Speculation: Armchair GM and Rumors Thread XXI EVERYTHING FLAMES-RELATED

[OvermanKingGainer]

On an unrelated note, is Shinkaruk waiver exempt still?

Waiver-exempt, but not expansion-exempt.

 

[Lunatik]

Ferland on the top line is ridiculous, putting him there is a farce. He's at best a 3rd line forward right now and it was stated Brouwer would play with young forwards. So he will either play with Gaudreau/Monahan or Tkachuk/Bennett or Shinkaruk/Bennett

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I agree about Ferland being in the bottom 6. But I'm actually really interested to see how he does this year. I know the Flames like him, but now he'll have a new coach so I'm really curious to see his player usage. Also, Ferland got away completely from playing his game. I think he got injured, then got tentative trying to play physical. Some nights he was trying to be way to fancy and he was totally useless, other than a few shifts a game. I'm hoping he puts it together and realizes who he is and what makes him impact a game.

 

[Janks]

What's everyone's thoughts on bringing back Hudler for a cheap 1-2 year deal to play beside Bennett and Tkachuk? He could mentor them like with Johnny and Sean, and wouldn't need to be a physical presence as both kids have that. That would leave Brouwer for the kids, and Frolik on a line with Backs still.

 

[Calgareee]

What's everyone's thoughts on bringing back Hudler for a cheap 1-2 year deal to play beside Bennett and Tkachuk? He could mentor them like with Johnny and Sean, and wouldn't need to be a physical presence as both kids have that. That would leave Brouwer for the kids, and Frolik on a line with Backs still.

I was saying a while ago that Huds would he nice to bring back on a cheap 1-2 year deal. Wouldn't want to shell out more than 2-2.5 mill though. would be a really versatile guy to have around.

 

[tyflames]

What's everyone's thoughts on bringing back Hudler for a cheap 1-2 year deal to play beside Bennett and Tkachuk? He could mentor them like with Johnny and Sean, and wouldn't need to be a physical presence as both kids have that. That would leave Brouwer for the kids, and Frolik on a line with Backs still.

I would, though I don't think we will and the money and term would have to be low. I think he will most likely get a better offer then we would put together.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I like it. We should try to deal Wideman and sign Hudz to a two year deal.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Hudler
Ferland-Backlund-Frolik
Shinkaruk-Bennett-Brouwer
Bouma-Stajan-Chiasson

Gives us time to develop Tkachuk properly.

 

[Turning Mangiapanese]

On a one year deal I would absolutely take Huds back. But it all hinges on dumping Wideman somewhere (I'm looking at NJ).

 

[Janks]

I would, though I don't think we will and the money and term would have to be low. I think he will most likely get a better offer then we would put together.

Hopefully the fact he had a pretty meh time with Florida might convince him to sign here again. Even 1 year, 2 million would be sufficient.

 

[Volica]

Not interested in Huds to be honest. Unless on league minimum, I'm hoping we've moved on from him.

One dimensional offense, I believe, isn't required in this team anymore.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I feel mixed about it. Like I'd consider a 2 year, 5 million dollar contract (basically what I wanted to pay Colborne). But I'm unsure if we need him at all.

But if he scores 60pts next year, he could be a great asset to deal if we're out of a playoff spot, especially at that money.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I would bring Hudler back, but not for the top line otherwise it's just too easy for other teams to shut it down.

Gaudreau - Monahan - Brouwer
Hudler - Backlund - Frolik
Shinkaruk/Tkachuk - Bennett - Stajan

Top nine looks a lot better in that scenario.

 

[Lunatik]

I supported Hudler here and felt we got took when we traded him, but we have moved on from him and it needs to stay that way.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

I would bring Hudler back, but not for the top line otherwise it's just too easy for other teams to shut it down.

Gaudreau - Monahan - Brouwer
Hudler - Backlund - Frolik
Shinkaruk/Tkachuk - Bennett - Stajan

Top nine looks a lot better in that scenario.

I think he'd make the most sense with Bennett. That line is inherently going to see the easiest matchups since Backs is the checker and Monahan/Gaudreau will naturally be drawing the tough matchups when opposing coaches get the chance. Throw pretty much anyone else (Stajan, Jooris if re-signed, Ferland) with Backs/Frolik and they'll be just fine.

Although I honestly still really want to see Wideman for Iginla happen.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I think he'd make the most sense with Bennett. That line is inherently going to see the easiest matchups since Backs is the checker and Monahan/Gaudreau will naturally be drawing the tough matchups when opposing coaches get the chance. Throw pretty much anyone else (Stajan, Jooris if re-signed, Ferland) with Backs/Frolik and they'll be just fine.

Although I honestly still really want to see Wideman for Iginla happen.

Yeah I agree with that first bit.

I don't think Wideman for Iginla is remotely possible.

 

[slappipappi]

I like it. We should try to deal Wideman and sign Hudz to a two year deal.

Gee, moving Wideman to save cap space, I wonder why the Flames have figured that one out?

 

[FlamesFan18]

Anyone else think the Flames will be acquiring another forward through FA or trade?

As of now these are the sure bets on the roster

Gaudreau - Monahan - Brouwer
? - Bennett - Frolik
Ferland - Backlund - ?
Bouma - Stajan - Chiasson
Bollig, ?

Are they really gonna bank on 3 prospects (Tkachuk, Shinkaruk, Hamilton/Hathway most likely) to fill the holes. I think they sign another guy and have 12/14 forward spots.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Thinking back on Treliving's comments about Brouwer playing with "the kids" I'm not so sure Monahan & Gaudreau qualify as the kids anymore. Could very well find himself on the third line with Tkachuk & Bennett, which is generally where he'd belong in a perfect world.

Maybe there's another incoming cheap-ish UFA (Pirri, Hudler, Gagner) who may slot in at RW on the top line? Using possibly the cheapest/worst/most optimistic option (Gagner) I wonder if this works better? I know I said earlier that Hudler on the top line makes it easier to shut down, but I also think it allows some maneuvering through the lineup and possibly provide more scoring balance among the top nine. It also keeps the key pairs together (Gaudreau/Monahan, Backlund/Frolik, Tkachuk/Bennett - assumed)

Gaudreau - Monahan - Gagner
Shinkaruk/Ferland - Backlund - Frolik
Tkachuk / Ferland - Bennett - Brouwer
Bouma - Stajan - Chiasson
x- Bollig, Hathaway, Hamilton

Or perhaps there's someone being looked at via the trade route.

Or even more perhaps, it's time to put Gaudreau with Bennett?

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Or even more perhaps, it's time to put Gaudreau with Bennett?

I'm not sure what this solves. Gaudreau and Monahan have developed great chemistry, no need to mess with that unless it solves one of our problems. I'm not convinced Gaudreau-Bennett, would be any better than Gaudreau-Monahan.

I mean, at some point we will probably have the opportunity to experiment with injuries, perhaps out of the playoff hunt at the end of the year, at certain situations during games etc.

As it stands now, Brouwer is the obvious choice to play RW on the top line. Things could change, but I don't foresee anything major displacing him form that role. Even if we add Hudler, Gagner or Pirri, I think Brouwer is the best option there. Though, I'm not a huge fan of adding any of the guys mentioned.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

I'm not sure what this solves.

What it solves is the fact that Gaudreau/Monahan have no presence down low as a primary pair and you're left hoping the third wheel can do the dirty work while still keeping up offensively.

Having Bennett in the corners lets you get away with more of a pure scorer on the opposite wing of Gaudreau rather than a grinder, because Bennett is a natural skilled grinder who can still score as well as anyone.

a top 12 something like

Shinkaruk-Bennett-Gaudreau
Ferland-Monahan-Brouwer
Frolik-Backlund-Chiasson
Bouma-Stajan-Hathaway

(Assuming Tkachuk is sent back to junior for the year and Jankowski is sent to Stockton.)

 

[AgeOfBennett]

What it solves is the fact that Gaudreau/Monahan have no presence down low as a primary pair and you're left hoping the third wheel can do the dirty work while still keeping up offensively.

Having Bennett in the corners lets you get away with more of a pure scorer on the opposite wing of Gaudreau rather than a grinder, because Bennett is a natural skilled grinder who can still score as well as anyone.

a top 12 something like

Shinkaruk-Bennett-Gaudreau
Ferland-Monahan-Brouwer
Frolik-Backlund-Chiasson
Bouma-Stajan-Hathaway

(Assuming Tkachuk is sent back to junior for the year and Jankowski is sent to Stockton.)

It's a bit unrealistic to put Bennett as 1C. Also Gaudreau is not a RW, and Frolik is not a LW. If anyone has to switch sides it's Shink. I think Bennett and Gaudreau might be tried out together but I see Bennett being able to soon drive a line on his own, so it would be better to have him and Johnny on different lines

 

[Skobel24]

Thinking back on Treliving's comments about Brouwer playing with "the kids" I'm not so sure Monahan & Gaudreau qualify as the kids anymore. Could very well find himself on the third line with Tkachuk & Bennett, which is generally where he'd belong in a perfect world.

Maybe there's another incoming cheap-ish UFA (Pirri, Hudler, Gagner) who may slot in at RW on the top line? Using possibly the cheapest/worst/most optimistic option (Gagner) I wonder if this works better? I know I said earlier that Hudler on the top line makes it easier to shut down, but I also think it allows some maneuvering through the lineup and possibly provide more scoring balance among the top nine. It also keeps the key pairs together (Gaudreau/Monahan, Backlund/Frolik, Tkachuk/Bennett - assumed)

Gaudreau - Monahan - Gagner
Shinkaruk/Ferland - Backlund - Frolik
Tkachuk / Ferland - Bennett - Brouwer
Bouma - Stajan - Chiasson
x- Bollig, Hathaway, Hamilton

Or perhaps there's someone being looked at via the trade route.

Or even more perhaps, it's time to put Gaudreau with Bennett?

I'd gladly try Gagner out on a cheap one year deal. He's still only 26 too.

I think if the Flames told him he'd be given a chance on the top line with Gaudreau and Monahan, he'd jump at the opportunity.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

What it solves is the fact that Gaudreau/Monahan have no presence down low as a primary pair and you're left hoping the third wheel can do the dirty work while still keeping up offensively.

Having Bennett in the corners lets you get away with more of a pure scorer on the opposite wing of Gaudreau rather than a grinder, because Bennett is a natural skilled grinder who can still score as well as anyone.

a top 12 something like

Shinkaruk-Bennett-Gaudreau
Ferland-Monahan-Brouwer
Frolik-Backlund-Chiasson
Bouma-Stajan-Hathaway

(Assuming Tkachuk is sent back to junior for the year and Jankowski is sent to Stockton.)

Monahan is far from poor down low. He has shown the ability to use his size to protect the puck quite often actually. Too say they have no presence down low is simply not true. The larger problem of that line's lack of down low game until trade deadline was the fact that 2/3 of it was 5'10" or less and 180 or less, and much less than you claim to do with Monahan. Is Bennett stronger down low, sure, I will certainly concede that, but moving him up with Gaudreau creates more problems than it solves in my mind.

The strength of the potential pairs is the way the are set up. Gaudreau/Monahan, Tkachuk/Bennett, and Backlund/Frolik all have things that make them click, at least in theory when it comes to Tkachuk and Bennett, but the other 2 have been tested and proven to work. Every player in every pair compliments each other well, especially the first two. Monahan' shot/release and hands in tight compliment Gaudreau's high end vision and playmaking ability. Bennett is also able to create offensive opportunities, granted through slightly different measures as Gaudreau. Tkachuk will also go hard to the net and has a good set up ability of his own in order to compliment Bennett.

With your proposed line-up it is much less of a 3 line threat when it comes to offence. I really question that 2nd lines ability to create much offence. Leaving the projected pairs as is would really be a tough offence to contain, when all of your top 3 lines are able to create offence consistently. They are all scoring threats, not so much in your lineup.

 

[Skobel24]

Unless some stronger chemistry develops, I think Gaudreau - Monahan, Backlund - Frolik, and Tkachuk - Bennett all stay together.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I wouldn't hate Gagner at all.

Also, I do think Brouwer might play with Bennett.