Waived: Shinkaruk, Poirier, and Wotherspoon.

[Mr Snrub]

Whose style would you guys say meshes better with Stone, Kulak's or Bartkowski's?

 

[SaintMorose]

Whose style would you guys say meshes better with Stone, Kulak's or Bartkowski's?

If we're interested in having the puck at any point Kulak if we just want to try and block it until we get a whistle somehow Bart

 

[Baxterman]

Making large decisions based on a few preseason games is bad management. Kulak will be great and we'll all laugh at the thought that about half of you wanted him waived instead of Bartkowski or Spoon.

Fair enough, but Kulak was bad in his time in the NHL last season as well so this isn't just based on a one time/small sample size.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Fair enough, but Kulak was bad in his time in the NHL

No, he was not.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Fair enough, but Kulak was bad in his time in the NHL last season as well so this isn't just based on a one time/small sample size.

I strongly disagree. He had one bad game. They rewarded his strong start to the season with a game beside Dougie. He was terrible and ended up minus 4 in that one game. And that was the story of Brett Kulak after he rotted in the pressbox and then got injured.

 

[DFF]

Every team has a few of these guys...hyped up busts...

I doubt if any of them will get claimed.



It's a good thing that Trev is trading all the draft picks....they still dont know how to draft.

 

[Paulinvancouver]

if we just want to try and block it until we get a whistle somehow Bart

Hah! Vancouver fans hear that!! Enjoy!

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Every team has a few of these guys...hyped up busts...

I doubt if any of them will get claimed.



It's a good thing that Trev is trading all the draft picks....they still dont know how to draft.

Not to defend Treliving's draft record (because it has some certain oddities in it from time to time) but none of the guys on waivers are picks he has made.

 

[Mr Snrub]

Not to defend Treliving's draft record (because it has some certain oddities in it from time to time) but none of the guys on waivers are picks he has made.

What's more, we acquired one of those guys now on waivers by trading a guy this organisation picked and developed who is now a capable bottom six forward with real upside to do more. But let's not let facts get in the way of the narrative.

 

[Rockmorton]

I never understand why these guys sometimes get waived the day after being scratched from a pre-season game. At least give the guy one more shot.

Maybe the coaches saw something in practice they didn't like, who knows?

 

[Jihadi Flames Fan]

What's more, we acquired one of those guys now on waivers by trading a guy this organisation picked and developed who is now a capable bottom six forward with real upside to do more. But let's not let facts get in the way of the narrative.

The Flames made that trade on the belief Shinkaruk had a higher upside than Granlund. Unfortunately it didn't turn out.

As for the Kulak vs Bartkowski question. I'd like to see Kulak as the #6 and Bart as the #7.

 

[Mr Snrub]

The Flames made that trade on the belief Shinkaruk had a higher upside than Granlund. Unfortunately it didn't turn out.

As for the Kulak vs Bartkowski question. I'd like to see Kulak as the #6 and Bart as the #7.

Personally I think it was pretty ill-founded from the start. Everyone here seemed to think it was a steal but we were giving up an NHL player for a guy who had struggled pretty bad in his rookie AHL season, even while then being considered an offensive specialist.

 

[Anglesmith]

Personally I think it was pretty ill-founded from the start. Everyone here seemed to think it was a steal but we were giving up an NHL player for a guy who had struggled pretty bad in his rookie AHL season, even while then being considered an offensive specialist.

I think that in order for it to be a bad trade, Markus Granlund would have to become something that is a significant upgrade on what we have. He is not better than any of our top 3 players at centre or left wing, I would say. So unless he plays right wing and prevents us from signing Brouwer, his loss has zero impact. So we traded a guy worth nothing to us for a scratch card. If Shinkaruk doesn't turn out, it's not the end of the world.

 

[Mr Snrub]

I think that in order for it to be a bad trade, Markus Granlund would have to become something that is a significant upgrade on what we have. He is not better than any of our top 3 players at centre or left wing, I would say. So unless he plays right wing and prevents us from signing Brouwer, his loss has zero impact. So we traded a guy worth nothing to us for a scratch card. If Shinkaruk doesn't turn out, it's not the end of the world.

I guess this is a more palatable way of looking at it. I just think that at the time it was clear one guy was gonna be an NHL player and with the other guy there was considerable doubt. Trading Granlund was the right move because there was no space for him on the roster, but I'd have liked to get maybe a safer bet out of it than Hunter Shinkaruk.

 

[JPeeper]

I know they're all still relatively young at 21 or 22, but I'll just say it, they're all busts and unless Lazar is on the 4th line, he'll be as well.

I think the only forwards who still have potential to be actual NHL players are Dube, Mangiapane, Klimchuk and Foo. Foo needs to get acclimated to pro hockey, Mangiapane just needs another season or two of seasoning of pro hockey, Dube needs to get stronger, and Klimchuk needs to get more games under his belt in the A.

I think Mangiapane has the highest ceiling offensively and could push for a spot next year.

Defensively, Vali and Kylington need to get bigger and stronger and they'll be close, as well as continuing to learn the game. Andersson should make the team this year based on his play, because he is way better than Kulak or Bart are.

 

[Calculon]

I'd say the Flames lost the Shinkaruk/Granlund swap. The Canucks got a serviceable NHL'er out of the deal; the Flames seemingly got an AHL'er.

Yeah, Granlund got way more opportunity in Vancouver than what he would have gotten here but that doesn't change the fact it was simply bad asset management. The Flames could trade Andersson for a 7th because they wouldn't miss him right now but that doesn't mean it's not a bad deal.

Poirier still has NHL potential. Unlike Shinkaruk, it's not top six/nine or bust; Poirier could in theory still become a fourth line forechecker type given his high end speed. He just needs to get back on track though.

 

[Baxterman]

I am not sure that Granlund is a servicable NHLer on a good team.

Yes he fits in on a terrible Canucks team or the bad Flames teams previously but he is not nearly skilled enough offensively to play on a good team or defensivbly good enough to fit in the bottom 6.

I guess he maybe able to fit in on the 4th line but really that is a spot that is basically a dime a dozen and should be able to be replenished yearly with young guys/AHLers stepping up/cheap UFA.

 

[Skobel24]

I am not sure that Granlund is a servicable NHLer on a good team.

Yes he fits in on a terrible Canucks team or the bad Flames teams previously but he is not nearly skilled enough offensively to play on a good team or defensivbly good enough to fit in the bottom 6.

I guess he maybe able to fit in on the 4th line but really that is a spot that is basically a dime a dozen and should be able to be replenished yearly with young guys/AHLers stepping up/cheap UFA.

He's a serviceable NHLer, but I feel he's replaceable.

 

[Bosnian Beast]

The thing about Granlund is that he was never going to amount to much here in Calgary unless they made him play RW ala Ferland, and the position he is in now with Vancouver. He wasn't going to stick at C with Monahan/Backlund/Bennett/Stajan and (now presumably) Jankowski. If Granlund was going to have an opportunity to be an NHLer, it was not going to be here, so I can understand and am okay with the decision to trade him. Sure, Shinkaruk is probably not going to work out and will likely be an AHL regular, but the potential payoff with Shinkaruk was better than what Granlund was going to be with the Flames.

Like AS said, for it to be a "bad trade" or a "loss for Calgary" would mean that Granlund turned into something that is not replaceable for the Flames, but I don't think he is really missed. The scratch ticket analogy is spot on.

 

[King In The North]

Is Granlund even in the Nucks top nine?

Baertschi-Horvat-Boeser
Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson
Vanek-Sutter-Gagner
Granlund?

 

[Bosnian Beast]

Is Granlund even in the Nucks top nine?

Baertschi-Horvat-Boeser
Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson
Vanek-Sutter-Gagner
Granlund?

Granlund played with either the Sedin's or Sutter for most of last season, IIRC.

 

[Lunatik]

Granlund played with either the Sedin's or Sutter for most of last season, IIRC.

He may have, but that was before all of Boeser, Vanek and Gager were added. It's pretty clear Granlund will only see top 9 minutes when someone is injured.

 

[King In The North]

I'm sure Vanek and Gagner will be trade bait come the deadline but they seem like good secondary powerplay options, which is less time for Granlund.

 

[Bosnian Beast]

He may have, but that was before all of Boeser, Vanek and Gager were added. It's pretty clear Granlund will only see top 9 minutes when someone is injured.

Which kinda proves my point. Granlund wasn't going to get far with the Flames, and now he's being pushed down the depth chart in Vancouver, too.

 

[Skobel24]

Looks like Granlund is expected to center the 3rd line, with Sutter on the 4th. Who knows if that will stick though.