line, drive possession etc. Ultimately though almost every goal that is scored comes from someone getting someone else the puck, so it’s not as simple as saying avoid players that need someone to get them the puck to score a goal. Everybody needs someone to get them the puck to score, the puck touches a lot of sticks before scoring chances happen

I think the problem with Neal is not that he’s a pure sniper and the Flames should avoid that. I think Neal’s problem was that he’s a pure sniper who didn’t have the legs to get into scoring positions last year quick enough.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

There are some very good players available this year at 10. One year of Brodie won’t headline a deal for that pick.

A d-man like Valimaki might though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Canucks are trading back in scenario 2. Giving up their 2nd and moving back 16 spots isn’t a steep price for Brodie seems fair to me.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The Canucks are trading back in scenario 2. Giving up their 2nd and moving back 16 spots isn’t a steep price for Brodie seems fair to me.

It's a huge price to pay. The different in this draft from 10 to 26 is night and day.

[blankall]

My thoughts on Neal last season:

1. He really was snake bitten/had no confidence for much of the season. He hit many posts. Missed many easy opportunities. He was much better post January though.

2. He has a very limited role. He can drive the net and put pucks in. He's slow. He's not skilled. He doesn't have an especially great shot. He's a bit of a sniper, but he doesn't have the big shot like Ovechkin, or even Monahan. He'd be hopeless on the 2nd line, and Lindholm is much better on the 1st. There were definitely points where he and Bennett had chemistry, but a lot of the time it was like watching the blind lead the blind. Both players had hands of stone at points.

3. Players don't lose their ability to play hockey over an off season, but they do get complacent. That's how James Neal looked to me, at least for the first half. He had signed his retirement contract. It wasn't until he realized how bad things were for him, and how unpleasant things could get for him, that he started playing again.

I would be shocked if anyone showed interest. But you never know.

Now is the time to move Brodie though. Quite frankly, I see Andersson and Valimaki both as smarter d-men than Brodie. Both will end up just as good skaters. Brodie is a FA next season we cannot possibly retain. Time to sell somewhat high.

[jlh2640]

Cant see anyone taking on Neal. Brodie and Frolik yep

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Jankowski on his own is not worth a first round pick.

Well, Brodie is part of both deals too, of course.