Speculation: Armchair GM / Speculation / Rumours Thread XXIV - Beware of Doug

Status
Not open for further replies.
May 27, 2012
17,070
856
Earth
I don't understand the question

Of the players you protect who gets taken out of the protection list and replaced with Ferland?

If they do end up protecting Ferland, someone else is exposed. Looking at the list by Gamo on the other page, I wouldn't drop any of those guys in favour of Ferland. Unless management favours Ferland a lot.
 

MonyontheMoney

Registered User
Apr 5, 2015
4,429
520
Of the players you protect who gets taken out of the protection list and replaced with Ferland?

If they do end up protecting Ferland, someone else is exposed. Looking at the list by Gamo on the other page, I wouldn't drop any of those guys in favour of Ferland. Unless management favours Ferland a lot.

You wouldn't have to drop anyone to protect Ferland.
 
May 27, 2012
17,070
856
Earth
Oh crap. I thought it was 5/3/1 for some reason. I concede. I would protect Ferland in that case since it's a drop off after him.

The other two forwards would have to be Ferland and Brouwer unless we got someone better.
 

OvermanKingGainer

#BennettFreed #CurseofTheSpulll #FreeOliver
Feb 3, 2015
16,133
7,107
2022 Cup to Calgary
Oh crap. I thought it was 5/3/1 for some reason. I concede. I would protect Ferland in that case since it's a drop off after him.

The other two forwards would have to be Ferland and Brouwer unless we got someone better.

I would strongly consider making Versteeg a full time Flame. After Tkachuk, he's been right there with Frolik as our second best winger this year and shouldn't be too expensive to retain given the lack of market demand for offensively capable hockey players.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
I would strongly consider making Versteeg a full time Flame. After Tkachuk, he's been right there with Frolik as our second best winger this year and shouldn't be too expensive to retain given the lack of market demand for offensively capable hockey players.

I think it's easy to be dazzled by Versteeg's slick plays on the PP, but at even strength, I don't know if he's actually been that great consistently. He looked good last game, but for a stretch prior to last game, I didn't notice him contributing anything 5-on-5 at all. He's not much different than Brouwer in that regard- every so often, he'll make a great play or have a great game that makes him seem irreplaceable, and then he'll disappear for a while.

That said, I'm liking Versteeg's play this season. Definitely a positive surprise. I would love to have him back if he can stay healthy, but I don't believe we need to bend over backwards to make that happen.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,955
8,449
OKG, I don't disagree with keeping Versteeg, but for clarity sake, you don't think we need to protect him in the expansion draft, right? Just a general comment about keeping Versteeg?
 

SmellOfVictory

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
10,959
653
Who do you replace with Ferland?

There's an open protection spot for him, even with that list. But even if there wasn't, he's a player worth trading something to Vegas to prevent them from taking him. I wouldn't be mad in the slightest if the Flames gave up a 3rd rounder to keep him if they were in a position that they had to (thankfully they don't).
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
This si how I see our protection shaping up for the expansion draft.

Right now IMO we have:

GOALTENDERS
None. We could either re-sign one of Johnson/Elliott or acquire someone else after the regular season.

DEFENSEMEN
Brodie, Giordano, Hamilton. There is no question or debate here, it doesn't get more black and white than this.

FORWARDS
Backlund, Bennett, Brouwer, Frolik, Gaudreau and Monahan that are guaranteed to be protected. I know certain posters have this irrational disdain for Brouwer but you don't sign a UFA like that and then expose them in the expansion draft when they have played exactly like they were signed to play.

For the final two spots the contenders are Bouma, Chiasson, Ferland, Hathaway, Poirier, Shinkaruk and Stajan. Due his age and contract I do not think you protect Stajan, as much as I like him. Bouma is in the same spot but only due to his contract. Poirier and Shinkaruk have not done anything this year to show they are worth being protected. Out of Chiasson, Ferland and Hathaway, I love Hathaway but I can't justify protecting a 9 minute a night winger that doesn't play special teams and has the least offensive potential of the group. That leaves us protecting Chiasson and Ferland, I know people will disagree here and frankly I think the team may as well, but if we acquire another protection worthy forward, I would protect Chiasson over Ferland; he is more productive, more consistent, he kills penalties and I think will be cheaper to re-sign. But to be brutally honest I'd rather grab two protection worthy forwards and expose both Chiasson and Ferland.
 

SmellOfVictory

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
10,959
653
This si how I see our protection shaping up for the expansion draft.

Right now IMO we have:

GOALTENDERS
None. We could either re-sign one of Johnson/Elliott or acquire someone else after the regular season.

DEFENSEMEN
Brodie, Giordano, Hamilton. There is no question or debate here, it doesn't get more black and white than this.

FORWARDS
Backlund, Bennett, Brouwer, Frolik, Gaudreau and Monahan that are guaranteed to be protected. I know certain posters have this irrational disdain for Brouwer but you don't sign a UFA like that and then expose them in the expansion draft when they have played exactly like they were signed to play.

For the final two spots the contenders are Bouma, Chiasson, Ferland, Hathaway, Poirier, Shinkaruk and Stajan. Due his age and contract I do not think you protect Stajan, as much as I like him. Bouma is in the same spot but only due to his contract. Poirier and Shinkaruk have not done anything this year to show they are worth being protected. Out of Chiasson, Ferland and Hathaway, I love Hathaway but I can't justify protecting a 9 minute a night winger that doesn't play special teams and has the least offensive potential of the group. That leaves us protecting Chiasson and Ferland, I know people will disagree here and frankly I think the team may as well, but if we acquire another protection worthy forward, I would protect Chiasson over Ferland; he is more productive, more consistent, he kills penalties and I think will be cheaper to re-sign. But to be brutally honest I'd rather grab two protection worthy forwards and expose both Chiasson and Ferland.

The disdain for Brouwer isn't irrational; some of us just don't like the contract he's signed to. Also, I disagree with you on Ferland v Chiasson (as is tradition), because Chiasson is consistently mediocre, while Ferland this season has been either solid or impressive depending on the game - also Ferland is 2 years younger and has more growth potential.
 

FlamerForLife

Mon Seanahan
May 22, 2015
4,701
1,926
Calgary
This si how I see our protection shaping up for the expansion draft.

Right now IMO we have:

GOALTENDERS
None. We could either re-sign one of Johnson/Elliott or acquire someone else after the regular season.

DEFENSEMEN
Brodie, Giordano, Hamilton. There is no question or debate here, it doesn't get more black and white than this.

FORWARDS
Backlund, Bennett, Brouwer, Frolik, Gaudreau and Monahan that are guaranteed to be protected. I know certain posters have this irrational disdain for Brouwer but you don't sign a UFA like that and then expose them in the expansion draft when they have played exactly like they were signed to play.

For the final two spots the contenders are Bouma, Chiasson, Ferland, Hathaway, Poirier, Shinkaruk and Stajan. Due his age and contract I do not think you protect Stajan, as much as I like him. Bouma is in the same spot but only due to his contract. Poirier and Shinkaruk have not done anything this year to show they are worth being protected. Out of Chiasson, Ferland and Hathaway, I love Hathaway but I can't justify protecting a 9 minute a night winger that doesn't play special teams and has the least offensive potential of the group. That leaves us protecting Chiasson and Ferland, I know people will disagree here and frankly I think the team may as well, but if we acquire another protection worthy forward, I would protect Chiasson over Ferland; he is more productive, more consistent, he kills penalties and I think will be cheaper to re-sign. But to be brutally honest I'd rather grab two protection worthy forwards and expose both Chiasson and Ferland.

MM you have 6 forwards listed there, and we can only protect a max of 7, unless we go the 8 skater route.
 

Sparky93

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
7,002
1,040
The only way Brouwer isn't protected, is if he's part of a trade for a better player. Ferland over Chiasson for me, but he's only useful to me while his contract is under $2 million. Hopefully we have a better player by the expansion draft and neither are protected.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
The disdain for Brouwer isn't irrational; some of us just don't like the contract he's signed to. Also, I disagree with you on Ferland v Chiasson (as is tradition), because Chiasson is consistently mediocre, while Ferland this season has been either solid or impressive depending on the game - also Ferland is 2 years younger and has more growth potential.
Disliking a player because of their contract is irrational and frankly moronic.

Ferland when on is more impressive (offensively and physically), but that is when he is on. On a night to night basis Chiasson is the better player in all aspects of the game.
 

Calculon

unholy acting talent
Jan 20, 2006
16,578
4,035
Error 503
Hathaway is expansion draft exempt as far as I know

Barring an acquisition, Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Backlund, Frolik, Ferland and Brouwer will be the 7 forwards protected. The organization is very high on Ferland and while it would be nice to get out of Brouwer's contract before it becomes an anchor, it's really not realistic to expect the Flames to expose him. None of Versteeg, Chiasson, Bouma, Stajan, Shinkaruk or Poirier are worth protecting. Moreover, just to meet the draft requirements, neither Bouma nor Stajan can be protected otherwise the Flames won't the forward requirement. They could sign another forward but it's easier this way.
 

GAMO1992

#ThankYouIggy
Dec 9, 2011
7,943
572
Ontario, Canada
the reason i posted the list I did was I was doing the 8 skaters/1 G route which seems like it'd be in our best interest. so my list still stands.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
Hathaway is expansion draft exempt as far as I know

Barring an acquisition, Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Backlund, Frolik, Ferland and Brouwer will be the 7 forwards protected. The organization is very high on Ferland and while it would be nice to get out of Brouwer's contract before it becomes an anchor, it's really not realistic to expect the Flames to expose him. None of Versteeg, Chiasson, Bouma, Stajan, Shinkaruk or Poirier are worth protecting.
You are right about Hathaway, I was thinking that he would be done his 2nd year but technically it will still be year two.

Also Ferland is highly debatable, the fact is Chiasson plays more, produces more and see special teams time. The year and a half difference in age is not enough to ignore those factors. But like I said, I would prefer to acquire someone and protect neither.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
the reason i posted the list I did was I was doing the 8 skaters/1 G route which seems like it'd be in our best interest. so my list still stands.
How is it in our best interest? Jokipakka is hot garbage and neither Wotherspoon nor Kulak are even close to being worth protecting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->