Making the playoffs or keeping our top-10 first round pick 2025?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CSharp

It'll be a win-win situation for the Flames if they win or lose most of their games after the break. I just hope it's not something in between.

Exactly - don't go 7-6. Either find a way to go 9-4, or go 4-9.

Pick a lane, one way or the other.

(and unfortunately, there is very little chance of 9-4)

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by CSharp

It'll be a win-win situation for the Flames if they win or lose most of their games after the break. I just hope it's not something in between.

They undoubtedly will not lose or win most of their games. It will almost certainly be something in between.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

How much talent is still tbd during the rest of the year.

The reason they were traded is that Philly did not believe the money they were being paid, or in the case of Frost, were likely to be paid ($9M total).

Their start, while not particularly relevant, has not been great. Calgary has lost 3 of their 4 games, they have 2 points in total , and they are a combined -7.

Yeah I think lots got ahead of themselves a little. We traded for a couple middle 6 forwards from a bottom half team, not top 6 forwards.

They're still young enough though and just got traded, so hopefully there's more there.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

The wild don’t have a Wolf in net. Parekh could be that superstar on the backend. Coronato has the potential (although Kaprizof is a stretch for his ceiling).

Important thing is that no team is built the same but patiently and smartly building, taking advantage of opportunities as they come up, and drafting well are almost always keys to success.

Seattle is new to the league and took the Vegas approach to building an expansion team. They have not been as successful, but they have not tanked either and they are loaded with good prospects as well.

Winnipeg
Carolina
Washington
Minnesota

Some of these teams are just as loaded as Chicago and SJ and have much better teams right now.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by kehatch

No. I want them to prioritize futures when making moves instead of trying to balance it with a win now approach. I would also like then to be more aggressive with trading veterans rather then waiting until we have no choice.

What veterans, other than Andersson, do you think they can move.
Remember - a bunch of NTCs

[Jiggy_12]

Whichever side we end up on - playoffs, mushy middle, bottom 10, this season should be looked at as a success. The lost draft pick is BT's fault and his alone. The current group can't be faulted for being put in this situation.

They have done everything they can to play way above their heads and the key guys (Zary, Wolf, Coronato, Bahl) have progressed as we have hoped. Not to mention all the prospects that have been killing it.

I'm not too fussed either way...we're in good hands

[traptor]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What veterans, other than Andersson, do you think they can move.
Remember - a bunch of NTCs

If the flames miss the playoffs this year, I won't be surprised if Rasmus wants to try something new, and some of these other vets start thinking about a change of scenery too.

Also Rasmus is -15 and on pace for 32 points this year. But then you throw in the cap increasing big time over the next couple years.
I really wonder if these complications make a contract signing this summer alot more difficult from both sides.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Exactly - don't go 7-6. Either find a way to go 9-4, or go 4-9.

Pick a lane, one way or the other.

(and unfortunately, there is very little chance of 9-4)

TBH 7-6 in that stretch would be pretty remarkable and would probably leave them in the playoff race.

It's more like don't go 3-5-5 or something like that - where you pick up enough loser points to not drop into the bottom 10, but also leave yourself behind the playoff pace.

Wins or regulation losses only please.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

TBH 7-6 in that stretch would be pretty remarkable and would probably leave them in the playoff race.

It's more like don't go 3-5-5 or something like that - where you pick up enough loser points to not drop into the bottom 10, but also leave yourself behind the playoff pace.

Wins or regulation losses only please.

If they go 3-5-5, they probably find themselves in 20th or 21st.

And too far out of the playoffs to hope to be able to rally back.

[Kidder]

The trade deadline is the day after we return from that road trip from hell.

Hoping for a run to the playoffs, but if we go 1-5-0 on the road trip that will hopefully make Connie’s decision easy and we can sell off a bit to help with the bottom 10 likelihood.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The 13 game stretch after the break will be the most telling:

vs Sharks
@ Capitals
@ Lightning
@ Panthers
@ Hurricanes (Back to Back)
@ Flyers
@ Stars
vs Canadiens
vs Canucks
vs Avalanche
@ Maple Leafs
@ Rangers (Back to Back)
@ Devils

That schedule is a murderers row and really they could easily drop 4 points

I agree and the "murderers row" label is perfect. I had been holding off looking past the trade deadline as I felt that was a significant milestone.. but the whole month of March looks brutal.

But, just to add to your list here it is to the end of March:
vs Sharks
@ Capitals
@ Lightning (end of Feb)
@ Panthers
@ Hurricanes (Back to Back)
@ Flyers
@ Stars
----Trade Deadline----
vs Canadiens
vs Canucks
vs Avalanche
@ Maple Leafs
@ Rangers (Back to Back)
@ Devils
@ Islanders
vs Kraken
vs Stars
@ Oilers
@ Avalanche

It is a lot of games in one month (15), a lot of road games (10) and a lot of playoff teams (10) and no real easy games to break it up (those are in April).

The Canucks also have 15 games in March but only 8 on the road and they have 6 playoff teams. I would also argue that their 6-game road trip looks way easier than ours.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What veterans, other than Andersson, do you think they can move.
Remember - a bunch of NTCs

Andersson and Coleman would be the two guys to look at this season. Kadri to if you can move him, but that might not be possible. Obviously Vladar, but that's a low return trade at this point.

We could have likely traded several UFAs earlier last season as well. I can't remember where the article was, but it referenced several NHL execs assessment of the Flames. In general it called out the consistent mediocrity, waiting to long to get max value on pending UFA trades, and the attempt to sign Lindholm and Hanafin as criticism.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Coleman has a ntc (at least partial)
So does Kadri

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Brad sure handed those NTCs out like candy.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Brad sure handed those NTCs out like candy.

the Flames do not have an inordinate amount of NTCs

[SuperMatt18]

The only NTC I'm not a super big fan of him giving out is Andersson TBH.

Huberdeau, Kadri, Coleman, Weegar...those types of deals to avoid UFA or for a UFA are always going to come with a NTC.

But the Andersson one actually annoys me - he was a 23 year old with 134 Career NHL games when he signed that contract, and had only had a 20 point season in his career to that point.

I'd argue $4.55M was a good contract for him at that point, but wasn't even really a discount, it was a bit of a bet on it being a great long term deal...which it was. But really there was no reason Andersson's deal at that time should have required a NTC.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Is it not safe to assume that without the ntc the cap hit would have been higher?
They aren’t just giving them out for free

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The only NTC I'm not a super big fan of him giving out is Andersson TBH.

Huberdeau, Kadri, Coleman, Weegar...those types of deals to avoid UFA or for a UFA are always going to come with a NTC.

But the Andersson one actually annoys me - he was a 23 year old with 134 Career NHL games when he signed that contract, and had only had a 20 point season in his career to that point.

I'd argue $4.55M was a good contract for him at that point, but wasn't even really a discount, it was a bit of a bet on it being a great long term deal...which it was. But really there was no reason Andersson's deal at that time should have required a NTC.

To put it into context, would you give Wolf, Zary or Coronato a modified NTC if it meant bringing down the average annual value or increasing the number of years?

There's probably a fair to decent chance that at least one and maybe all three will have similar protections if they sign deals longer than 3 years. It's pretty typical for young players considered core to have at least back end protection on longer term deals.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

To put it into context, would you give Wolf, Zary or Coronato a modified NTC if it meant bringing down the average annual value or increasing the number of years?

There's probably a fair to decent chance that at least one and maybe all three will have similar protections if they sign deals longer than 3 years. It's pretty typical for young players considered core to have at least back end protection on longer term deals.

Depends how much cap savings it is.

Is it saving you $250k a season? then no I wouldn't. I'd rather pay a bit more in cap than I would limit my future flexibility to move the player.

Now if it's like a $750k per season discount over the course of the 8 years or something then sure maybe, but really all depends how much I'm saving.

Ivan Provorov signed his deal 2 months earlier on a 6 year, $4.725M deal, he was a top 10 pick who was the same age as Andersson, already had a 41 point season, and he didn't get any trade protection.

Which came in pretty handy when the Flyers moved him to Columbus for a 1st, 2nd, and Sean Walker. If he had even a 6 team NTC on that list it's likely Columbus was possibly on it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Whatever happens this season, happens. Whether they make the playoffs (hooray!) or end up with a top 10 pick (hooray!) or finish in the middle (boo!). They still walk out of this season with their young guys taking a step forward and 2 first round picks for the upcoming draft. There is a lot of reasons to be excited about this team, period.


As for 'tanking' - if you are going to do it, next year is the year to do it anyway. I am not convinced that Conroy's plan was to really be competitive this season anyway. Can the Flames repeat this next season? Also, repeat what exactly? We don't know how the Flames will finish. I wonder what Conroy does this off-season. Maybe he improves the team and really does intend to rebuild on the fly, or maybe he knocks out an important peg or two (or even does it at the trade deadline this year?), and the team finishes lower in the standings next season by design. Maybe the Flames have a worse defence next season than this season, with just as much trouble scoring. Wolf won't factor-in so much.



What we know is that Conroy wants to keep the culture going and have this team competing hard most nights, and Huska - along with leadership team - has made sure that is happening. Conroy is also not going to make short-term 'win now' moves either. He has stated numerous times that he wants to build through the draft, so I don't think you will see him trade much in the way of futures for win-now players. Frost and Farabee were good depth adds that should be here through the rebuild and probably beyond.



I am just going to give this an open mind - let's see how Conroy handles the trade deadline, the draft, and what moves he makes this off-season. No need to panic, or get angry, or get into random heated arguments.