[Rumour] Flames meeting with Ryan Reaves

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Flames are at the stage where they are simply trying to make it into the playoffs. Realistically this team is not close to being a true cup contender. I don't see 20-30 games of Reaves in the regular season as being a difference maker for this team especially if he's actually looking to get paid.

That's valid. I am in the mindset that Reaves was getting no more than $1M for 1-2 years, in which case he would be a useful addition in the 30-40 games a year where you need a different look.

[Toonage]

Reaves will be making upwards of $2M a year if/when he signs here. $2M if the Flames are lucky.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If Reaves can take a shift on Pittsburgh and Vegas, two of the fastest teams in the NHL and teams that appeared in the last few Stanley cup finals, call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure he can take a shift on the “let’s hope for the playoffs” Flames.

Are we signing him to take an occasional shift, or trying to win a bidding war for a UFA?

If it takes a three year to sign him would you feel differently?

[Stay Golden]

Reaves would be a great Policeman for the Flames skilled players. Worth the addition for that reason. Last year there was nobody that filled that role on a nightly basis.
Loves to crunch opponents into the boards, we have too many bottom 6 players that just prefer to shove their opponents which has very little effect.
Downside below average player but during the playoffs he showed he might be better than I expected. Cant overpay for him in either contract or term.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

This argument doesn't make any sense.

I never said Ryan Reaves holds back a team from being good. I mean, he can if we sign him for 3+ years for $2 million+, but I'm not insinuating that Reaves brings an entire team down. That shouldn't be the basis for whether or not a player is a worthwhile acquisition for a team.

Vegas was good before they added Reaves, and they were good after. There are some bad players on some really good teams in this league. Does that mean we should go out and acquire them? Because they have been on good teams in the past?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. No players are overpaid more than role players on teams that go deep into the playoffs. You can bet it will be even less lucrative if that player is a 31 year old enforcer.

Hypothetically, the Flames could be good without Reaves, and they could also be good with Reaves. So I don't see the point in getting upset about the Flames potentially signing the guy.

I certainly don't want to see the Flames pay a ridiculous amount for an 8 minute per night 4th liner, but I also don't know what kind of effect having a guy like this in your line up has on the rest of the team. Maybe the money you pay isn't worth it for the 8 minutes per night of possession black hole and minimal offensive output, but maybe you make that money back by his presence having a positive effect on the rest of your line up? I don't know, I've never spent any time in an NHL locker room. One thing is for sure though, if they do sign him and he's on our team, he won't be blowing up one of our top defensemen and putting them out for an extended period of time with a concussion.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Burke's gone but it seems his spirit is still in the building. The Capitals won the cup without a guy like Reaves on their team and the Flames didn't miss the playoffs because they are butter soft and more because they were offensively challenged and poorly coached. This signing won't change anything in regards to the Flames plight in the standings but it will consume a roster spot and add to the press box rotation.

The Capitals didn't win.. but Vegas came pretty close.

In the last 3 out of 4 seasons, he has played around 80 games per season. There must be something that teams like about him. Especially good teams like Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Vegas.

He also has played in more playoff games than any other player on the Flames roster. To me, that is pretty valuable.

[locsofblu]

As long as he can play 4th line minutes without being a liability then I say do it. We were lacking some serious toughness last year.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Hypothetically, the Flames could be good without Reaves, and they could also be good with Reaves. So I don't see the point in getting upset about the Flames potentially signing the guy.

I certainly don't want to see the Flames pay a ridiculous amount for an 8 minute per night 4th liner, but I also don't know what kind of effect having a guy like this in your line up has on the rest of the team. Maybe the money you pay isn't worth it for the 8 minutes per night of possession black hole and minimal offensive output, but maybe you make that money back by his presence having a positive effect on the rest of your line up? I don't know, I've never spent any time in an NHL locker room. One thing is for sure though, if they do sign him and he's on our team, he won't be blowing up one of our top defensemen and putting them out for an extended period of time with a concussion.

If your position is that this move wouldn't make or break the team and therefore it isn't something to be annoyed about, then many of us are wasting a lot of time on this forum.

He is coming off a 4 year contract as an enforcer. He will be 32 years old before the end of the season. He will take up a roster spot. His next contract will likely scare me, and it seems like these types of moves never work out for the Flames.

The only positive I see is that he does have apparent value around the league since he was included in a package for the 31st overall pick (insane move by Pittsburgh who will also sign Jack Johnson to a 5 year contract in 3 days).

[442scotty]

I would rather have Reaves than Hathaway if that's what it comes down to

[Badgers Nose]

Is Reaves the guy who played for St Louis and hurt one of our guys with a cheap shot a few years ago?

[keenan87]

With Ryan and Reaves potentially signing... you gotta believe they will ship Brouwer out.. right?!?

[Bingo]

I certainly get both sides of this one.

I'd vote no, but not in a passionate angry sense. I think the role is antiquated in today's game, but man would it be fun to see him alter the Lucic thing in Edmonton for a season.

[Reign of Fire]

Where is the Peters' connection?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by keenan87

In the last 3 out of 4 seasons, he has played around 80 games per season. There must be something that teams like about him. Especially good teams like Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Vegas.

All three of which got rid of him too.

[Toonage]

Pittsburgh probably wishes they had kept him.

[Classic_Sniper]

Did the Flames not learn anything about the Brandon Bollig tenure? Toughness in today's game is overrated. I don't think this management group is going to ever take this team to the Stanley Cup.

Treliving spoke of adding more skill at the end of the season and all he's done so far is arguably lost skill and goals while allegedly focusing his energies on guys like Derek Ryan and Ryan Reeves instead of true high end talent. I think it's safe to say that Treliving's player evaluation has been mediocre at best.

[Hey Connor, It's Mess]

I understand people's concerns when it comes to the price tag but I don't agree with those that believe he is a liability or unfit for the fourth line. Dating back to his time in St. Louis and onward, I've never noticed him as a defensive problem. In fact, there's shifts where his physicality is able to turn momentum.

I think people are underestimating what having Reaves in the lineup will do. I don't see any team taking liberties on a Gaudreau or a Lindholm or whoever if Reaves is on the bench. We're talking about the best fighter in the league. Additionally, we're looking at someone who would play about half the season. That's half the wear and tear on a player's body which means he is more capable of giving it 100% every night and fully committing to his style of game. The Ferlands and Boumas and Hathaways are perfect examples that you cannot sustain a hyper-physical, aggressive game for 82 games; it's unfair to expect of those guys. Having Reaves would also take the weight off of Tkachuk/Gio/Hamonic's shoulders when it comes to sticking up for teammates in the course of a rough game.

Reaves wouldn't automatically turn us from a soft team into the most feared in the league or anything, but he would have a considerable impact in my opinion. I'd be thrilled if we could sign him.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Pittsburgh probably wishes they had kept him.

Would they have though? They won 2 Cups without him and Washington plowed through Vegas easier than the Pens anyway.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Cantrader

We need a fighter. We don't want Hamonic fighting all the time as Brouwer won't do too much of that.

Fake news. Brouwer fought a lot considering it was only in the first half of the season (due to having to wear a cage later). Until he got the broken bone in his face (from a puck IIRC) he was the fight leader. And he absolutely destroyed a couple guys in fights.

He's not a good player, but credit where it's due:

http://www.hockeyfights.com/players/...htcard/reg2018

[GioforPM]

I think this dinner is being made out to be a lot bigger than it actually is. Both guys are former Wheat Kings so maybe Reaves asked for the meeting and Treliving accommodated. Or maybe it's just Treliving doing due diligence. An NHL player expresses interest in coming - you don't say not interested without giving him the courtesy of a meeting.