Speculation: Armchair GM and Rumors Thread XX

[Calculon]

Are you guys interested in acquiring Fleury in the summer?

Or would you rather go after Reimer in FA or try to get one of Andersen/Gibson?

No interest in Fleury at all; too old, too expensive, too many injuries and has a NMC. If Gillies (Flames' goalie of the future probably) needs to be protected, then Fleury is a non-starter.

Ducks won't trade a starting goalie to a division rival for anything short of a massive overpayment, so Andersen and Gibson can be crossed off the list.

So, we're left with Reimer basically who'd be a fine acquisition on a two or three year deal.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I'd trade a 2nd for Fleury. Not Calgary's. Would Fleury waive to come to Calgary? Probably not. Don't see a deal here.

If the alternative is Reimer on a 2-3 year deal, I take that instead. Unfortunately I don't think Reimer wants a 2-3 year deal, probably wants something longer term.

 

[Fig]

Engelland on an ELC would be great though...

The contract he was supposed to get before we decided to use him to reach the floor...

Sieloff's breakout pass is miles ahead of Engelland. I think people don't realize that his skillset is as modern as it gets, despite his lack of offensive zone skill and defensive polish. He's not a glass-and-out defensive defenseman, he's really damn good at separating man from puck and then finding his center or winger on the exit.

Hence, better Eggs.

TSpoon is looks to be a 5/6 right now, no? Sieloff we hope makes it to being a 5/6? Or does Sieloff have more that I'm not realizing?

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Ace hit the nail on the head. If Riemer wants a big contract, a trade will make more sense. Also, why wouldn't Fleury waive to come here? Does anyone think he would rather ride the pine for the remainder of his contract? These guys are competitive athletes and I'm sure he wants to be moved.

 

[Skobel24]

Regarding Sieloff, I want him keep him. I really think he can be a Sarich/Hannan type.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Very much so. He's been nothing but quietly solid when given a chance.

If Smid's healthy, I'm guessing he spends most the year in Stockton. Don't think the owners will agree to a buyout unless the cap actually goes down. As for Wideman, I'm hoping they can find a way to move him but I'm not optimistic at this point.

It irks me that he is always used as a throw in, in many trade proposals. I want to keep him.

I also don't know how willing ownership will be to buyout anyone, but I think if they are Smid is probably the best, most sensible option. As for Wideman, I think he has negative value if he needs to be protected in expansion; if not I could see a team who lacks offence from the backend take a shot at him for a conditional pick, likely performance based.

 

[NYR Viper]

Hey guys, Rangers fan here, could you give me a brief description of Nakladal? His fancystats look pretty good. The Rangers may be in the market for a RD and I'm wondering how he looked

 

[Volica]

Hey guys, Rangers fan here, could you give me a brief description of Nakladal? His fancystats look pretty good. The Rangers may be in the market for a RD and I'm wondering how he looked

Solid bottom pair guy with a big shot. Fairly smart player; can play the PP fairly well. Alright skater with some size, who is not afraid of pushing his frame around in corners.

Overall a guy I hope Flames keep.

 

[moon*]

Hey guys, Rangers fan here, could you give me a brief description of Nakladal? His fancystats look pretty good. The Rangers may be in the market for a RD and I'm wondering how he looked

He looked like a 6/7.

I found him to be really slow and often caught flat footed. He isn't really physical but big enough that he doesn't get pushed around. He has a hard shot but isn't great at getting it through.

I personally wasn't a fan of his play in his own zone. As I mentioned I found him slow and flat footed a lot and he doesn't have the hockey IQ to make up for that.

I am fine if he is brought back, ideally as the 7th guy who fills in for injuries, but also wouldn't really care if he isn't re-signed. I have him behind the big 3, Jokkipakka, Wotherspoon and Engelland for sure and think with Kulak and Kylington we would be ok if one of the top 6 went down.

 

[Sparky93]

Regarding Sieloff, I want him keep him. I really think he can be a Sarich/Hannan type.

Maybe if you mean the Sarich/Hannan that we saw for the Flames, at the tail end of their careers. He's doesn't have nearly the talent either of those guys had, at his age. I'd say absolute ceiling is a number six defenseman in the NHL, if all the stars align

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Maybe if you mean the Sarich/Hannan that we saw for the Flames, at the tail end of their careers. He's doesn't have nearly the talent either of those guys had, at his age. I'd say absolute ceiling is a number six defenseman in the NHL, if all the stars align

Which still matters from time to time.



That was still one of my favorite moments in Flames history as it spurred a hell of a comeback.

 

[Fig]

He looked like a 6/7.

I found him to be really slow and often caught flat footed. He isn't really physical but big enough that he doesn't get pushed around. He has a hard shot but isn't great at getting it through.

I personally wasn't a fan of his play in his own zone. As I mentioned I found him slow and flat footed a lot and he doesn't have the hockey IQ to make up for that.

I am fine if he is brought back, ideally as the 7th guy who fills in for injuries, but also wouldn't really care if he isn't re-signed. I have him behind the big 3, Jokkipakka, Wotherspoon and Engelland for sure and think with Kulak and Kylington we would be ok if one of the top 6 went down.

Nakladal is also playing his first year in NA. I don't disagree with your analysis, but I think to be fair, this tidbit of info should be mentioned as well.

I want to keep Nakladal. But with the following names fighting for slots 4/5/6, I don't know if we can without a trade/injuries/buyout...

Wideman
Jokkipakka
Engelland
Smid
Nakladal
Wotherspoon
-----------Few years away to being a mainstay 5/6
Kulak
Kylington
Andersson

 

[Demetric]

wideman for Nick Holden from Col, thoughts?

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Regarding Sieloff, I want him keep him. I really think he can be a Sarich/Hannan type.

I think he can be more. Think Simon Despres before concussions.

 

[moon*]

Sieloff has been a repeated healthy scratch on a weak AHL team.

There is nothing about his game that indicates he will be anything more than a 4-6 guy on an AHL team.

If there are people who are still crazy enough to think he can turn into something of value lets move him now. Otherwise he seems to be doing nothing other than taking up space from other guys that may actually have a future with the Flames.

 

[Fig]

wideman for Nick Holden from Col, thoughts?

IKEAstartthecar.jpg

I'd prefer a forward, but if you can get Holden and bury him easier than Wideman... uhh.. no brainer. I think management might even consider kicking in a pick.


CBJ poster suggested 6OA for wingers instead. Anything we'd want? Something like a Saad + Rychel and a few more pieces to balance value make sense? (But then we'd have way too many LW, and no RW). Or are there some other great prospects I'm not paying attention to?

JG - Mony - (Ferland?)
Saad - Backlund - Stajan
Shinkaruk - Bennett - Frolik
Rychel - Bouma - Colborne

13th Bollig
Jooris not retained

I looks weird to me. I don't think I like it. I don't think salary works... and Dat RW...

 

[Johnny GODreau]

wideman for Nick Holden from Col, thoughts?

Hell naw. Wideman is good for 30 odd points a year.

 

[moon*]

wideman for Nick Holden from Col, thoughts?

Not sure why Colorado does it or if Wideman waives to go there but I would do that in a second.

But really I would do anything that gets rid of Wideman.

 

[Fig]

Not sure why Colorado does it or if Wideman waives to go there but I would do that in a second.

But really I would do anything that gets rid of Wideman.

Agreed.

But if we had the line open, I'd also consider asking Roy while the phones are open whether we could use the 6OA and add something we're comfortable with to acquire Rantanen.

Both trades are probably equal pipe dreams.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Now that we're fairly sure that Wideman won't need protecting for the expansion draft, the urgency to trade him "at any cost" is non-existent.

Why sell low? Trade him at the deadline where his value will be highest - at least higher than it is now. (assuming ploffs aren't in the picture)

 

[Demetric]

my thought was they get wideman to help ofset the loss of Barrie. Holden, is more of what we need in a stay at home D man with size and is physical and we free up cap space to sign / trade for better goalie and top 6 RW.

 

[moon*]

Now that we're fairly sure that Wideman won't need protecting for the expansion draft, the urgency to trade him "at any cost" is non-existent.

Why sell low? Trade him at the deadline where his value will be highest - at least higher than it is now. (assuming ploffs aren't in the picture)

Wideman was borderline unplayable 5 on 5 last year and not a whole lot better 5 on 5 the year before.

Just because he can be traded at the deadline doesn't mean that a team will want him. If we can move him now for something of value its probably in our best interest because playing him is likely going to result in his value going down not up.

Plus with the defense we have there really is no spot for him so he is preventing a younger and better player from playing/developing.

 

[Volica]

Now that we're fairly sure that Wideman won't need protecting for the expansion draft, the urgency to trade him "at any cost" is non-existent.

Why sell low? Trade him at the deadline where his value will be highest - at least higher than it is now. (assuming ploffs aren't in the picture)

Wishful thinking this Wideman increasing his value as long as he doesn't nail an official in the back, he'll have made some strides

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Wideman was borderline unplayable 5 on 5 last year and not a whole lot better 5 on 5 the year before.

Just because he can be traded at the deadline doesn't mean that a team will want him. If we can move him now for something of value its probably in our best interest because playing him is likely going to result in his value going down not up.

Plus with the defense we have there really is no spot for him so he is preventing a younger and better player from playing/developing.

Sure if he can be moved for something of value, you do it. I don't think that's likely or even possible right now (because of a poor season, coupled with the suspension fresh in everyone's minds), unless the Flames retain salary (proven unwillingness to do so) as I don't think he has value to other teams right now. So if Wideman is worth X in the trade market today, and nothing else changes, then by the deadline all that's happened is the number of teams that are able to take on his salary have increased, increasing the chances of a better return - even if it's only marginally better (see: David Jones)

As far as preventing a younger and better player from playing and developing, the Flames don't really appear to have that player yet. Granted that may change after development camps / training camp this summer/fall.

 

[moon*]

I think what can happen with Wideman beyond teams being able to take his salary is more teams see how awful he is. My guess is if we keep him there will be 0 teams that want him come trade deadline so if there is a team that wants him now lets take it and run.

I would say the defense could look like:

Brodie-Hamilton
Gio-Jokkipakka
Wotherspoon-Engelland
Nakladal

That leaves Kulak and Kylington in the AHL for call-ups and maybe having to fit Smid in if healthy.

That is plenty of depth for me to replace Wideman and it is likely a young guy like Wotherspoon and/or Kulak that is impacted by Wideman playing.