Players that you think have played their final year with the Flames? (18-19 Edition)

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Thank you.

The only way TJ Brodie is moved is if the team gets an offer they can't resist for a young RD that belongs on the top pair. If Toronto offers Liljegren or Winnipeg offers RFA Trouba, that's the only situation where we move Brodie.

People who don't like Brodie's occasional turnovers are missing the forest for the trees.

It's not about disliking Brodie, but about the realities of our defensive corps being crowded.

You have a choice this summer:

Move one of Brodie or Hamonic - both of whom will be on expiring deals in 2019-20 - or force Kylington back to Stockton. And Kylington has demonstrated he is an every day NHL player.

And, frankly, Brodie will have far more value with a full year on a good value contract and after a very good year being lifted by Gio.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

People who don't like Brodie's occasional turnovers are missing the forest for the trees.

They won't be able to retain both Hamonic and Brodie next offseason (both due for raises) which is why I expect Brodie to be moved at the draft.

[The Boy Wonder]

Very early to do this but what I would love to see would be the following players moved out

Smith - probably doesn't even get a PTO elsewhere.
Brodie - Play has been slipping, hoping to get something out of him
Stone - now that we missed out on his bro theres no need to keep him around
Neal - Too expensive, and hurt his knee, when have you ever seen a guy come back faster after a knee injury? Thats scary for 4 more years. should be a PTO within 2 seasons but hopefully someone elses problem
Frolik - Attractive contract for a team looking to hit cap floor, maybe restock our prospect shelves a bit
Prout - probably looking elsewhere
Hathaway - easily replaced or kept, doesn't really impact that much.

I know this is a ton of turnover again but I think theres a lot of room for improvement on this roster and none of these guys should be in our long term plans.

[Duffalufagus]

Brodie
Frolik
Stone
Smith

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by LWcrowfoot

I understand you're not a big believer in Rasmus (I am) but Timothy Liljegren is an odd suggestion for the type of player the Flames couldn't resist adding to the top pair. The guy was down in the ECHL just a month ago for a game. He might be a star but right now he's rawer then Kylington.

I would like to have more than one bullet in the proverbial chamber especially if/when Rasmus falters if we were to move away our #2 Dman.

But yeah, Liljegren is not going to step into a top pair role right away. At least he'd have the upside to.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It's not about disliking Brodie, but about the realities of our defensive corps being crowded.

You have a choice this summer:

Move one of Brodie or Hamonic - both of whom will be on expiring deals in 2019-20 - or force Kylington back to Stockton. And Kylington has demonstrated he is an every day NHL player.

And, frankly, Brodie will have far more value with a full year on a good value contract and after a very good year being lifted by Gio.

No, you force Valimaki back to Stockton and call him up where there is an inevitible injury. The kid will be 21 and there is ZERO urgency to have him in the NHL in the midst of a cup window at the expense of a top pairing D. Or you have Valimaki and Kylington split duties 40 / 40.

You're creating an issue that really isn't an issue.

And either way, Valimaki and Kylington play the left side. Moving out a RD doesn't solve that issue. We have 4 left defensemen and only three left defensemen spots, someone will lose ice time. Our coach subscribes to lefty-righty pairings and only made an exception for Brodie.

[Haplo]

If Brodie is as underrated among GMs as he is among Flames fans, we might as well keep him and trade Hamonic instead.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

They won't be able to retain both Hamonic and Brodie next offseason (both due for raises) which is why I expect Brodie to be moved at the draft.

I would much prefer to move Stone out, even at the cost of a minor asset.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

I would much prefer to move Stone out, even at the cost of a minor asset.

Stone is going to be difficult to move if he doesn't play again this season. His contract expires at the end of next season but I'm sure they would love to move him if they could.

[Duffalufagus]

Originally Posted by Haplo

If Brodie is as underrated among GMs as he is among Flames fans, we might as well keep him and trade Hamonic instead.

Given what we paid, Hammer not leaving. That is a chia-esque move. Best, and I mean best, return would be what we paid.

Give the he guy has upped his game and is on a reasonable deal, I highly doubt you trade what is a value contract for a top 4 dman

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Haplo

If Brodie is as underrated among GMs as he is among Flames fans, we might as well keep him and trade Hamonic instead.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It's not about disliking Brodie, but about the realities of our defensive corps being crowded.

You have a choice this summer:

Move one of Brodie or Hamonic - both of whom will be on expiring deals in 2019-20 - or force Kylington back to Stockton. And Kylington has demonstrated he is an every day NHL player.

And, frankly, Brodie will have far more value with a full year on a good value contract and after a very good year being lifted by Gio.

...

[Duffalufagus]

Originally Posted by Haplo

If Brodie is as underrated among GMs as he is among Flames fans, we might as well keep him and trade Hamonic instead.

Why trade hammer? Top four d man on really good term

[Haplo]

Originally Posted by Duffalufagus

Given what we paid, Hammer not leaving. That is a chia-esque move. Best, and I mean best, return would be what we paid.

Give the he guy has upped his game and is on a reasonable deal, I highly doubt you trade what is a value contract for a top 4 dman

Originally Posted by Duffalufagus

Why trade hammer? Top four d man on really good term

Hamonic will be a free-agent after next season, same as Brodie. Both are on value contracts. Why trade Brodie then? He has obvious chemistry with Gio.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

They won't be able to retain both Hamonic and Brodie next offseason (both due for raises) which is why I expect Brodie to be moved at the draft.

I think you're overestimating these raises. If Brodie gets a raise from 4.65 to 5.25 x 4 years, and Hamonic gets a raise from 3.85 to 4.25 x 4 years, is that really a reason to move on from these guys?

Both guys seem to want to be here more than they seem to be after a big payday.

[LWcrowfoot]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I would like to have more than one bullet in the proverbial chamber especially if/when Rasmus falters if we were to move away our #2 Dman.

Oh I'd love that too but it's hard to have that in the chamber. Not an easy thing to have a number two in waiting though. Although I think the Flames already do.

But yeah, Liljegren is not going to step into a top pair role right away. .

Yeah, Liljegren is what.. 1-2 years from being an NHL'er, another two from being a legit top pairing guy (if it happens). He'd just be a nice prospect to have, not a solution. The guys we have are much closer.

At least he'd have the upside to

Personally I think the three guys we have are on par or better than him.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by LWcrowfoot

Oh I'd love that too but it's hard to have that in the chamber. Not an easy thing to have a number two in waiting though. Although I think the Flames already do.

Exactly. So trading away a #2 seems illogical to me. Especially since I see Andersson as a middle pair guy not a true #2, especially next season.

Personally I think the three guys we have are on par or better than him.

Two of those three guys play the left side of the ice. So it doesn't matter if they're better than Liljegren or better than Brodie.

Brodie playing the right was a comprimise Peters made because Brodie prefers that side, I don't think it's something the organization will be doing willy-nilly going forward.

[TheScorpion]

What makes Liljegren so special in comparison to Andersson? I think they're both very good young players. Why does Liljegren have top-pair potential and the ability to make up for a Brodie departure when Andersson purportedly cannot do the same? If anything, I'd be more confident in Andersson's potential, given his ability to play a full NHL season (albeit in a sheltered role) at such a young age.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

No, you force Valimaki back to Stockton and call him up where there is an inevitible injury. The kid will be 21 and there is ZERO urgency to have him in the NHL in the midst of a cup window at the expense of a top pairing D. Or you have Valimaki and Kylington split duties 40 / 40.

You're creating an issue that really isn't an issue.

And either way, Valimaki and Kylington play the left side. Moving out a RD doesn't solve that issue. We have 4 left defensemen and only three left defensemen spots, someone will lose ice time. Our coach subscribes to lefty-righty pairings and only made an exception for Brodie.

If you want to adhere to a strict L-R with only Brodie as an exception rule, then that means Hamonic is the one who goes. And given I personally think Hamonic is better than Brodie, I dislike that.

And no, I am not creating an issue that isn't there. But you are merely delaying one. Because you are not only blocking an NHL ready kid, but now you're putting yourself in a position where you're going to risk losing fully one half of your top four to free agency without any of their replacements being given the time and chance to learn the role beforehand.

One of Brodie or Hamonic is almost certainly gone by the end of 2019-20. That's just reality. The question is: when and how can you get the most value for the team? Both in terms of the guys on the ice, and in terms of the assets we can get in return for the one who has to leave? I say Brodie, and I say this summer.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I think you're overestimating these raises. If Brodie gets a raise from 4.65 to 5.25 x 4 years, and Hamonic gets a raise from 3.85 to 4.25 x 4 years, is that really a reason to move on from these guys?

Both guys seem to want to be here more than they seem to be after a big payday.

Hamonic is going to get $5 million per season at minimum or he will be taking his services elsewhere. He will be looking to make some money after playing on a discount on the current contract. The problem with giving Brodie a raise is that he's really not that good unless he's paired with Gio so handing him a long term deal at $5.25 when Gio is 35 years old is not a great idea.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Stone is going to be difficult to move if he doesn't play again this season. His contract expires at the end of next season but I'm sure they would love to move him if they could.

If he doesn't play for the rest of the season, he'll likely get a medical retirement. He's skating, so the main concern at this time is bleeding if he's still on anticoagulants. If they can't take him off of them, he will likely never play hockey again.

Anyway, I mentioned about trading him with a minor asset (if he's ever medically cleared to play again) because the asset going with him could help to grease the wheels of the trade. Strangely enough, Ottawa could be a good landing place for him (let's say, for example, Stone and a 3rd for a 4th), as they will need help reaching the cap floor, and a player with one remaining contract year may be the ideal candidate to do that.

[Calgary4LIfe]

"Brodie falls off a cliff when not paired with Giordano"


Peters moves him to the third pairing to spread-out the defence, and Brodie proceeds to get a goal and an assist.


Unless a really good deal opens up for Brodie, he won't get dealt. Nobody is ready to take over his minutes and responsibilities. If another GM wants to overpay, or something else falls into Treliving's lap where he can replace Brodie on that top pair, Treliving isn't about to weaken a critical position for this team.


I am all for trading Brodie to upgrade somewhere, as long as he can be replaced adequately. That's the key right there. There is no way he is simply going to be traded to free up cap space, with the assumption that Rasmus can simply come in and play that position all year. Either way you look at it, you will be hard-pressed to replace Brodie's play with another defencemen at or below that cap hit. Other teams simply don't want to deal their cap-friendly high-end defencemen. I believe that it is going to take another season for Rasmus to get seasoned and given more opportunity and responsibilities and see how he handles it.



Want to make room on the cap? You trade guys away who aren't producing relative to their cap hits. If you keep these around, you end up as being a cap team that underperforms regularly.


Neal - Stone - Frolik, in that order, is the guys Treliving needs to take a look at and figure out what he can do. Hathaway is as good as gone IMO, since some team out there will give him a bit more than what Calgary will give him in the off-season, especially if he continues his strong play.