[News] Flames place Shinkaruk, Poirier, and Wotherspoon on waivers UPD: All 3 clear

[Stud_McCool]

I guess we've finally used up the gift that was Tom Erixon.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

It's ok to admit that the Canucks got the better of the deal...it happens from time to time. Judging by his game here, there is no way Shinkaruk even gets considered to play 17 min a game that Granlund saw last year.

What does that have to do with your assertion Granlund would currently fit in our bottom six?

I don't think anyone would question the deal worked out better for Vancouver.

That doesn't change the fact it was trading two very minor assets for one another, and both wouldn't crack our roster as it sits now.

[calgaryblood]

Why wouldn't Granlund crack the roster? He could be a winger and a great 4th liner. He'd be an upgrade over Stajan that's for sure.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Yeah because double digit goal scoring great PKers are a bad thing to have on the 4th line LW... Should load up on Tanner Glass and Luke Gazdic types rawr toughness

Right because that's exactly what I said.

We have a list of forwards good on the PK. It doesn't justify getting smaller and softer on our bottom line. Not to mention he wouldn't see the same minutes and that he'd be relegated to a position he's proven to be less adept at.

[Love]

Shinkaruk wouldn't have scored 19 in Vancouver. It was a mediocre (but not bad) deal for us because we took a flyer on potential and bought more waiver exemption years. And a good deal for Vancouver because they turned an AHL tweener into a middle six scorer with instincts and a nice shot.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Love

Shinkaruk wouldn't have scored 19 in Vancouver. It was a mediocre (but not bad) deal for us because we took a flyer on potential and bought more waiver exemption years. And a good deal for Vancouver because they turned an AHL tweener into a middle six scorer with instincts and a nice shot.

Granlund wasn't an ahl tweener, he was an nhler and still is.

If he was still a Flame the tone of the comments would be much different.

[Love]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Granlund wasn't an ahl tweeter, he was an nhler and still is.

If he was still a Flame the tone of the comments would be much different.

The tweener comment is referring to Hunter

[Gizmo]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

I'm sure i'll get slammed for this, but i must ask....

Any reason to question our AHL system, regarding the growth and development of the prospects going thru our AHL system?

Some may point to Jankowski as the counter argument, but i suppose his NCAA experience has played a large role in preparing him for pro hockey.

This is a few camps in a row where our AHL prospects just simply don't seem like they have progressed to a point where they can actually play in the NHL....

Cant expect to pull off a miracle out of camp like the lightning and just ice an entire line from your AHL squad and think they'll all translate to the NHL game.

I think it should also be re-evaluated every time new management steps into the equation. When Treliving came to this team, Wotherspoon was thought of as that prospect that was knocking on the door. We currently have two prospects who Treliving drafted that have shown noticeable growth in Stockton and are arguably above Wotherspoon on the depth chart today.

The Shinkaruk trade I wouldn't necessarily chalk up as an AHL team's failure to develop as much as just a prospect with a lower ceiling. The Canucks of all teams gave up on him after all and we took him on as a project; without many returns so far.

As mentioned in a post above, many prospects simply don't pan out too. Watching this preseason has been a solid reminder of just how many guys are making a push for two, maybe three roster spots.

In recent memory our farm system has quite consistently been able to provide us with bottom 6 depth at the very least. Ferland, Bouma, Granlund, Jooris, Hamilton, Hathaway, and Byron all being examples. Honourable mention goes to Brodie on the blueline.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

The Flames aren't missing Granlund, not the type of piece we need or are looking for to make this team better. The only question should be not do we regret trading him, do we no feel like we didn't get the right return.

Hindsight makes it pretty easy to critique, not sure Tre could have done much better for the asset, took a shot at the right type of player we needed, so far it hasn't worked out, but it was likely a long shot regardless, and as many have pointed out, there's likely still time for it to turn into something for us.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

It's ok to admit that the Canucks got the better of the deal...it happens from time to time. Judging by his game here, there is no way Shinkaruk even gets considered to play 17 min a game that Granlund saw last year. There's a baseline that certain players have to meet for coaches to even consider that kind of responsibility.

The logic being employed in this thread basically extends to reason that no bad team can have good players. Silly.

this is where you are missing the boat...Granlund doesn't play 17 mins a night in Calgary. By the time the Canucks are a good team he will be a 3rd or 4th liner or he will be playing on another team that overpays for his production IMO. Calgary is at the cap anyway, can't keep everyone.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

Kinda done with Wotherspoon - the Flames were decent enough to him; he pouted way too much and when his spot was finally there for him to win he played pretty terribly. Move on, nothing to see here.

He pouted?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

It's ok to admit that the Canucks got the better of the deal...it happens from time to time...

I think Vancouver did well in that deal, but that does not mean that Calgary made out poorly, or currently would be in a better situation with Granlund in their system than they are today.

This is not a zero-sum game. Granlund is not a player the Flames miss, nor will likely ever miss. I think that is the principle point to be made here.

[JohnnyTitan]

Is Hunter even better than Mangiapane? Honest question. I kinda see them as somewhat similar only at a younger age Eat Bread seems to have become the better rounded AHLer at least.

As for the D-Men...the pipeline is stocked and the sting of losing any of Wotherspoon or even Kulak or Bartkowski will be very short-lived. Yes, we need a #6 this year but we'll figure that out. By as early as next season there is NO room in the NHL for the aforementioned trio. Honestly -> even Hickey has probably been passed by the 2015ers, Fox and Valimaki. I value their AHL contributions but there will be no long-term pain associated with losing any of them.

[dammage79]

Wait, can't Valimaki play in the AHL this year??

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Right because that's exactly what I said.

We have a list of forwards good on the PK.

Okay we'll cut our four best PK options:

Backlund
Frolik
Bennett
Jankowski

from this conversation for starters.

Who on this team is as good an aggressive and mobile PKer as Markus Granlund? Not Matt Stajan, who plays a passive game that hurt us a lot last year. The three names that should come to mind are:

Garnet Hathaway
Freddie Hamilton
Curtis Lazar

Markus Granlund had more goals last year (19) than these three players combined had points (5+2+4 = 11).

You can rationalize about "toughness", "hitting", "physicality" all you want but the closest substitute for a forward to putting the puck in the back of the net is drawing power plays, and the only guy in that trio who draws PPs is Hathaway. We could easily have had Granlund and Hathaway on the same team playing opposite wings.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

I'm sure i'll get slammed for this, but i must ask....

Any reason to question our AHL system, regarding the growth and development of the prospects going thru our AHL system?

Some may point to Jankowski as the counter argument, but i suppose his NCAA experience has played a large role in preparing him for pro hockey.

This is a few camps in a row where our AHL prospects just simply don't seem like they have progressed to a point where they can actually play in the NHL....

I see your Jankowski and raise you Micheal Ferland. He is another example of an AHL success story for the Flames from the past three years.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Wait, can't Valimaki play in the AHL this year??

No. His CHL status eliminates this possibility.

[TheIronMaiden]

Is it fair to assume that the lions share of the cuts will take place tomorrow after waivers are cleared?

by my count in addition to these waived players, the Flames have to cut 2-D, 2-G, and 10 F in the next eight days to make a 23 man roster.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

So from our non-lottery level picks here are the players on the roster (or other rosters) that graduated from the flames AHL system in the past few years (i'm sure i'm missing others that may have made it elsewhere):
- Brodie
- Ferland
- Granlund
- Baertchi
- Hathaway

How do the flames compare with other orgs as far as AHL development to NHL players?

Just a guess but I would say bottom half of the league. Most of the long term prospects in this organization never make the team. Brodie, Gio, and Ferland are the only regulars on the roster that were developed by the team in the AHL (I suppose Backlund played parts of a season in the AHL as well if you really want to stretch it). The other drafted players went straight from the draft or college to the Flames. I know some people will say that all teams are like that but that's not exactly true. A lot of teams seem to do better at bringing along their AHL players into NHL players. There are lots of factors as maybe the players were just bad draft picks, maybe the AHL development hasn't been as good as some teams, or maybe the big team is simply reluctant to give their developed players a shot. I believe it's a combination of all of those factors. I do believe if the Flames want to build a perennial good team like some other organizations they do need to draft and develop better. You can sit on a few good drafts or trades for some time but eventually things will catch up if you aren't continually developing NHL players from within. The Ducks for instance have managed to almost completely turn over their roster while maintaining a competitive team over the past five years. The only thing they are really missing is the next Getzlaf and that's going to be a big challenge but they really do a stellar job of drafting and developing.

This is why I'm really hoping Andersson gets a chance because it's been a while since the organization developed a defenseman into an NHLer.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Okay we'll cut our four best PK options:

Backlund
Frolik
Bennett
Jankowski

from this conversation for starters.

Great job, why stop at 4? Why not 6?

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

You can rationalize about "toughness", "hitting", "physicality" all you want but the closest substitute for a forward to putting the puck in the back of the net is drawing power plays, and the only guy in that trio who draws PPs is Hathaway. We could easily have had Granlund and Hathaway on the same team playing opposite wings.

Granlund is small, plays soft and was tried at wing when here and wasn't a good fit. This was stated by Treliving when he was moved.

The way the team is situated now, we already have a 6'5 skilled centre who's trying to push his way into the lineup.

We're fine on the PK, and moving a small, soft player like Granlund onto the wing on the 4th line would not be productive or advantageous with the current contracts we have.

It's a pointless discussion.