[Rumour] Flames interested in Brandon Carlo

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Still no reason to bring in an older player for assets right now.

Everyone knows it's time to get young for liabilities!

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by dino7c

You wouldn't spend all the assets...and that older player would likely be worth more in a year or two with less term left on their deal

Depends is Boston trying to dump his contract. If that’s the case they should only get a Miromanov back.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by dino7c

You wouldn't spend all the assets...and that older player would likely be worth more in a year or two with less term left on their deal

Right, and plus you want a solid experienced partner to pair-up with young defencemen graduating (or potentially graduating) next season. Not doing so is a great way to "Buffalo it up".

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

The Flames are interested in acquiring a monster-sized defensemen?

Which teams aren't?

Bahl and Carlo. The twin towers.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Right, and plus you want a solid experienced partner to pair-up with young defencemen graduating (or potentially graduating) next season. Not doing so is a great way to "Buffalo it up".

We still have Bahl, Weegar and Pachal on the roster.

I’m assuming you think we bring in Carlo if we trade Andersson.

You could look at feee agency as well on short term deal.

We need to have competition but be flexible enough that we can get rid of players if the young guys win spots.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by flambers

If the direction is to make the playoffs or to make a push

In my view, none of the above are what the team requires in the short term.

Flames I would think, are looking for a defense pairing for Weegar,

Then push Hanley to 5th/6th etc...

Obviously not a rental.

Andersson Bahl
Carlo Weegar
Nacho Pachal

That’s not too bad. Solvyov in the wings.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Everyone knows it's time to get young for liabilities!

100%. It’s tax season! If we have assets the government gets a cut.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Can't quote you for some reason Paulie, so will do it manually:

We still have Bahl, Weegar and Pachal on the roster.

I’m assuming you think we bring in Carlo if we trade Andersson.

You could look at feee agency as well on short term deal.

We need to have competition but be flexible enough that we can get rid of players if the young guys win spots.

I get that you don't want to spend a pick, but you can always trade Carlo again at the deadline two seasons from now for more than you paid to get him, especially if he is playing better than he has this season. Given how Huska has the defencemen playing, i would take that bet. This draft isn't very deep anyway, and in two years, it may be deeper. So from a cost-perspective, I don't hate it.


I look at it similarly to the Monahan deal that I really hate. I don't care about he difference in picks - I hate that the Flames won't have 3 first round picks this year, period. Whatever pick goes to Montreal, it will be pricey and it could have been turned into a big piece of the puzzle long-term. However, if the Flames end up trading Kadri in the off-season, then that's when the 'difference' in value means something to me, and it is even possible for the Flames to get more in return than they gave up to unload Monahan's deal. Maybe. Either way, we wait until (or if) that day comes to close the book on that deal. Carlo would be in that same vein - give up something now, trade him for something else later on. Or who knows - maybe he solidifies himself as a really good defensive defencemen for the next 7 years? There are worse things.


As Weegar-Bahl-Pachal - that's too few defencemen. Ideally you want a top pairing with 2 experienced defencemen that go up against the best lines. You probably want 2 more experienced defencemen on the 2nd pairing, but I guess if one is good enough defensively, you can partner him with a young and inexperienced defencemen - Tanev-Kylington as an example. Then Pachal with another inexperienced young defencemen cutting his teeth in the NHL that you can shelter more.


I don't think it is fair to expect Parekh, Brzustewicz, Poirier, etc.., to suddenly have to face McDavid, MacKinnon, etc., night in and night out in their first season. It would create chaos. It would rattle them and the entire team too much IMO. The forwards wouldn't trust the defencemen playing behind them. Wolf would probably start developing poor habits and feel he has to cheat a little since he can't trust the defencemen to get over, or stop the pass going across, or get to the rebounds. I think it would be detrimental trying to develop kids that way. I think pairing a young defencemen with an experienced and vocal defencemen would go a long way in bringing up these highly talented offensive defencemen in the system.


Plus, what would happen if one of them gets hurt? Team turned into almost a tire-fire when Bahl got hurt.


I am also not convinced that you can sign a decent enough defencemen as a UFA in the off-season either. Nobody really wants to play in Calgary - not a competitive team, it is Canada and it is cold, and the facilities suck. it will be a different story when this team is back to winning, plus the new arena. I think you either overpay for a 4th (including having to give out too much term). Top 4 D probably don't want 2 year terms, and with the amount of talented D coming through the pipeline, I wouldn't want to overpay one for 4-5 years right now.



I don't believe this rumour really has much legs to it, but if it happens, I can understand why, as long as the price was not exorbitant. It wouldn't surprise me to see Conroy grab a defencemen somewhere through trade with 2-3 years left on his deal. That's just how I see it anyway - I guess we will see what happens.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Depends is Boston trying to dump his contract. If that’s the case they should only get a Miromanov back.

Why would they want to dump the contract of a pretty good defensive dman signed to an excellent contract?


Teams would line up for that player and contract.

So, even if they wanted to move on, no dumping is required,

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Can't quote you for some reason Paulie, so will do it manually:





I get that you don't want to spend a pick, but you can always trade Carlo again at the deadline two seasons from now for more than you paid to get him, especially if he is playing better than he has this season. Given how Huska has the defencemen playing, i would take that bet. This draft isn't very deep anyway, and in two years, it may be deeper. So from a cost-perspective, I don't hate it.


I look at it similarly to the Monahan deal that I really hate. I don't care about he difference in picks - I hate that the Flames won't have 3 first round picks this year, period. Whatever pick goes to Montreal, it will be pricey and it could have been turned into a big piece of the puzzle long-term. However, if the Flames end up trading Kadri in the off-season, then that's when the 'difference' in value means something to me, and it is even possible for the Flames to get more in return than they gave up to unload Monahan's deal. Maybe. Either way, we wait until (or if) that day comes to close the book on that deal. Carlo would be in that same vein - give up something now, trade him for something else later on. Or who knows - maybe he solidifies himself as a really good defensive defencemen for the next 7 years? There are worse things.


As Weegar-Bahl-Pachal - that's too few defencemen. Ideally you want a top pairing with 2 experienced defencemen that go up against the best lines. You probably want 2 more experienced defencemen on the 2nd pairing, but I guess if one is good enough defensively, you can partner him with a young and inexperienced defencemen - Tanev-Kylington as an example. Then Pachal with another inexperienced young defencemen cutting his teeth in the NHL that you can shelter more.


I don't think it is fair to expect Parekh, Brzustewicz, Poirier, etc.., to suddenly have to face McDavid, MacKinnon, etc., night in and night out in their first season. It would create chaos. It would rattle them and the entire team too much IMO. The forwards wouldn't trust the defencemen playing behind them. Wolf would probably start developing poor habits and feel he has to cheat a little since he can't trust the defencemen to get over, or stop the pass going across, or get to the rebounds. I think it would be detrimental trying to develop kids that way. I think pairing a young defencemen with an experienced and vocal defencemen would go a long way in bringing up these highly talented offensive defencemen in the system.


Plus, what would happen if one of them gets hurt? Team turned into almost a tire-fire when Bahl got hurt.


I am also not convinced that you can sign a decent enough defencemen as a UFA in the off-season either. Nobody really wants to play in Calgary - not a competitive team, it is Canada and it is cold, and the facilities suck. it will be a different story when this team is back to winning, plus the new arena. I think you either overpay for a 4th (including having to give out too much term). Top 4 D probably don't want 2 year terms, and with the amount of talented D coming through the pipeline, I wouldn't want to overpay one for 4-5 years right now.



I don't believe this rumour really has much legs to it, but if it happens, I can understand why, as long as the price was not exorbitant. It wouldn't surprise me to see Conroy grab a defencemen somewhere through trade with 2-3 years left on his deal. That's just how I see it anyway - I guess we will see what happens.

Very nice summary.

If the Flames are trading Anderson, a trade for Carlo makes sense. But I hate if the cost is a first round pick, and I expect some contender would give that up.

[Ped]

Depends is Boston trying to dump his contract. If that’s the case they should only get a Miromanov back.

If Boston is looking to trade Carlo, it's likely to get assets back as they don't need to dump his contract. They have over 24 million in cap space next season, no RFAs that are going to command huge raises, and just Marchand and Geekie as notable UFAs.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Or, how about no older player and more assets?

Im fine with an Andersson trade if they get a good return, but there is still no reason to spend those assets at this point.

I think the argument is the only way they trade Andersson for a haul of futures, is if they replace him on the team with a cheaper version that costs less assets.

I'm operating under the idea that the only way this Carlo deal happens is if Andersson is gone.

But additionally the only way that Andersson is gone, is if they do another deal (or same deal), that brings in a replacement.

[Ryan Coke]

The plan (which I support) has been acquiring long term pieces in the right age range, 25/26 and under. Acquiring a 28 year old does not fit if you are spending good assets on them.

I’m not against some older short term players this season for minimal assets, but I think this would be a mistake, and that’s based on everything we’ve heard and seen from Conroy.

For that reason I’ll believe it if it happens, which it likely won’t. But it is interesting seeing some of the rationalizing on here. I’m nowhere close to a burn it down and sell it all off guy, but this team is still on the bubble and there is no reason to be spending good assets (2nd round pick or higher) for a 28 year old D.

IMO, of course.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

The plan (which I support) has been acquiring long term pieces in the right age range, 25/26 and under. Acquiring a 28 year old does not fit if you are spending good assets on them.

I’m not against some older short term players this season for minimal assets, but I think this would be a mistake, and that’s based on everything we’ve heard and seen from Conroy.

For that reason I’ll believe it if it happens, which it likely won’t. But it is interesting seeing some of the rationalizing on here. I’m nowhere close to a burn it down and sell it all off guy, but this team is still on the bubble and there is no reason to be spending good assets (2nd round pick or higher) for a 28 year old D.

IMO, of course.

I'm not rationalizing my own opinion, I'm guessing at Conroy's.

He's reluctant to move out veterans with his team in a playoff spot. If he feels he can't pass up on the return for Andersson right now it makes some sense to find a guy to replace him in the lineup.

Otherwise there is nothing to this rumour as they already have 3 right shot dmen.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think the argument is the only way they trade Andersson for a haul of futures, is if they replace him on the team with a cheaper version that costs less assets.

I'm operating under the idea that the only way this Carlo deal happens is if Andersson is gone.

But additionally the only way that Andersson is gone, is if they do another deal (or same deal), that brings in a replacement.

I hope that if a haul is offered you take it and figure out the rest later.

IMO the young guys have already learned everything they need to from the vets. Hard work isn’t the problem, elite talent is.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

I hope that if a haul is offered you take it and figure out the rest later.

IMO the young guys have already learned everything they need to from the vets. Hard work isn’t the problem, elite talent is.

I get that you think that.

I get that many think that.

He doesn't.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Can't quote you for some reason Paulie, so will do it manually:





I get that you don't want to spend a pick, but you can always trade Carlo again at the deadline two seasons from now for more than you paid to get him, especially if he is playing better than he has this season. Given how Huska has the defencemen playing, i would take that bet. This draft isn't very deep anyway, and in two years, it may be deeper. So from a cost-perspective, I don't hate it.


I look at it similarly to the Monahan deal that I really hate. I don't care about he difference in picks - I hate that the Flames won't have 3 first round picks this year, period. Whatever pick goes to Montreal, it will be pricey and it could have been turned into a big piece of the puzzle long-term. However, if the Flames end up trading Kadri in the off-season, then that's when the 'difference' in value means something to me, and it is even possible for the Flames to get more in return than they gave up to unload Monahan's deal. Maybe. Either way, we wait until (or if) that day comes to close the book on that deal. Carlo would be in that same vein - give up something now, trade him for something else later on. Or who knows - maybe he solidifies himself as a really good defensive defencemen for the next 7 years? There are worse things.


As Weegar-Bahl-Pachal - that's too few defencemen. Ideally you want a top pairing with 2 experienced defencemen that go up against the best lines. You probably want 2 more experienced defencemen on the 2nd pairing, but I guess if one is good enough defensively, you can partner him with a young and inexperienced defencemen - Tanev-Kylington as an example. Then Pachal with another inexperienced young defencemen cutting his teeth in the NHL that you can shelter more.


I don't think it is fair to expect Parekh, Brzustewicz, Poirier, etc.., to suddenly have to face McDavid, MacKinnon, etc., night in and night out in their first season. It would create chaos. It would rattle them and the entire team too much IMO. The forwards wouldn't trust the defencemen playing behind them. Wolf would probably start developing poor habits and feel he has to cheat a little since he can't trust the defencemen to get over, or stop the pass going across, or get to the rebounds. I think it would be detrimental trying to develop kids that way. I think pairing a young defencemen with an experienced and vocal defencemen would go a long way in bringing up these highly talented offensive defencemen in the system.


Plus, what would happen if one of them gets hurt? Team turned into almost a tire-fire when Bahl got hurt.


I am also not convinced that you can sign a decent enough defencemen as a UFA in the off-season either. Nobody really wants to play in Calgary - not a competitive team, it is Canada and it is cold, and the facilities suck. it will be a different story when this team is back to winning, plus the new arena. I think you either overpay for a 4th (including having to give out too much term). Top 4 D probably don't want 2 year terms, and with the amount of talented D coming through the pipeline, I wouldn't want to overpay one for 4-5 years right now.



I don't believe this rumour really has much legs to it, but if it happens, I can understand why, as long as the price was not exorbitant. It wouldn't surprise me to see Conroy grab a defencemen somewhere through trade with 2-3 years left on his deal. That's just how I see it anyway - I guess we will see what happens.

Nice summary, but this point we don't know what teh cost is for him at the moment since nothing has happened. We don't know for sure we can recoup a better return by flipping him.

We also have Bean signed for next season as well. His play is above water and isn't getting caved in.

My expectation isn't all those guys to come in at once. Zayne will be here. We just need be flexible if one of those other guys grab a spot, and we do have NHL dman to help shelter them for next year. Can't see them being fed to McDavid lol.