Speculation: Armchair GM Thread 2021-22 VII (Eichel? Never Heard of Him)

[Ainsy01]

Chariots and Kessel are both available. One of the two would be great. Other , long -term acquisitions like Hertl would probably have to wait until the Gaudreau/Chucky situation setttles.

Also praying Dallas loses 20 straight and Pavelski shakes loose. All three of the flames top 3 picks should be in play - if they're still winning games come the deadline.

I think winning at least a round this year is important for this core, and resigning Johnny/Chucky could be dependent on it. Winning fixes things. Win some games in April (or whenever the playoffs are now) , have some fun, then write some cheques.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

I know Sutter would hate it in principle, but if Garland is truly available, I'd LOVE to add him.

 

[herashak]

At this point I still wouldn’t commit to sending out a 1st or one of the top 4 prospects for a run this year since Gaudreau isn’t signed. Garland, Giroux, and Klingberg all probably cost that much. Then again this might be the best year to go for it with California still pretty bad, ditto for oil/nucks

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I know Sutter would hate it in principle, but if Garland is truly available, I'd LOVE to add him.

I think Sutter would be fine. Defensively responsible, and offensively skilled. Even though his frame is on the 'slight' end of the spectrum, it doesn't appear to be an issue in his game.

 

[Body Checker]

At this point I still wouldn’t commit to sending out a 1st or one of the top 4 prospects for a run this year since Gaudreau isn’t signed. Garland, Giroux, and Klingberg all probably cost that much. Then again this might be the best year to go for it with California still pretty bad, ditto for oil/nucks

It is a dilemma for sure. Gaudreau might walk and Tkachuk might not be willing to sign long term setting up a trade. Both gone this time next year is a definite possibility. So do we go for it or not? Well now it feels like "sure let's move our 1st, let's move Valimaki" for a shot at it. But then if we miss playoffs late or go out in the first round then walk into the draft with Johnny days away from free agency and no 1st then it's very depressing. One day I want to go for it, the next day I want to keep our assets. Tough dilemma for sure.

 

[Ainsy01]

It is a dilemma for sure. Gaudreau might walk and Tkachuk might not be willing to sign long term setting up a trade. Both gone this time next year is a definite possibility. So do we go for it or not? Well now it feels like "sure let's move our 1st, let's move Valimaki" for a shot at it. But then if we miss playoffs late or go out in the first round then walk into the draft with Johnny days away from free agency and no 1st then it's very depressing. One day I want to go for it, the next day I want to keep our assets. Tough dilemma for sure.

Tkachyk is an RFA. He doesnt have a ton of leverage other than to refuse to resign and demand a trade. He cant just walk. Im alot more worried about Johnny than Chucky.

Conveniently both having career years lol.

 

[CF Magic]

At this point I still wouldn’t commit to sending out a 1st or one of the top 4 prospects for a run this year since Gaudreau isn’t signed. Garland, Giroux, and Klingberg all probably cost that much. Then again this might be the best year to go for it with California still pretty bad, ditto for oil/nucks

We really blew it with Eichel. None of those players (also adding Pavelski to that list) imo are worth giving up our 1st and top prospects for. I just can't see any of those pieces pushing us over the top into contender status the way an Eichel could have.

 

[Volica]

We really blew it with Eichel. None of those players (also adding Pavelski to that list) imo are worth giving up our 1st and top prospects for. I just can't see any of those pieces pushing us over the top into contender status the way an Eichel could have.

The wild thing for Eichel, was that not only would he have pushed us as a legitimate heavyweight in the league, but it also would have ensured we had a core piece in this franchise for the next 4 years.

Beyond stupid Treliving didn't back up the Brinks truck. Honestly, there should have been no untouchables, but apparently there were.

 

[Yepthatsme]

At this point I still wouldn’t commit to sending out a 1st or one of the top 4 prospects for a run this year since Gaudreau isn’t signed. Garland, Giroux, and Klingberg all probably cost that much. Then again this might be the best year to go for it with California still pretty bad, ditto for oil/nucks

Giroux is the only one who’s be worth it, I’d give up Valimaki, a 1st, then a mid round pick in a heart beat for him. Keep in mind he has more even strength points than everyone on our roster save for Gaudreau and Tkachuk on an absolutely awful flyers team. Adding a 70 point centre to this team turns us into legitimate playoff threats playing Sutter hockey. We already have a legitimately a top 3 line in hockey this season, rolling out a second line of Mangiapane-Giroux-Coleman gives us a super potent and defensively responsible second line too, and suddenly makes our depth look fantastic.

 

[Mobiandi]

Eichel was never happening because Buffalo fixated on getting Drysdale, Zegras, or Krebs. We were used as leverage for Buffalo to get Krebs and the hometown guy in Tuch.

It should have been Dubois

 

[CF Magic]

We need to pull off a "reverse Pittsburgh" move. For all those years where they traded away 1sts every deadline to bolster their depth, they had two superstar centres to carry the team. For us, we have the depth but no top end talent like they do. So assuming we can keep Johnny, I think packaging our middling/late 1sts for the next say three drafts to get a legit 1C is worth it. Of course we can't expect Crosby/Malkin level talent coming back plus cap and all that but... get a team to bite and figure out the money afterwards.

Maybe we can tempt NYI enough to pry Barzal out of there after another tough season?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

We need to pull off a "reverse Pittsburgh" move. For all those years where they traded away 1sts every deadline to bolster their depth, they had two superstar centres to carry the team. For us, we have the depth but no top end talent like they do. So assuming we can keep Johnny, I think packaging our middling/late 1sts for the next say three drafts to get a legit 1C is worth it. Of course we can't expect Crosby/Malkin level talent coming back plus cap and all that but... get a team to bite and figure out the money afterwards.

Maybe we can tempt NYI enough to pry Barzal out of there after another tough season?

Barzal is probably untouchable.

 

[BigRangy]

We need to pull off a "reverse Pittsburgh" move. For all those years where they traded away 1sts every deadline to bolster their depth, they had two superstar centres to carry the team. For us, we have the depth but no top end talent like they do. So assuming we can keep Johnny, I think packaging our middling/late 1sts for the next say three drafts to get a legit 1C is worth it. Of course we can't expect Crosby/Malkin level talent coming back plus cap and all that but... get a team to bite and figure out the money afterwards.

Maybe we can tempt NYI enough to pry Barzal out of there after another tough season?

yes, this. Barzal, Scheifele, Larkin, someone at that level. Someone at least as good as Lindholm.

every future except wolf on the table.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

TSN linking us to Rakell. He’d be a really good addition IMO.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

TSN linking us to Rakell. He’d be a really good addition IMO.

I think he would too. But I still question if he’s that play driver that we really need for our 2nd line.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I think he would too. But I still question if he’s that play driver that we really need for our 2nd line.

I think Our first PP is pretty good so imo we need a RHS that can play well 5 on 5 which is exactly what Rakell is

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Two years ago I suggested two moves:

1) Monahan for the a draft pick to get Lundell. I was really high on this player coming into the draft. I had him at 5 (saw him routinely in the late teens)

or

2) Monahan for a guy who was lighting up the AHL, Drake Batherson

I got laughed at for both suggestions lol. Mostly cause no one on these boards (main board too) was high on Lundell. Also no one knew who Batherson was

 

[Fig]

I think Our first PP is pretty good so imo we need a RHS that can play well 5 on 5 which is exactly what Rakell was.

Isn't Rakell a LHS RW?

Two years ago I suggested two moves and got laughed at.

1) Monahan for the a draft pick to get Lundell. I was really high on this player coming into the draft. I had him at 5 (saw him routinely in the late teens)

or

2) Monahan for a guy who was lighting up the AHL, Drake Batherson

I got laughed at for both suggestions lol. Mostly cause no one on these boards (main board too) was high on Lundell. Also no one knew who Batherson was

At that time, Monahan's value had already plummeted. Even Monahan + our 1st, I don't know how we go from 19th OA to somewhere between 9-11th OA to nab Lundell before Florida did. Even 19th + Monahan to somewhere like 14th to nab Holloway I think might have been a hard sell. None of those teams between 8-15th ish needed a guy like Monahan.

Even Monahan for Batherson, I don't get why Ottawa does that trade based on their needs at the time. I don't know if you were truly laughed out of the room, but I think most of us in general expected his value to be so low, it made no sense to make such a deal/we didn't think the other team would bite.

19th to 24th to grab Zary + Poirier and Boltmann ain't bad though.

 

[Mobiandi]

Gourde and Klingberg remain at the top of the list for me. Granted it would be nice to have a top 9 RHS forward that could contribute

Isn't Rakell a LHS RW?

Other way around. RHS LW

 

[Fig]

Gourde and Klingberg remain at the top of the list for me. Granted it would be nice to have a top 9 RHS forward that could contribute

Other way around. RHS LW

I misread.

For players on the Ducks though, I'd wonder if we could give Steel or Silf a look as well.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Isn't Rakell a LHS RW?



At that time, Monahan's value had already plummeted. Even Monahan + our 1st, I don't know how we go from 19th OA to somewhere between 9-11th OA to nab Lundell before Florida did. Even 19th + Monahan to somewhere like 14th to nab Holloway I think might have been a hard sell. None of those teams between 8-15th ish needed a guy like Monahan.

Even Monahan for Batherson, I don't get why Ottawa does that trade based on their needs at the time. I don't know if you were truly laughed out of the room, but I think most of us in general expected his value to be so low, it made no sense to make such a deal/we didn't think the other team would bite.

19th to 24th to grab Zary + Poirier and Boltmann ain't bad though.

actually there were fans from other teams willing to trade their pick (I think it was 7th or 8th for Monahan) not sure if GMs would accept. As for Batherson I had several Ottawa fans agree to Batherson and that Finnish D I forget his name, for Monahan.

obviously GMs might have different opinions but yes both trades I was called crazy by flames fans. Again more cause people didn’t know who I was interested in than anything.

 

[Fig]

actually there were fans from other teams willing to trade their pick (I think it was 7th or 8th for Monahan) not sure if GMs would accept. As for Batherson I had several Ottawa fans agree to Batherson and that Finnish D I forget his name, for Monahan.

obviously GMs might have different opinions but yes both trades I was called crazy by flames fans. Again more cause people didn’t know who I was interested in than anything.

hmm... perhaps you're right. Agreed we don't know how GMs think. But IIRC around that time, I think the reasons for not trading Monahan were combinations of the following:

- Other teams were rumored to not want him (injury history and risk well known?); supposedly Minny and CBJ wanted nothing to do with him.

- Monahan's value was considered so low, it wasn't worth the trade. Trading him that low would also make bad optics and also other GM want to lowball us (ie: Cammellari thing until Burke put his foot down)

- It might piss of his really good friend, Gaudreau... who IIRC was also kinda slumping around that time and just not clicking with others. Unless that was just more example of idiot coaching.... or both? IIRC, even Tkachuk was slumping around that time.

I was in the 2nd and 3rd point range. If we could get great value for him (ie: Lundell ish range) by all means, do it. But if his trade value was crap or borderline (ie: Batherson), I'd rather not end up with another Brodie unwanted situation (which would potentially bleed from Monahan over to a few other guys) if the trade didn't go through or he was basically sent to no mans land (ie: Gio, but unlike Gio, we had a choice for desination for our players). Like, the players on our roster understand, "Oh, he's highly valued and we need to rebalance the team. I get it." vs feeling like, "My buddy was thrown out like scrap at an e-Cycle drop off location.... I wonder if I could be next one day."

I think this is an important ish point. The end result is worrying that something like Bennett happens to more than one guy.

Curious also is whether we would have been better off with Pelletier + Frolik or Zucker (Rumored to be screwed up on the Flames side somehow).

Treliving has some interesting deals in place in the last 3 seasons that probably would have done reasonably well. It's kinda crazy they all kinda fell through. Brodie (Kadri NTC), Zucker (internal veto?), Stone (Rental? Ottawa wanted Valimaki over Kylington), Eichel (VGK wanted Krebs and likely played LTIR to expedite the move vs Flames needed a 3rd party to move cap).

Any one of these 4 moves likely is a major improvement to this roster in the way we need right now. Insane. It's easy to get mad in being the bride, but at least this isn't a Feaster/Benning fear of actually poking around the market place.

 

[Bounces R Way]

As much as I would like Rakell or Silf or Toffoli or whatever other generic top 6 scoring winger, for the Flames to really take a serious run this season I think they need to target a guy who on any given night can be the best player on the ice. Someone to push Coleman or Backlund off that 2nd line. Our most successful season with this core so far has been when we had Tkachuk putting up 77pts on the 2nd line.

To me that's Giroux or Pavelski territory. Maybe someone else of that caliber not rumored to be available yet. Either of those two would help with the leadership aspect as well.

 

[Fig]

As much as I would like Rakell or Silf or Toffoli or whatever other generic top 6 scoring winger, for the Flames to really take a serious run this season I think they need to target a guy who on any given night can be the best player on the ice. Someone to push Coleman or Backlund off that 2nd line. Our most successful season with this core so far has been when we had Tkachuk putting up 77pts on the 2nd line.

To me that's Giroux or Pavelski territory. Maybe someone else of that caliber not rumored to be available yet. Either of those two would help with the leadership aspect as well.

Circling way back, but what about Laine? Treliving loves that RFA stuff.
How much more do we have to add to something like: Monahan + 1st + Mangiapane?

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Laine
OR
Tkachuk - Backlund - Laine

Both seem like a good line on paper, but no extra leadership stuffs from Laine. Boeser and PLD are also RFA. But more likely to re-sign than someone like Laine who still has rumors quietly swirling.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Laine
Tkachuk - Backlund - Coleman

Looks solid for a top 6.

In theory, doesn't doing this unlock enough cap space to allow us to technically sign Gaudreau/Tkachuk and Laine to 10 mil AAV deals each with a wee bit of cap left over? I think we still need to consummate an additional deal for that extra middle 6 RHS RW, but it's doable I think... right?

EDIT: It seems that Boeser might shake free. If we could Seattle Lucic and re-sign all our guys, I wonder if we have enough to chase that extra RW and go all in for another 2-4 seasons.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I would take a Laine, all day.