To be clear, I consider it like upping your grade from a D- to a D but there is some improvement. Handles the puck as a hand grenade a bit less, hitting the net a bit more, a little quicker decision making at the blue line. His big problem right now IMO is his one on one defending. Constantly takes the wrong angle, turns the wrong way, misses with his stick. I dunno if he's over thinking things or what and he doesn't have the raw footspeed to make up for mistakes so he gets exposed.
Confirmed with Link: Flames trade for D Michael Stone
- Thread starter Otzelor
- Start date
To be clear, I consider it like upping your grade from a D- to a D but there is some improvement. Handles the puck as a hand grenade a bit less, hitting the net a bit more, a little quicker decision making at the blue line. His big problem right now IMO is his one on one defending. Constantly takes the wrong angle, turns the wrong way, misses with his stick. I dunno if he's over thinking things or what and he doesn't have the raw footspeed to make up for mistakes so he gets exposed.
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
A 2nd and Poirier for Duclair is more than fair, no need to offer our 1st. That's just silly talk.
Sound like he maybe overcompensating for lack of lateral movement. How's his acceleration and overall speed compared to prior to the injury?
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
Well, he looked better than Wideman in his first game, so go him. I didn't notice any glaring errors, except when he held the puck too long and almost lost it behind the Flames net (then made a dangerousish pass to get it away from him).
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,439
- 11,115
Had a fairly average 3rd pairing game last night.
Picked up an assist, played physical, skated better than Wideman. He'll continue to improve I think; this was only game 1.
The defence right now is so much better than the one we had throughout most of the year.
Picked up an assist, played physical, skated better than Wideman. He'll continue to improve I think; this was only game 1.
The defence right now is so much better than the one we had throughout most of the year.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
It's worth noting that he played at least half of the third with Brodie. I think he'll start the next game there, too, because Brodie and Engelland were a bit of an issue last night.
Fig
Absolute Horse Shirt
- Dec 15, 2014
- 12,973
- 8,453
Agreed. There's also funny talks about the risk of expansion circumvention which IMO is easily avoided. My understanding is that this is for teams that finish a contract prior to the draft and delay signing it to avoid the exposure risk. Treliving can easily bypass this by establishing where Stone's camp number and duration request is, stating what the Flames are willing to offer and not bothering with further contract talks until after Vegas chats with Stone. Stone can chat with Vegas' offer in mind and decide for himself. Pardon the pun, but as long as the contract isn't pretty much set in Stone, there's no issue.
Family/friend ties in Calgary and history in this city can easily explain why he'd sign in Calgary over Vegas even with similar contract offers. If there is legitimate reason why the two had not come to an agreement prior to Vegas chats, there is not risk of penalization IMO (ie: NTC vs no NTC). Heck, don't bother printing a contract if that's the case.
Personally, I wouldn't have too many issues offering Egg's contract to Stone. 3x3 no NTC for a young 4/5 dman isn't bad (even if you have concerns on his knee). I think at max, I'd offer him Mason Raymond's contract (Slight pay bump and a partial NTC). He still exits the contract at a good age, gets stability and we get a good contract with low risk. But... perhaps if we hope not to jinx ourselves and repeat history, 2 years instead of 3 might be a better option if include NTC?
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,439
- 11,115
If Stone shows that he can step-up and play a solid middle pairing role with Brodie; and have a solid 20 game + playoff stint with Calgary, I'd have absolutely no issues bringing him back on a 4x4 or something.
Again, completely depends on his ability, because this season has not given him much reason to get paid.
Would leave two spots next year:
Giordano - Hamilton
Brodie - Stone
Kulak - Andersson
That's pretty solid.
It would be if Andersson is ready...Kulak should be fine in the bottom pair going into next year. Not that I see it happening, but I would love to have Engelland back as our 7th dman next year. Gives you that tough vet to throw out against goon teams when we need it.
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
Yesterday Stone said on the radio that if he was going to be traded anywhere, he was glad it was Calgary. I have full confidence that he will be back.
OvermanKingGainer
#BennettFreed #CurseofTheSpulll #FreeOliver
Mr Snrub
I like the way Snrub thinks!
- Oct 12, 2016
- 5,713
- 2,410
Doubt we pay him more than 3.5. Lots of other guys on the market that we could pick up instead, and we acquired him for almost nothing.
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
Don't see why it should be an issue at all. He will probably get 2 million less than Alzner will on the open market. It was such a solid pick up, Tre really did his homework there.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,248
- 8,384
But Stone is not just a #6 defenseman, but a NATURAL #6 defenseman.
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2148151&highlight=michael+stone
Too many variables to make a solid prediction just yet
But if he does well next to Brodie and shows he can handle a top four role, and in light of his connections to Calgary, i'd expect a medium length deal (3 to 5 years; most likely 4) at around his current salary (+/- 0.25M).
Would also say there's a small chance of a 6 year deal at something less than 3.5M per along with some form of NTC protection if he really prioritizes location/long term security in light of a terrible injury and Treliving and co. are big fans. But there's also a chance that Treliving leaves and new management aren't fans whatsoever which could be good or bad.
It's really dumb having a lame duck GM.
But if he does well next to Brodie and shows he can handle a top four role, and in light of his connections to Calgary, i'd expect a medium length deal (3 to 5 years; most likely 4) at around his current salary (+/- 0.25M).
Would also say there's a small chance of a 6 year deal at something less than 3.5M per along with some form of NTC protection if he really prioritizes location/long term security in light of a terrible injury and Treliving and co. are big fans. But there's also a chance that Treliving leaves and new management aren't fans whatsoever which could be good or bad.
It's really dumb having a lame duck GM.
Mr Snrub
I like the way Snrub thinks!
- Oct 12, 2016
- 5,713
- 2,410
Brad's extension probably hinges on this team making the playoffs this year. Not that it should though.
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: WCQF Game 3: Dallas Stars @ Vegas Golden Knights | 7:30PM PT |
- Latest: Vegan Knight
