[Rumour] TSN: Treliving would like to add an experienced right side d-man

[bax]

Originally Posted by MrMike

With what cap space are we adding another Dman, taking Kylingtons 800k into consideration?

They said on TSN if something were to get done it would likely be via trade

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

popcorn eaters / AHL players won't affect the cap

(unless they make more than $1M, which won't be the case)

Doesn’t anyone who is up/on the 23 man roster count towards the cap?

[bax]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You can't go into a season with 6 defensemen. I don't know why this is an annual discussion. Here are the number of defenemen that played AT LEAST 10 GAMES for the Flames over the last 5 years:

15/16: 10
16/17: 9
17/18: 8
18/19: 10
19/20: 7 (with 3 more that played 7 games, in a shortened season)

So I am not sure why the angst towards acquiring another vet for depth.

Giordano
Andersson
Tanev
Hanifin
Valimaki
Nesterov
Kylington
Mackey
Yelesin
Petrovic

I wouldn’t be mad with adding one more to the list. Really the only guy on that list that is doubtful to play games is Petrovic, but even then he can in a pinch.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by MrMike

Doesn’t anyone who is up/on the 23 man roster count towards the cap?

Yes, but they will probably run with a 22 man roster. And everyone else would not count.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by bax

Giordano
Andersson
Tanev
Hanifin
Valimaki
Nesterov
Kylington
Mackey
Yelesin
Petrovic

I wouldn’t be mad with adding one more to the list. Really the only guy on that list that is doubtful to play games is Petrovic, but even then he can in a pinch.

Mackey is probably not ready (certainly can't count on him)
And Yelesin and Petrovic are not guys that you want to see getting 10+ games. At least I don't. And I am guessing Treliving doesn't either.

Injuries happen. And if you want to contend, you have to have NHL quality guys to back up your roster.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Mackey is probably not ready (certainly can't count on him)
And Yelesin and Petrovic are not guys that you want to see getting 10+ games. At least I don't. And I am guessing Treliving doesn't either.

Injuries happen. And if you want to contend, you have to have NHL quality guys to back up your roster.

Yep I agree, which is why I said I wouldn’t mind them adding one more name to the list.

Yelesin already played 4 games last year so I don’t think it’s a stretch to say he could play around 10 this year.

I mentioned I doubt Petrovic plays games. He’s more of a plan D or E.

Mackey will surprise though. He will start in the AHL, but I think people will be happy with him if he gets an NHL opportunity.

We also have Kinnvall in the pipeline as well. I forget if he was set to come over this season or not though.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Mackey is probably not ready (certainly can't count on him)
And Yelesin and Petrovic are not guys that you want to see getting 10+ games. At least I don't. And I am guessing Treliving doesn't either.

Injuries happen. And if you want to contend, you have to have NHL quality guys to back up your roster.

Yes, because we're going to need to load up with contender depth on the back end for the deep playoff run we're going to make with our top 6.

Kind of putting the cart before the horse, wouldn't you say?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MrMike

Doesn’t anyone who is up/on the 23 man roster count towards the cap?

They do.

But if you start camp with player X pencilled in as the 6th defenseman but he's out played by say Kylington then you have the option of sending player X to Stockton and he won't count against your cap.

You've added a free option without blocking a young player.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Yes, because we're going to need to load up with contender depth on the back end for the deep playoff run we're going to make with our top 6.

Kind of putting the cart before the horse, wouldn't you say?

So, to preface this post, I'm going to say that I hate defending Treliving, as I'm not really a fan of his approach to a lot of things.

Now that said, while we're certainly not a stacked roster contender like Tampa Bay, I don't think we're any worse than most of the teams that go on deep runs in most years. Last year's Stars? I didn't think they were better than us. If Chad Johnson makes some routine saves in game 6, we probably go on to a coin-flip game 7.

The 2018 Blues? This was essentially their top six:

Sanford-ROR-Perron
Schwartz-Schenn-Tarasenko

ROR's great... after the fact. Yet that same ROR circa 2017 was struggling at even strength in a Mikael Backlund type 2C role in Buffalo. He was putting up powerplay points so you might not have noticed, but he ought not be absolved of his lack of production 5v5 there.

Tarasenko's great too... just like Matthew Tkachuk is. I don't see why Chucky can't take a step forward to be a Tarasenko level winger. Different play, sure, but still elite in his own way.

The rest of that top six though? It's pretty mediocre.

you can go back every year and find similarily mediocre top sixes go on deep runs. 2018 Vegas? 2017 Ottawa? 2017 Nashville? etc.

I firmly believe you need a top-end number one centre to content, and I'm not swayed by those who believe Sean Monahan is that guy either (I'd actually put more money on Backlund being that guy if given the opportunity, crazy as it sounds). But at the same time, this team isn't devoid of talent.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Yes, because we're going to need to load up with contender depth on the back end for the deep playoff run we're going to make with our top 6.

Kind of putting the cart before the horse, wouldn't you say?

So, because you don't like the top 6, you don't think the defense should be improved upon?

You always complain that Treliving is focusing on the wrong thing, as if he can only work on one thing. But it is you that is fixated on one single thing.

A team consists of all the parts and it is perfectly reasonable and sensible to work on the D, even though the forward group isn't perfect. DO you think he should stop all other efforts until he satisfies your concerns up front?

[SuperMatt18]

Here's the fact: Playoff success can be somewhat random and you never know when the team is going to go on a run.

In reality a 7 game series between two close teams is a small sample size where goaltending, shooting luck, special teams, reffing, the odd bounce, etc can be the difference between a deep run and being out in the first round.

Best bet is to build a good team that consistently is in the top 12 teams in the league, if you can do that you have a shot at winning the cup. The idea of a 2-3 year window is foolish since so much can hurt that window from an uncontrollable standpoint, and long term team strength and team building is your best bet.

If you want the best indicator of playoff success year to year being random than look no further than Tampa Bay: From the team that lost in 4 to Columbus to the team that won the cup here's the changes in their playoff forward roster (top 12 forwards in playoff TOI). Subtract: Stamkos, JT Miller, Erne for Coleman, Goodrow, & Maroon. In what world does that make sense that the playoff team that lost Stamkos and Miller did better.

I know people are down on this top 6 forward group due to recent playoff performance but as a forward group they are actually a strong group. This team is 5th in goals for over the last two seasons (~152 games since the acquisition of Lindholm and promotion of Mangiapane). The only teams that have scored more are Tampa, Toronto, Washington, & Colorado.

The top 6 specifically hasn't had much playoff success yet but the talent is there and they have proven it in the larger sample size of the regular season. They just need to find a way to translate that to playoff success. But I wouldn't write them off because of that just yet.

I remember when Detroit couldn't win with their young core because Pavel Datsyuk had 3 goals and 15 points in his first 42 playoff games, and Zetterberg wasn't much better with 9 goals and 11 points in his first 22 playoff games, and those guys weren't "built for playoff hockey". They were roasted after losing as the #1 seed in the West to a bad Oilers team too, before they turned it around and won the cup two years later.

Doesn't sound far off from Gaudreau who has 19 points in his first 30 playoff games, and Monahan who has 21 in his first 30.

If Treliving does decide to move Gaudreau or Monahan it should be due to their impending contract expiries (and moreso Gaudreau in this case) not selling low because of the lack of playoff success to date.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Here's the fact:

OK, quit confusing the board with facts. You know this isn't the place for them! Please ensure that your posts only contain hyperbolic conjecture and opinion.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don’t think you can overly focus on one transaction or one off season. Better to look at the whole body of work.

There is one school of thought that says the GM always knows more then we do and therefore every move or lack thereof is the best that anyone could have done under the circumstances. That doesn’t seem like interesting fodder for discussion.

It is fascinating how some posters are much harder on players who are clearly trying and competing than the guy behind the desk who is also trying. And vice versa.

My criticism of certain players has always been about commitment not effort
I believe they all try hard
That’s not enough

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

First off no one is calling you a goof.

Secondly I agree with you. I just don't make the leap to stating the current GM thinks differently and isn't even pursuing change for the top six as you are hoping.

My happiness order

1. Treliving finds a deal that alters the chemistry of the top six and Flames make out like bandits in the transaction.
2. Treliving finds a deal that alters the chemistry of the top six and both teams get fair value in the transaction.
3. Treliving checks the market, doesn't like the return and decides to leave the core as is unless someone ups their offer.
4. Treliving takes the best offer he can find for one of Gaudreau or Monahan and moves them in a trade that is clearly a loss for the Flames.

Would much rather have 3 than 4.

One could see that there would be a difficulty of setting value for Gaudreau and Monahan and basically any Flame roster player

2018-19 was a career year for the franchise and pretty much every player on the roster.. The most consistent player on the team Giordano beat his previous career year by 18 pts a 32% increase on his 56 pts in 2015-16

The Flames and the fans are expecting a trade return base on the inflated value of the 2018-19 player. The trading partner is looking at the 15-20% fall off and extrapolating the trend forward...

Most of the trade proposals I have seem on this board might have been reasonable in the Summer of 2019 but now would be in your category 1 trades...

The trouble with hanging on for another year is if the players the Flames would like to cycle out have another decline year they will not bring back a quality low-risk top level player.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

One could see that there would be a difficulty of setting value for Gaudreau and Monahan and basically any Flame roster player

2018-19 was a career year for the franchise and pretty much every player on the roster.. The most consistent player on the team Giordano beat his previous career year by 18 pts a 32% increase on his 56 pts in 2015-16

The Flames and the fans are expecting a trade return base on the inflated value of the 2018-19 player. The trading partner is looking at the 15-20% fall off and extrapolating the trend forward...

Most of the trade proposals I have seem on this board might have been reasonable in the Summer of 2019 but now would be in your category 1 trades...

The trouble with hanging on for another year is if the players the Flames would like to cycle out have another decline year they will not bring back a quality low-risk top level player.

If the offers are based on a Gaudreau slide then you don't move him, as his career arch suggests he bounces back.

He doesn't have to bounce back to the 2018-19 season to bring in value, and he'll still have a year left to go.

Giordano is 37 he won't put up career numbers again, but both Monahan and Gaudreau are young enough not to fire sale them based on a bad season.

Over the last three seasons Gaudreau is the 18th most productive skater in time per 60. That has value. If not keep him. He's right in a pocket with Hall, Point, Eichel, Wheeler and Tavares.

Nobody is talking about their decline.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If the offers are based on a Gaudreau slide then you don't move him, as his career arch suggests he bounces back.

He doesn't have to bounce back to the 2018-19 season to bring in value, and he'll still have a year left to go.

Giordano is 37 he won't put up career numbers again, but both Monahan and Gaudreau are young enough not to fire sale them based on a bad season.

Over the last three seasons Gaudreau is the 18th most productive skater in time per 60. That has value. If not keep him. He's right in a pocket with Hall, Point, Eichel, Wheeler and Tavares.

Nobody is talking about their decline.

Good examples

Wheeler / Tavares with their under a ppg 2019-20 are not going to bring back a spectacular value and are basically in the Gaudreau boat of declining value.

Pretty sure that the Flames wouldn't give Valimaki and Lindholm for either of them. That is the kind of return that is appears from the rumor thread the Flames were shopping with Gaudreau... solid top-6 forward and best young d-man

[The Original FFIV]

I see the logic here from the flames side. Have a competent rhd that can play all situations and take the pressure off the the top 4, esp on special teams. Gio has to have his minutes managed, and no sense burning out your top 4 by having them play pk and pp. having a competent bottom pair probably means more even minutes as well, which you can do if there isn’t a deep drop in your bottom pair, which we’ve had in recent seasons.

Problem is see if that players under 1m are probably too valuable to their current team to be moved given the flat cap. This probably involves sending money out for a player that has a higher cap. We might be taking back some term as well, which may help us with expansion draft eligibility.

Some candidates

Colin Miller from Buffalo (Montour/Risto probably part of bigger deal which is unlikely)
David Savard from Columbus
Connor Murphy from Chicago
Nick Jensen from Washington (3rd team has to be involved as they are up against cap)
Anton Stralman from Florida
Kurtis McDiarmid from LA (can see la keeping him unless we pay a premium given his favorable cap hit)
Damon Severson (unlikely unless it’s part of a bigger deal)

Probably involves moving Derek Ryan as he would logically be the odd man out if we move lindholm to C. Can see a team like CLB interested as he seems like a torts kind of player.

Is having Ryan making 3+ as 4th line C worse than having one of the above making 3+ on bottom pair? For me it is a wash.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Good examples

Wheeler / Tavares with their under a ppg 2019-20 are not going to bring back a spectacular value and are basically in the Gaudreau boat of declining value.

Pretty sure that the Flames wouldn't give Valimaki and Lindholm for either of them. That is the kind of return that is appears from the rumor thread the Flames were shopping with Gaudreau... solid top-6 forward and best young d-man

Yeah no.

Wheeler is 34 and four more years at $8.5M
Tavares is 30 with five more years at $11M

Gaudreau is younger (27) and two years at $6.75M in a tight cap world.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah no.

Wheeler is 34 and four more years at $8.5M
Tavares is 30 with five more years at $11M

Gaudreau is younger (27) and two years at $6.75M in a tight cap world.

Just to be clear we are in fact talking about their decline.

Wheeler dropped off just about as much as Gaudreau but with a major injury forcing him to play Centre. Would not be a surprise to him going back up to 90 pts again playing on top line or falling to 50-60 pts as he slows down.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Just to be clear we are in fact talking about their decline.

Wheeler dropped off just about as much as Gaudreau but with a major injury forcing him to play Centre. Would not be a surprise to him going back up to 90 pts again playing on top line or falling to 50-60 pts as he slows down.

They were production similar players.

They're not similar at all in age or compensation which are two key components in trade value.