Speculation: Armchair GM Thread: There are no solutions, only problems

[Baxterman]

This discussion is all well and good but people seem to forget that Ottawa have no interest in moving Stone

If they were offered Monahan I think they would have a hard time saying no to that.

I know teams tend to overrate their own guys and hold on to a core that needs rebuilding too long and Ottawa with their idiot owner seem to be especially bad in this regard but Monahan makes a lot more sense to them with where they are at and that roster than Stone does.

As for Tavares I am not 100% sold he is re-signing in NYI but I am 100% certain he is not signing here. It makes zero sense for him or the Flames.

 

[Dack]

I obviously think a lot more of Monahan than a lot of players here so I don't think the issue is as bad as some but I do realize that we do not have Crosby, Kopitar, Toews (at his Cup winning level) here.

I think the better solution would be to trade from our strength, defense, to add another top 6 center similar to Monahan so that we could potentially have two offensively competent lines built around Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Center X.

I mean if we don't think Monahan is good enough to be the #1 C on a contending team and that being in the mushy middle is the worst then shouldn't we consider rebuilding? As much as OKG want to push the agenda I have a hard time seeing Bennett and Jankowski ever coming close to being as good as Monahan let alone top level #1 C's on a contending team.

This is what part of me Is worried about the last team to win a cup with a guy like Monahan was who? I'm not sure how to fix that I'd give it more time for sure but if in two or three years we're still in the same spot I'd rebuild.

This discussion is all well and good but people seem to forget that Ottawa have no interest in moving Stone and Tavares is going to resign in New York. Targeting players is fine but the reality is that you’re not going to get a dynamic, young, cost controlled, first line right winger from a rebuilding team without an extreme overpay, which would be dumb.

If Tavares hits free agency I’m all for pursuing him, but I don’t think it’s something that should be depended on either.

Even with the way Neal and the Knights are performing I wouldn’t be surprised if he resigns either. It’s not easy to just add top 6 talent, it’s nearly impossible to add young top 6 talent

Yeah I think Neal will probably stay in Vegas assuming they want him back he seems to like it there. The only contending team of the past couple years the Flames remind me of is the 2014 Rangers and if that's what were going for we need three top 6 lines and a 4th line that doesn't get murdered when they step on the ice.

We could also try trading for one of Hoffman or Pacioretty to make the 3rd line good.

 

[Baxterman]

This is what part of me Is worried about the last team to win a cup with a guy like Monahan was who? I'm not sure how to fix that I'd give it more time for sure but if in two or three years we're still in the same spot I'd rebuild.

I would say Boston with Krecji but they also had Bergeron which is why I do like the idea of getting a second center (not Backlund) to fill that role and be able to provide a 2nd line that can handle a lot of the offensive load.

I also think that looking solely at teams that won the Cup is a little dangerous as Nashville easily could have won with Johanssen as its center and I am not sure he is that much of an improvement over Monahan.

And Jersey and the Rangers have both made finals with worse #1 centers than Monahan. So it is possible but obviously having that elite #1 c is the best way to build your team for success.

 

[Anglesmith]

This is what part of me Is worried about the last team to win a cup with a guy like Monahan was who? I'm not sure how to fix that I'd give it more time for sure but if in two or three years we're still in the same spot I'd rebuild.

I would say Nashville was very close last year, but their version of Monahan got injured before the SCF.

 

[Dack]

I would say Boston with Krecji but they also had Bergeron which is why I do like the idea of getting a second center (not Backlund) to fill that role and be able to provide a 2nd line that can handle a lot of the offensive load.

I also think that looking solely at teams that won the Cup is a little dangerous as Nashville easily could have won with Johanssen as its center and I am not sure he is that much of an improvement over Monahan.

And Jersey and the Rangers have both made finals with worse #1 centers than Monahan. So it is possible but obviously having that elite #1 c is the best way to build your team for success.

No way man Bergeron is and was better than Monahan. Even back then he was elite defensively while producing well even though their 2 good wingers Lucic and Horton played with Krejci. I think he was better than Krejci back then but didn't get the fan fare. Also this team is weird because they got carried by Tim Thomas.

Johanson isn't too much better than Monahan but the Predators have a better defense a better top line and comparable depth.

Actually New Jersey is a good comparable to my Stone-Gaudreau setup. They had a top line with Kovalchuk and Parise with nothing down the middle.

Also getting another top 6 center would be great but it can't come at the expense of Backlund he's too important to this team. He's on pace for 53 points and is our best defensive forward by a landslide.

 

[Dack]

I would say Nashville was very close last year, but their version of Monahan got injured before the SCF.

I think RyJo is a little better than Mony but yeah it's close. If we plan to be Nashville we have to massively improve our depth again 3 scoring lines.

 

[crackdown44]

No way man Bergeron is and was better than Monahan. Even back then he was elite defensively while producing well even though their 2 good wingers Lucic and Horton played with Krejci. I think he was better than Krejci back then but didn't get the fan fare. Also this team is weird because they got carried by Tim Thomas.

Johanson isn't too much better than Monahan but the Predators have a better defense a better top line and comparable depth.

Actually New Jersey is a good comparable to my Stone-Gaudreau setup. They had a top line with Kovalchuk and Parise with nothing down the middle.

I actually like Monahan more than RyJo but it’s by a very slim margin for me too. That being said I think Forsberg and Gaudreau are comparable, they both drive their respective lines and then Ferland and Arvidson are also comparable. Arvidson has a bit more skill but Ferland is more physical

 

[crackdown44]

I think Nashville is the closest comparison. Similar top 6, but they have better depth and then they’re better by a slim margin on D and in nets. If we want to contend sooner rather than later then that has to be the model we try and emulate

 

[Anglesmith]

I think RyJo is a little better than Mony but yeah it's close. If we plan to be Nashville we have to massively improve our depth again 3 scoring lines.

That's true, but realistically, you can't put a Stanley Cup-winning team together and just expect to receive your Cup. The way it works is that the Cup is won each year by the team that gets hot at the right time and bands together to create magic.

Nashville last year squeaked into the playoffs as a 2nd wild card team. You don't think their fans had doubts about their team throughout the regular season? In the playoffs, they stepped up their game and found something that worked, and nearly parlayed that into a Cup despite being absolutely hammered with injuries to key players.

 

[Baxterman]

No way man Bergeron is and was better than Monahan. Even back then he was elite defensively while producing well even though their 2 good wingers Lucic and Horton played with Krejci. I think he was better than Krejci back then but didn't get the fan fare. Also this team is weird because they got carried by Tim Thomas.

Johanson isn't too much better than Monahan but the Predators have a better defense a better top line and comparable depth.

Actually New Jersey is a good comparable to my Stone-Gaudreau setup. They had a top line with Kovalchuk and Parise with nothing down the middle.

Also getting another top 6 center would be great but it can't come at the expense of Backlund he's too important to this team. He's on pace for 53 points and is our best defensive forward by a landslide.

The year the Bruins won the Cup Bergeron had 57 points. Yes he had elite defensive ability but I don't think he was at the Crosby, Kopitar, Getzlaf or Toews level at that point.

If Backlund is going to be our 2nd center then we need to get someone to come in and take some of the defensive responsibilities from him or vastly improve our wingers because his point production is not good enough now for him to be the primary defensive guy and the 2nd offensive option as well.

 

[Dack]

I think Nashville is the closest comparison. Similar top 6, but they have better depth and then they’re better by a slim margin on D and in nets. If we want to contend sooner rather than later then that has to be the model we try and emulate

I think they're a lot better on defence.

Josi >= Gio
Subban > Hamilton
Ekholm > Brodie
Ellis > Hamonic
Stone > Weber
Kulak > Irwin


But it's how the team works that counts not the individual parts I just think we have to be a lot better offensively to make up for our worse defence.

 

[Dack]

The year the Bruins won the Cup Bergeron had 57 points. Yes he had elite defensive ability but I don't think he was at the Crosby, Kopitar, Getzlaf or Toews level at that point.

If Backlund is going to be our 2nd center then we need to get someone to come in and take some of the defensive responsibilities from him or vastly improve our wingers because his point production is not good enough now for him to be the primary defensive guy and the 2nd offensive option as well.

He's on pace for 4 less points than Bergeron (their 1C even if he didn't outproduce Krejci ) had that year. Obviously he's not as good but his point production is fine for a number 2.

The issue is the bottom 6 produces nothing. A 3rd line with a couple of 35-45 point players would make this team much better.

 

[Baxterman]

That's true, but realistically, you can't put a Stanley Cup-winning team together and just expect to receive your Cup. The way it works is that the Cup is won each year by the team that gets hot at the right time and bands together to create magic.

Nashville last year squeaked into the playoffs as a 2nd wild card team. You don't think their fans had doubts about their team throughout the regular season? In the playoffs, they stepped up their game and found something that worked, and nearly parlayed that into a Cup despite being absolutely hammered with injuries to key players.

I think this is such crap that fans like to spout off because it allows them to have hope that their mediocre team can somehow win the Cup.

Looking at the Pens, Kings, Hawks, Ducks teams that have won the Cup they were all good teams, for multiple years that when you looked at them it wasn't a surprise that they won at all. They didn't just get hot at the right time they were good teams, with elite talent that were clearly top teams in the league.

Even Nashville last year was coming off two straight years of making the play-offs going to game 7 of the 2nd round against the eventual WCC champs and have followed up last years run by being one of the top teams in the league. That wasn't a team squeaking in and getting hot that was a good team with elite talent playing well.

 

[Baxterman]

He's on pace for 4 less points than Bergeron (their 1C even if he didn't outproduce Krejci ) had that year. Obviously he's not as good but his point production is fine for a number 2.

On pace is a dangerous metric especially for a guy who is 29 and has multiple seasons of showing what his offensive output is. He also does come close defensively to Bergeron.

 

[crackdown44]

I think they're a lot better on defence.

Josi >= Gio
Subban > Hamilton
Ekholm > Brodie
Ellis > Hamonic
Stone > Weber
Kulak > Irwin


But it's how the team works that counts not the individual parts I just think we have to be a lot better offensively to make up for our worse defence.

A lot better might be a stretch, Nashville clearly the best in the league but I think we’re top 5 on paper. Only other elite groups that come to mind are Carolina, St Louis, maybe Winnipeg

 

[Dack]

On pace is a dangerous metric especially for a guy who is 29 and has multiple seasons of showing what his offensive output is. He also does come close defensively to Bergeron.

No but he's a 2C not a top 5-10 C like Bergy is.

 

[Anglesmith]

I think this is such crap that fans like to spout off because it allows them to have hope that their mediocre team can somehow win the Cup.

Looking at the Pens, Kings, Hawks, Ducks teams that have won the Cup they were all good teams, for multiple years that when you looked at them it wasn't a surprise that they won at all. They didn't just get hot at the right time they were good teams, with elite talent that were clearly top teams in the league.

Even Nashville last year was coming off two straight years of making the play-offs going to game 7 of the 2nd round against the eventual WCC champs and have followed up last years run by being one of the top teams in the league. That wasn't a team squeaking in and getting hot that was a good team with elite talent playing well.

Meh. You bring up the Kings, for example. This comes to my mind first. They meekly went out in the first round for two years, and were floundering around in mid-season in 2010-11. They brought Darryl Sutter in, everyone laughed, they played well down the stretch, everyone stopped laughing. Whether by a coaching change or whatever, the same group of guys can find a spark like that and shock everyone. It's not just me spouting. Nashville were always a Jackel and Hyde team, but a pain to play against in the playoffs, that's true. But they'd never shown or even hinted at a level of hockey that they displayed last playoffs.

The Penguins are another example. They were absolutely languishing in mediocrity for a good number of years prior to Rutherford making some minor mid-season trades, replacing the coach, and all of a sudden forming the greatest team in hockey for two years. It was anything but a steady, gradual build to get there.

 

[Dack]

A lot better might be a stretch, Nashville clearly the best in the league but I think we’re top 5 on paper. Only other elite groups that come to mind are Carolina, St Louis, maybe Winnipeg

Probably but I think they are a lot better they're better at almost every position. We're good no doubt but there is a reason no one debates that Nashville has the best Defence in the league. Josi and Subban are both near or above Gio who is our best D man by far. Hamilton is better than Ekholm and Ellis but I don't think Hamonic and Brodie are anymore.

 

[crackdown44]

Meh. You bring up the Kings, for example. This comes to my mind first. They meekly went out in the first round for two years, and were floundering around in mid-season in 2010-11. They brought Darryl Sutter in, everyone laughed, they played well down the stretch, everyone stopped laughing. Whether by a coaching change or whatever, the same group of guys can find a spark like that and shock everyone. It's not just me spouting. Nashville were always a Jackel and Hyde team, but a pain to play against in the playoffs, that's true. But they'd never shown or even hinted at a level of hockey that they displayed last playoffs.

The Penguins are another example. They were absolutely languishing in mediocrity for a good number of years prior to Rutherford making some minor mid-season trades, replacing the coach, and all of a sudden forming the greatest team in hockey for two years. It was anything but a steady, gradual build to get there.

This is the thing, you have to love the parity in the NHL. If you make the playoffs you have a chance. No one would expect a team like say, Columbus or whoever gets the second wild card to beat Tampa in the first round. But if it happens I don’t think everyone would go running around setting houses on fire. It’s not like Golden State losing to Minnesota or something

 

[Baxterman]

Meh. You bring up the Kings, for example. This comes to my mind first. They meekly went out in the first round for two years, and were floundering around in mid-season in 2010-11. They brought Darryl Sutter in, everyone laughed, they played well down the stretch, everyone stopped laughing. Whether by a coaching change or whatever, the same group of guys can find a spark like that and shock everyone. It's not just me spouting. Nashville were always a Jackel and Hyde team, but a pain to play against in the playoffs, that's true. But they'd never shown or even hinted at a level of hockey that they displayed last playoffs.

The Penguins are another example. They were absolutely languishing in mediocrity for a good number of years prior to Rutherford making some minor mid-season trades, replacing the coach, and all of a sudden forming the greatest team in hockey for two years. It was anything but a steady, gradual build to get there.

The Kings have/had Kopitar, Doughty, Carter, Quick. That is elite talent add in Muzzin, Toffolli, Gaborik, Voynov, Stoll even Brown and that is solid depth. Plus they had great to elite coaching. They weren't some mediocre group that caught lightning in a bottle that is a group of players that is top 10, if not 5 in terms of talent in the league.

The Pens likewise had Malkin, Crosby, Kessel, Letang and Murray as elite talent and depth like Guentzel, Bonino, Hahelin, Hornqvist, Kunitz. Another group of top 5-10 talent in the league.

Nashville has the best top 4 in the league (and I'm not sure it's close), Rinne in net, with Forsberg and Johanssen up front and a ton of quality depth. Again a top 10 team in terms of talent.

These are all great to elite teams in terms of talent not mediocre teams on hot streaks. Teams with lesser talent that expect to go on a run and win the Cup will be disappointed as they have been every year.

 

[Baxterman]

No but he's a 2C not a top 5-10 C like Bergy is.

Ok but the issue is that we need him to be the 2nd offensive C and the primary defensive center and I don't think that is recipe for success or a role that he can be successful in. I also don't think Backlund has shown an ability to be a top level defensive player and score over 50 points. He certainly hasn't done both this year.

If we are going to rely on Backlund to be the 2nd center in terms of offensive production then we need to have someone take on the primary defensive role because Backlund isn't good enough to do both and we are wasting Tkachuk by putting him in that role.

 

[Baxterman]

This is the thing, you have to love the parity in the NHL. If you make the playoffs you have a chance. No one would expect a team like say, Columbus or whoever gets the second wild card to beat Tampa in the first round. But if it happens I don’t think everyone would go running around setting houses on fire. It’s not like Golden State losing to Minnesota or something

Not sure that you have to love the play-offs if that were true or that it is true.

If Colombus won the Cup that would be a pretty big shock. When was the last time a shock team won the Cup? or a team without elite talent?

Sure it may not be as chalk as the NBA where you know it will be GS versus Boston or Cleveland but lets not act like it is a 16 team free for all where anyone can win. Even in the NHL with all its parity the elite teams still win.

 

[Anglesmith]

The Kings have/had Kopitar, Doughty, Carter, Quick. That is elite talent add in Muzzin, Toffolli, Gaborik, Voynov, Stoll even Brown and that is solid depth. Plus they had great to elite coaching. They weren't some mediocre group that caught lightning in a bottle that is a group of players that is top 10, if not 5 in terms of talent in the league.

The Pens likewise had Malkin, Crosby, Kessel, Letang and Murray as elite talent and depth like Guentzel, Bonino, Hahelin, Hornqvist, Kunitz. Another group of top 5-10 talent in the league.

Nashville has the best top 4 in the league (and I'm not sure it's close), Rinne in net, with Forsberg and Johanssen up front and a ton of quality depth. Again a top 10 team in terms of talent.

These are all great to elite teams in terms of talent not mediocre teams on hot streaks. Teams with lesser talent that expect to go on a run and win the Cup will be disappointed as they have been every year.

But that's more or less a description of Boston in 2011 and Nashville last year. And hell, it also describes LA in 2010, and Pittsburgh in 2016. To call them an elite team prior to that half-season is very revisionist. They had elite players, but they were not playing at an elite level as a team. And therein lies a major comparison to the Flames.

It's hard to fathom as a Flames fan. There is an inherent mindset as a fan of a team that your players aren't as good as the superstars around the league. But you know that on 30 other team boards on HF there have been pages and pages of discussion disparaging their own superstars (who we call elite players that our players can't touch) during their own cold streaks, just like we do to our guys. We always assume that other stars around the league are clockwork and only ours go through struggles, but that's simply not true. Watching guys game in and game out gives an inherent negative bias compared to only seeing what other teams' stars do on the highlight reel.

League-wide perception is heavily influenced by Stanley Cups. Sean Monahan is on pace for 70+ points this year (can only play 81 games). If Monahan has 70 points in the season, then league-wide, people will view him as a superstar the same way you would say Anze Kopitar or Patrice Bergeron was elite talent prior to his Cup win. We have a goaltender this year who is playing at an elite level. Mark Giordano is a fantastic #1 defenceman, and our defensive depth is great.

Paper roster isn't an issue, really. What the Flames need to do is have all their great parts come together to play dominant hockey. That's it. It's what the Kings did, it's what Boston did, it's what Nashville almost did, but what Pittsburgh did two seasons ago.

 

[Baxterman]

But that's more or less a description of Boston in 2011 and Nashville last year. And hell, it also describes LA in 2010, and Pittsburgh in 2016. To call them an elite team prior to that half-season is very revisionist. They had elite players, but they were not playing at an elite level as a team. And therein lies a major comparison to the Flames.

It's hard to fathom as a Flames fan. There is an inherent mindset as a fan of a team that your players aren't as good as the superstars around the league. But you know that on 30 other team boards on HF there have been pages and pages of discussion disparaging their own superstars (who we call elite players that our players can't touch) during their own cold streaks, just like we do to our guys. We always assume that other stars around the league are clockwork and only ours go through struggles, but that's simply not true. Watching guys game in and game out gives an inherent negative bias compared to only seeing what other teams' stars do on the highlight reel.

League-wide perception is heavily influenced by Stanley Cups. Sean Monahan is on pace for 70+ points this year (can only play 81 games). If Monahan has 70 points in the season, then league-wide, people will view him as a superstar the same way you would say Anze Kopitar or Patrice Bergeron was elite talent prior to his Cup win. We have a goaltender this year who is playing at an elite level. Mark Giordano is a fantastic #1 defenceman, and our defensive depth is great.

Paper roster isn't an issue, really. What the Flames need to do is have all their great parts come together to play dominant hockey. That's it. It's what the Kings did, it's what Boston did, it's what Nashville almost did, but what Pittsburgh did two seasons ago.

I am as big a Monahan fan as anyone but he is not at Crosby, Malkin, Kopitar or Toews level even if he does reach 70+ points this year. Gio is good but is not at Chara or Doughty levels. Smith is having a good half year but comparisons to Quick, Rinne or even Murray is a little premature at this point.

And beyond that the depth isn't remotely close to those teams.

This Flames team roster pales in comparison to every Stanley Cup champion in recent memory, it isn't close. Not only are our "Superstars" not close to the other teams but the depth is a big, big step below the top teams.

 

[Lunatik]

Meh. You bring up the Kings, for example. This comes to my mind first. They meekly went out in the first round for two years, and were floundering around in mid-season in 2010-11. They brought Darryl Sutter in, everyone laughed, they played well down the stretch, everyone stopped laughing. Whether by a coaching change or whatever, the same group of guys can find a spark like that and shock everyone. It's not just me spouting. Nashville were always a Jackel and Hyde team, but a pain to play against in the playoffs, that's true. But they'd never shown or even hinted at a level of hockey that they displayed last playoffs.

The Penguins are another example. They were absolutely languishing in mediocrity for a good number of years prior to Rutherford making some minor mid-season trades, replacing the coach, and all of a sudden forming the greatest team in hockey for two years. It was anything but a steady, gradual build to get there.

wait, you mean being a contender will have bumps along the road? No way, that can't be a thing