Speculation: Armchair GM/Rumors Thread v.18.0.1

[Fig]

I think he just missed so much it didn't seem like he was doing it anymore, I'm not concerned.

I guess I should have prefaced that I don't mind Bouma on the team at that cap and IMO the contract is ok.

However I do worry he may change his game and be ineffective as a result, which was the original reason we liked him in the first place.

 

[Lunatik]

I guess I should have prefaced that I don't mind Bouma on the team at that cap and IMO the contract is ok.

However I do worry he may change his game and be ineffective as a result, which was the original reason we liked him in the first place.

I concur, that would suck

 

[HAKAN LOOB]

Bouma should really change the style he blocks shots. It seems like every time he blocks a big one he's hurt badly and can't finish the shift. How he extends a leg out to expose the insides where there's few protection will cost him many games over the season.

He also blocks with the palms of his goddamn hands!

It's one of those things where I'm really surprised Kris Russell didn't pull him aside and tell him how to properly block a shot.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I love Bouma, he's a guy you win with and he would be the first to tell you this season has been a disaster for him. He's paid to much though, when you're cap team, you have to evaluate all areas top to bottom otherwise you aren't doing your job. The Flames retained an asset in re-signing himbut if they were to move that asset at fair value because they need cap space, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. If you want to get paid, you best perform or you can fall out of favour very quickly.

 

[Lifeline]

Quick question though I'm not sure if this is the best place for it. I was looking at Vesey's stats and I noticed he played in the ECAC league instead of the NCAA. My question was how does that league compare to the NCAA? Is it below the NCAA or is it just a separate league with similar quality players. I was on the ECAC's webpage and I noticed a few of their players were signed by NHL teams.

 

[Anglesmith]

Quick question though I'm not sure if this is the best place for it. I was looking at Vesey's stats and I noticed he played in the ECAC league instead of the NCAA. My question was how does that league compare to the NCAA? Is it below the NCAA or is it just a separate league with similar quality players. I was on the ECAC's webpage and I noticed a few of their players were signed by NHL teams.

The NCAA is broken into subdivisions. The ECAC is one of those. Hockey East is another (which is where Johnny Gaudreau played).

 

[Lifeline]

The NCAA is broken into subdivisions. The ECAC is one of those. Hockey East is another (which is where Johnny Gaudreau played).

Excellent, thank you very much.

 

[Lunatik]

The NCAA is broken into subdivisions. The ECAC is one of those. Hockey East is another (which is where Johnny Gaudreau played).

To expand on this further, the ECAC is one of 6 NCAA Division I conferences, in addition to the 6 conferences there is 1 school that is independent. This is how the NCAA Division I hockey is broken down.

• Hockey East
  • Providence College
  • Boston College
  • Boston University
  • Umass-Lowell
  • Umass
  • New Hampshire
  • Uconn
  • Maine
  • Merrimack
  • Vermont
  • Northeastern
• ECAC
  • Princeton
  • Harvard
  • Yale
  • Dartmouth
  • Cornell
  • Union College
  • Clarkson
  • Colgate
  • Brown
  • RPI
  • Quinipiac
  • St. Lawrence
• Big Ten
  • Wisconsin
  • Penn State
  • Michigan State
  • Ohio State
  • Michigan
  • Minnesota
  • Notre Dame (moving to the Big Ten in 2016-17 from Hockey East)
• NCHC
  • Colorado College
  • North Dakota
  • Western Michigan
  • St. Cloud State
  • Nebraska-Omaha
  • Denver
  • Miami-Ohio
  • Minnesota-Duluth
• WCHA
  • Alaska
  • Michigan Tech
  • Lake Superior State
  • Minnesota State
  • Bemidji State
  • Bowling Green
  • Northern Michigan
  • Ferris State
• Atlantic Hockey
  • American International
  • Robert Morris
  • Canisius College
  • Army College
  • Niagara University
  • Sacred Heart
  • Bentley
  • Air Force College
  • Holy Cross
  • RIT
• Independent
  • Arizona State

I find the ECAC quite interesting as far as the conferences go as it has the Ivy League schools in it (except Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania as they do not have Division I hockey programs) and they do not offer athletic scholarships and despite that they turn out some pretty decent hockey players.

Arizona State just finished their first season of their Division I program, I am hoping they get shuffled into the NCHC or WCHA. I would also like to see the Big Ten conference actually have 10 teams

 

[DFF]

I love Bouma, he's a guy you win with and he would be the first to tell you this season has been a disaster for him. He's paid to much though, when you're cap team, you have to evaluate all areas top to bottom otherwise you aren't doing your job. The Flames retained an asset in re-signing himbut if they were to move that asset at fair value because they need cap space, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. If you want to get paid, you best perform or you can fall out of favour very quickly.

Lance Bouma can be replaced with scrub like Hathaway....

Spending money on the bottom lines (Stajan, Bouma, Bolig, Jones, Raymond...etc) is not wise and that's one of the reasons the Flames is at the bottom of the league

 

[Fig]

Lance Bouma can be replaced with scrub like Hathaway....

Spending money on the bottom lines (Stajan, Bouma, Bolig, Jones, Raymond...etc) is not wise and that's one of the reasons the Flames is at the bottom of the league

1. Jones is gone.

2. Said players and contracts were required two seasons ago when we needed warm bodies and/or needed to reach the salary floor. Bouma's was due to a risk of the arbitrator giving more so management compromised.

3. So many kids stepping up and getting regular NHL jobs over vets wasn't predictable at the time. Gaudreau nearly was sent down to the AHL for the season instead of going top 3 in Calder voting. Hathaway in for Bouma who is really injured and banged up this season. Bouma was easily still far superior to Hathaway at the beginning of the season prior to dealing with 2 bad injuries.

4. Said contracts are not bad. Perhaps a year too long, but I'd further argue without said contract, the kids may not have developed as quickly and as effectively as they have these last two seasons.

5. Said 5 players alone are not the reason we are at the bottom of the league. This fall was a result of the ENTIRE team. Sure you said "one" but you're making it sound like the main reason.

6. Who do we have now who can consistently replace those guys?

7. Which kids do you want in the press box instead of actually developing?

8. Rebuild. Standings go up and down till fine tuning happens. Last season was an anomaly.

 

[TkachuckNotTkaczuk]

Lance Bouma can be replaced with scrub like Hathaway....

Spending money on the bottom lines (Stajan, Bouma, Bolig, Jones, Raymond...etc) is not wise and that's one of the reasons the Flames is at the bottom of the league

Fully agree, the best teams in the league seem to be top heavy. Meaning they have their core of highly paid top end talent and then use lower paid ELC players to fill in. Once those players get too expensive they either trade for younger options or let them walk in FA. This, I think is the new reality in the NHL and one we were slow to catch onto. You don't pay 3rd and 4th liners or 3rd pairing dmen like they are high end talent. Only exception to the rule is maybe your 3rd line centre who should be able to pot some points and move up in the lineup and also be a great shutdown player.

That said, I think we are on the right track, hoping Jankowski can become that 3rd line centre and believe that is where management see him slotting in.

 

[Fig]

Question: I have the following thoughts and was wondering if I could get an opinion.

What if... we don't acquire another top 6 LW?
Hear me out. We allow Monahan, Bennett, whoever internally (Janko?) as 1/2/3C. Convert Backlund to 2LW. Keep Backlund on a reasonable cheapish contract for a 2LW. Can jump back to C in events of injury. Backlund has played LW in international tournaments IIRC.

No assets moved out, probably more manageable contract and more "currency" to get a next level upgrade on RW and G?

Ok idea? Dumb idea?

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

What if... we don't acquire another top 6 LW?
Hear me out. We allow Monahan, Bennett, whoever internally (Janko?) as 1/2/3C. Convert Backlund to 2LW.

I literally proposed this four hours ago.

Ok idea?

It's an okg idea.

Dumb idea?

probably, everyone hates my ideas until they realize I was right all along.

 

[AgeOfBennett]

Question: I have the following thoughts and was wondering if I could get an opinion.

What if... we don't acquire another top 6 LW?
Hear me out. We allow Monahan, Bennett, whoever internally (Janko?) as 1/2/3C. Convert Backlund to 2LW. Keep Backlund on a reasonable cheapish contract for a 2LW. Can jump back to C in events of injury. Backlund has played LW in international tournaments IIRC.

No assets moved out, probably more manageable contract and more "currency" to get a next level upgrade on RW and G?

Ok idea? Dumb idea?

Backlund wouldn't be moved to LW. If any of them were to move to wing it would be Bennett (small maybe with Janko) I don't think we to acquire another LW (unless that's Laine ) I think we have a much bigger hole in RW. Maybe shink in the future could help in that area? Apparently he can play both wings. All in all I don't think we need to be going out to acquire a big fish winger this off season. We need to focus on goaltending. I'm pretty sure we have been top 10 in goals per game this year right? It's not like we necessarily need a big boost on offense. Goaltending on the other hand.

I personally think we are a 1G, one top 6 winger away from really contending. Obviously the development of guys like Bennett will be part of that too

 

[Anglesmith]

probably, everyone hates my ideas until they realize I was right all along.

Isn't this a tautology?

 

[Fig]

I literally proposed this four hours ago.

It's an okg idea.

probably, everyone hates my ideas until they realize I was right all along.

Sorry, I totally missed it.

Yeah I was really thinking Backlund would be 3C/2LW like Bennett was. Idea wise, if Bennett supercedes Backlund, we would just have Backlund and Bennett swap roles. Keeping Backlund allows flexibility in event of injuries. This might not be next season, but the season after though.

@pks: I agree. I think we should be looking at top 6 wingers next off season unless Oksposo comes to us on a silver platter. This one I'd focus on drafting and goalies.

Next season fine tuning and development. Season after, finding a guy to push us over the hump/covering any remainder weaknesses.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

It's a dumb idea.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Sorry, I totally missed it.

Don't be, I'm not mad. I'm glad someone has dumb ideas similar to mine

 

[TheHudlinator]

Question: I have the following thoughts and was wondering if I could get an opinion.

What if... we don't acquire another top 6 LW?
Hear me out. We allow Monahan, Bennett, whoever internally (Janko?) as 1/2/3C. Convert Backlund to 2LW. Keep Backlund on a reasonable cheapish contract for a 2LW. Can jump back to C in events of injury. Backlund has played LW in international tournaments IIRC.

No assets moved out, probably more manageable contract and more "currency" to get a next level upgrade on RW and G?

Ok idea? Dumb idea?

I don't hate it (although I prefer to have 3 good centermen than only having 2) but at this rate it will only be for a year until Shinkaruk is ready for the NHL.

 

[moon*]

Question: I have the following thoughts and was wondering if I could get an opinion.

What if... we don't acquire another top 6 LW?
Hear me out. We allow Monahan, Bennett, whoever internally (Janko?) as 1/2/3C. Convert Backlund to 2LW. Keep Backlund on a reasonable cheapish contract for a 2LW. Can jump back to C in events of injury. Backlund has played LW in international tournaments IIRC.

No assets moved out, probably more manageable contract and more "currency" to get a next level upgrade on RW and G?

Ok idea? Dumb idea?

Backlund doesn't have a ton of offensive ability and tends to kill offense a hell of a lot more than create it.

Plus it doesn't really address our need for size or strength in the top 6.

Maybe as a stop gap measure over overpaying for a UFA like Okposo but I don't think you want Backlund playing in your top 6 whether as a winger or center if you have plans to contend for the Cup.

 

[Anglesmith]

The thing I love about Backlund is how he generates so much offence from collecting the puck and skating it out of trouble. I don't know if that aspect of his game would come to the fore as much on the wing. Playing centre lets him go and engage in board battles along the wall in the defensive end, and that usually leads to good things. Our wingers often are tasked with disengaging from battles to make sure they don't leave the point open, and then hoping we recover the puck and get it to them. Backlund's acceleration also helps him beat his man up the ice, which is good both offensively and defensively as a centre.

 

[Fig]

I don't hate it (although I prefer to have 3 good centermen than only having 2) but at this rate it will only be for a year until Shinkaruk is ready for the NHL.

My thoughts for this idea would be in 2 years.

C depth

Mony
Bennett
Backlund
Jankowski?

That's easily 3 good C and conservative estimates on what we have for a 4C. Backlund would be a killer 3C IMO, but a waste there, so move him to 2LW.

Yes, others have mentioned size in top 6 if Backlund on LW, hence the RW upgrade comment. Rather than potentially spend assets on 2LW, 1RW, 2RW, you just need to spend on 1RW and 2RW.

I also believe Stajan will be traded to a rebuilding team and Frolik exposed in expansion due to top 6 RW guys we acquire... Please be gentle.

 

[TheHudlinator]

My thoughts for this idea would be in 2 years.

C depth

Mony
Bennett
Backlund
Jankowski?

That's easily 3 good C and conservative estimates on what we have for a 4C. Backlund would be a killer 3C IMO, but a waste there, so move him to 2LW.

Yes, others have mentioned size in top 6 if Backlund on LW, hence the RW upgrade comment. Rather than potentially spend assets on 2LW, 1RW, 2RW, you just need to spend on 1RW and 2RW.

I also believe Stajan will be traded to a rebuilding team and Frolik exposed in expansion due to top 6 RW guys we acquire... Please be gentle.

I believe that if Janko is ready to be a #3 in 2 years we will move Backlund.

I get what your saying but I think Shinkaruk will be a better option in 2 years on LW than Backlund.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I think we should find a way to keep Backlund. Sign him to a Frolik type contract. I think Janko could be a wing.

 

[Fig]

I believe that if Janko is ready to be a #3 in 2 years we will move Backlund.

I get what your saying but I think Shinkaruk will be a better option in 2 years on LW than Backlund.

I think we should find a way to keep Backlund. Sign him to a Frolik type contract. I think Janko could be a wing.

Why not both?

JG - Mony - RW
Backlund - Bennet - RW
Shink - Janko -RW

Shinkaruk is still theoretically cheap in 2 years and would aid keeping the 3rd line dangerous. Backlund theoretically would be adequate and cheap contract on 2nd line

Janko as wing we don't know info yet... Shink 2nd line, Backlund and Janko on 3rd line if not above?

Size is still an issue though...