CP Radio is returning: your questions?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Trading Sean Monahan is not scorched earth rebuild. Replace him with a center who can play in his own zone and the team is better IMO even if they can’t finish like he does.

Gaudreau is an asset like all others IMO. Managing that asset shouldn’t be looked at differently than say Tkachuk or Giordano. Just my opinion that the focus on Gaudreau and particularly his commitment should be proportional to all other potential solutions out there.

How do you replace Monahan at centre? It is the most coveted and toughest position to fill.
All assets should be managed properly, but this is a pinch point with Gaudreau - thus the focus.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

How do you replace Monahan at centre? It is the most coveted and toughest position to fill.
All assets should be managed properly, but this is a pinch point with Gaudreau - thus the focus.

I sign or trade for another center. It’s my view that Monahan is not that hard to replace and the lack of attention to detail in his own zone at such a critical position is holding the team back. Gaudreau can be a top line winger on a contender. Monahan can’t be the center on such a club. In my view.

The pinch point for Gaudreau exists with many other players too. For some it has passed and we missed our opportunity already.

The more I think about it, the more I disagree that Monahan is what stands between a scorched earth rebuild and improving the team. He’s simply not that valuable. You can look at my post history (although why would anyone want to do that) and see that I have always been a Monahan fan and supporter. This isn’t some drum i’ve been beating for years. Just come to the conclusion we need a different style of center for this club. Trade him for picks and sign a veteran 2 way center with far less goal scoring ability and we will end up ahead.

And I’m not against trading Gaudreau. That’s about using an asset to acquire what the team needs.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I sign or trade for another center.

Neat, who and what for?

[Robbob]

Sign or trade for a centre is such an easy thing to say vs actual doing it.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Neat, who and what for?

So trading Gaudreau is a viable strategy, without regard to what he would return. But the idea of replacing Monahan is different?

OK let's assume worst case. Trade Monahan for futures and roll with Backlund, Bennett, Ryan and Jankowski as our four centres next year. How many fewer playoff series do the Flames win?

What if we sign say Erik Haula and let Jankowski walk. Injury risk for sure but is the team stronger?

I just don't see Monahan as irreplaceable, nor that critical to the Flames success.

Or sign Soderberg for a couple of years?

[Locke]

But regardless of whether you want to change Monahan or not, I think the important thing is to understand that there is a difference between stability and complacency.

This group has had their chances. I'd wager that most would believe that the degree of slack they've gotten has been more than fair.

I know people hate to hear it and rail against it, but at some point you have to make changes not just for the sake of change, but to shake people up.

As I alluded to in my first post...one of the biggest issues this team has is complacency. Lack of drive.

It takes games of a series to get this team to the point of "Oh...we should probably play now....I guess."

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Sign or trade for a centre is such an easy thing to say vs actual doing it.

IS it though? A whole lot of centres change teams every year though, no? I'm not suggesting a Malkin level player.

[topfiverecords]

AM or FM radio?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

AM or FM radio?

Pshaw....terrestrial radio is for the pleebs!

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I sign or trade for another center. It’s my view that Monahan is not that hard to replace and the lack of attention to detail in his own zone at such a critical position is holding the team back. Gaudreau can be a top line winger on a contender. Monahan can’t be the center on such a club. In my view.

Monahan is not that hard to replace? OK name some centres with his production or close to it that you think you can get.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The pinch point for Gaudreau exists with many other players too. For some it has passed and we missed our opportunity already.

Agreed. And they can't have that happen again with Gaudreau. That's my point.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The more I think about it, the more I disagree that Monahan is what stands between a scorched earth rebuild and improving the team. He’s simply not that valuable. You can look at my post history (although why would anyone want to do that) and see that I have always been a Monahan fan and supporter. This isn’t some drum i’ve been beating for years. Just come to the conclusion we need a different style of center for this club. Trade him for picks and sign a veteran 2 way center with far less goal scoring ability and we will end up ahead.

Without Monahan your centre depth is awful. And absent a clear path to replacing him, that's why it represents a total re-build.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

And I’m not against trading Gaudreau. That’s about using an asset to acquire what the team needs.

Agreed. If they can use him to acquire a potential #1 centre that's the best scenario. I just don't know if that's totally possible.

[Harry Lime]

Is it time for Giordano to anchor the number two pairing?
Is Hanifin/Andersson ready for the responsibility of top pairing?
Gio in a mentor role with Kylington as a partner (Oliver can play the right side)?

[Enoch Root]

Center is always tougher to fill than wing. But on the Flames, it's magnified because:

1) we are already light at C

2) we have lots of winger depth. And if we sign Hall, we will have ridiculous winger depth

So yeah, the team is in a much better position trading Gaudreau than trading Monahan

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Monahan is not that hard to replace? OK name some centres with his production or close to it that you think you can get.

A centre with less production doesn't take this team to scorched earth rebuild. Monahan's production hasn't in fact gotten us very far so let's see if a centre with more of a 200 foot game does. Can it hurt?

Carl Soderberg gives you 10 less goals probably. Some cap savings and the return from a Monahan trade. And maybe a little more physicality and in zone awareness. There are several Carl Soderberg's out there.

Downgrading production from a guy that got you 22 goals this year is not such a disaster.

[Robbob]

Replacing Monahan with a Soderberg type is a huge down grade, especially considering his age. Monahan is working on his game away from the puck and he is only 25 right now. That sort of exchange doesn't make sense to me. Skill and scoring ability is one of the hardest things to find in the NHL.

How old was Yzerman when he started focusing on his 200 foot game?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Replacing Monahan with a Soderberg type is a huge down grade, especially considering his age. Monahan is working on his game away from the puck and he is only 25 right now. That sort of exchange doesn't make sense to me. Skill and scoring ability is one of the hardest things to find in the NHL.

How old was Yzerman when he started focusing on his 200 foot game?

It is a downgrade, but I'm not convinced it makes the team any worse. And then you have the return from a Monahan trade.

I would be interested to hear how Monahan is so critical to the team's success, beyond the notion he is the team's best center. Can his production be replaced? What else does he bring that is so valuable?

Maybe he learns the defensive game but right now, the inattention to detail in his own zone after seven years in the league is holding the team back from improving IMO.

Ideally you get a superstar #1C to replace him. I'd argue for trying for going that route in the draft, while going for a different style of player at centre for the current roster.

Or you can roll with Monahan and Taylor Hall. I wouldn't do that personally.

[Sylvanfan]

This I am convinced of. Monahan is not good enough to lead this team anywhere it hasn't already been. He is good enough that when healthy the Flames are a low level playoff team.

I trade him because it's unlikely they can upgrade on him, and they're not good enough with him playing that role. In both cases they need change at that position to be better. So change it. If it fails take the top 10 pick next year.

[browna]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Can Valimaki slot into the Top 4?

Or is he a pile of magic beans that had high expectations to start, and has even higher ones now given everything with the team, but won’t have played an NHL game for over 18 months if he starts next season...putting more pressure on him to do more then he is capable of when he does hit the ice to make an immediate impact.

Meanwhile Vegas is rolling through a second year of playoffs with Mark Stone who has 22 points in 16 playoff games with Vegas going into tonight. A very simplistic view, but if Stone is a difference maker and his presence could’ve won the Colorado series+ last year and Dallas series+ this year for the Flames, would that trade have been worth it to have this core roster of players and organization as a whole, in the short and medium term, for confidence and success?

If the Flames could have tasted playoff success last year and then again this year, and grow from it and build on it as a team and individuals in the next couple years, in the same time it will take Valimaki to now establish and reach those sky expectations. Instead, the Flames and the roster have to deal with the failure of the last two playoffs and hope Valimaki was worth the wait over a producing player like Mark Stone.

A lot of ifs but point is, this Valimaki injury has the chance to take a lot of the shine that we had all hoped for this player, losing crucial developmental time, because the expectations won’t have changed in that time.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by browna

Or is he a pile of magic beans that had high expectations to start, and has even higher ones now given everything with the team, but won’t have played an NHL game for over 18 months if he starts next season...putting more pressure on him to do more then he is capable of when he does hit the ice to make an immediate impact.

Meanwhile Vegas is rolling through a second year of playoffs with Mark Stone who has 22 points in 16 playoff games with Vegas going into tonight. A very simplistic view, but if Stone is a difference maker and his presence could’ve won the Colorado series+ last year and Dallas series+ this year for the Flames, would that trade have been worth it to have this core roster of players and organization as a whole, in the short and medium term, for confidence and success?

If the Flames could have tasted playoff success last year and then again this year, and grow from it and build on it as a team and individuals in the next couple years, in the same time it will take Valimaki to now establish and reach those sky expectations. Instead, the Flames and the roster have to deal with the failure of the last two playoffs and hope Valimaki was worth the wait over a producing player like Mark Stone.

A lot of ifs but point is, this Valimaki injury has the chance to take a lot of the shine that we had all hoped for this player, losing crucial developmental time, because the expectations won’t have changed in that time.

To not trade Valimaki for Stone (Selke candidate), Valimaki will have to be a Norris Candidate defender for that non-trade to have been worth it.

I...have my doubts.

[Strange Brew]

It seemed like an excruciating price but if you’re dying of thirst, no price is too high for a glass of water.

If you don’t have the elite forward talent to be a contender, maybe you need to pay the price it takes to acquire such talent. Zucker or Kadri would have been nice but they’re not Stone. Nor is Taylor Hall.

Obviously it’s easy to say in hindsight. At least our GM tried right?

[Red_Baron]

Discuss whether top flight coaches actually do not want to come here or is it a Calgary Puck Myth?

We have had 2 of our last 4 coaches leave another NHL head coaching gig to coach here. Is there any evidence of coaches refusing to come here?