Speculation: Armchair GM Thread VIII - We've Tried Nothing! And we have all kinds of ideas!

[DFF]

@Mazatt
Problem is Backlund, Coleman and Toffoli will be around whether you want them or not

 

[Mazatt]

@Mazatt
Problem is Backlund, Coleman and Toffoli will be around whether you want them or not

I have little doubt on Backlund/Coleman being here due to effectiveness combined with their clauses, but they were examples. In essence it's still the big bottom 6 contracts that need to be managed in Lucic and Monahan, but someone like Toffoli is just a whole lot easier to move. Either way it's just about getting the salary structure of the team in line with the lineup structure in the offseason regardless of who is moved.

Idk, I think I may just expect too much out of Treliving in having creativity to move the players he needs to to build the best roster.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Again, if he wants 6M+, Treliving can trade him. It’s not like there is no option. Mangi is like Bennett, a critical support player but not the guy to carry the team. You should not break the bank to pay those guys. It’s ok if we don’t have Johnny and Tkachuk to sign but we do. I think 5M is as far as they should go with him.

Also you underestimate Bennett. He brings more than number. Even his numbers look as good as Mangi this year.

I'm not undervaluing Bennett I'm just point out the facts that will be brought up in a negotiation, Mangiapane is a good pker and is only seeing limited pp time and is still a 30 goal scorer.

In the end I think your being overly dramatic we will get Mangiapane hopefully around 5.5 and we will move Monahan to make room for the 4 we need to keep or Gaudreau will walk and none of this matters anyway

 

[Rockmorton]

He scored at a 28 goal pace last year. Like I said good luck getting him on a deal at 4 million

Okay. One 30 goal season and one potential 30 goal season. I don’t think pace is considered during contract negotiations, but I could be wrong. He’s an RFA, so I think he’s near the back of the line for signing. With the big contracts coming up, the Flames are gonna need to get a good deal with Mang. I predict a range of 3.95-4.5. It’ll depend on the term.

 

[Some Other Flame]

Okay. One 30 goal season and one potential 30 goal season. I don’t think pace is considered during contract negotiations, but I could be wrong. He’s an RFA, so I think he’s near the back of the line for signing. With the big contracts coming up, the Flames are gonna need to get a good deal with Mang. I predict a range of 3.95-4.5. It’ll depend on the term.

All of Tkachuk, Mangiapane, and Kylington are arbitration eligible.

Tkachuk and Mangiapane are a year away from UFA and buying UFA years ain't cheap. Especially when both can elect arbitration and then walk in a year.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Okay. One 30 goal season and one potential 30 goal season. I don’t think pace is considered during contract negotiations, but I could be wrong. He’s an RFA, so I think he’s near the back of the line for signing. With the big contracts coming up, the Flames are gonna need to get a good deal with Mang. I predict a range of 3.95-4.5. It’ll depend on the term.

Pace will absolutely be taken into account when you are talking about a shortened season. I see 0 reason Mangi will sign long term under 5, he can simply go to arbitration and point out he has 49 goals in the last 129 games while being on a second line with limited pp time and being a good pker, take whatever he is awarded most likely in the range you stated for 1 year then walk to free agency when many teams are desperate for a 200 foot player that can score and he will make bank. He has exactly 4 less goals then Tkachuk in the last 2 years, kills penalties, takes less penalties then Tkachuk, and you expect him to sign for less than half of what Tkachuk will want? It's just not realistic.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I wonder if Mang’s season could land us Lafreniere

 

[RasmusAndersson]

I wonder if Mang’s season could land us Lafreniere

No chance imo. I love Mang but Laf has a higher ceiling and has many more years of team control, not to mention the Rangers only have a need at C and the last thing they would do is trade Laf for a more expensive, older LW. I Reaaaallly don't like the idea of moving Mang, the guy is such a stud playing with second tier players. Put the guy with a high-skilled guy and he's a first-liner. I'd move Backlund way, way before Mang. But obviously Monahan and Looch first

 

[DFF]

No chance imo. I love Mang but Laf has a higher ceiling and has many more years of team control, not to mention the Rangers only have a need at C and the last thing they would do is trade Laf for a more expensive, older LW. I Reaaaallly don't like the idea of moving Mang, the guy is such a stud playing with second tier players. Put the guy with a high-skilled guy and he's a first-liner. I'd move Backlund way, way before Mang. But obviously Monahan and Looch first

None of backlund, Monahan or Lucic would return anything if not cost you to move them

 

[DFF]

I wonder if Mang’s season could land us Lafreniere

In a couple years when Laf officially become the next Bennett or Yakupov

 

[Body Checker]

I projected to resign Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Mangiapane and Kylington, add in Pelletier, a minimum salary guy, Mackey/Valimaki/Stone as the 5-7 group then would need to clear out $8-9 million to make it work. Obviously Monohan and Lucic are the ones that need to go.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

None of backlund, Monahan or Lucic would return anything if not cost you to move them

For Monahan and Lucic absolutely. Backlund I bet you could definitely return something. My guess is buyout Monahan (or LTIR if possible) and then if Lucic will waive figure something out like Lucic+2nd for 4th or something. Maybe Lucic would cost even less since he’s only owed 1 mil in actual money. Something like Lucic+late pick for Austin Watson, which would actually save Ottawa real dollars. But if Lucic Is immovable then see what you can get for Backlund, I bet a 2nd and medium cap dump between 2-3 mil

 

[BigRangy]

I don’t think we need to consider Toffoli locked into the roster next year. If he’s just average in the playoffs I could see him getting flipped. Make up most of the cost for him and call it a rental

 

[TheHudlinator]

I don’t think we need to consider Toffoli locked into the roster next year. If he’s just average in the playoffs I could see him getting flipped. Make up most of the cost for him and call it a rental

Makes 0 sense for a team trying to compete for a cup to move out a 4 million dollar pking forward who could score 30 goals here in a full season. Makes way more sense to simply buy out Monahan if you have to and work with lucic to find a team for him and pay to move him out.

 

[Body Checker]

My take on our cap space is if Flames want to stay a contender and re-sign Johnny and Tkachuk to long term deals then Mangiapane might have to go as I just don't see the team unloading both the Monohan and Lucic contracts this offseason. Also consider our depth up front prospect wise - Pelletier, Coronato and Zary. All three are top 100 prospects not in NHL and can replace Mangiapane. Next consider that we could then add additional almost NHL ready prospects from teams maybe looking to bump up their rebuild into contending for the playoffs - i.e. New Jersey, Detroit, Ottawa. Treliving could really score a great trade on Mangiapane's value right now while still winning for today and having a great prospect pool that is right on the cusp.

 

[Mazatt]

Makes 0 sense for a team trying to compete for a cup to move out a 4 million dollar pking forward who could score 30 goals here in a full season. Makes way more sense to simply buy out Monahan if you have to and work with lucic to find a team for him and pay to move him out.

If the Flames feel like Toffoli won't score 30, and this his current 5v5 stretch is indicative of a drop off in production in the future, it is worth considering moving a guy for a profit instead of paying to get rid of guys. That's just a part of the tough decisions that come with a cap crunch.

Another wrinkle is that there are indications that an injured player cannot be boughtout without permission (not directly stated but some articles mention it) so making a move to buyout Monahan while having him on LTIR relies a lot on if he is healthy or not. So if Monahan is injured as of the initial buyout period (without any arbitration cases) then they don't really have that option to exercise on him

 

[TheHudlinator]

If the Flames feel like Toffoli won't score 30, and this his current 5v5 stretch is indicative of a drop off in production in the future, it is worth considering moving a guy for a profit instead of paying to get rid of guys. That's just a part of the tough decisions that come with a cap crunch.

Another wrinkle is that there are indications that an injured player cannot be boughtout without permission (not directly stated but some articles mention it) so making a move to buyout Monahan while having him on LTIR relies a lot on if he is healthy or not. So if Monahan is injured as of the initial buyout period (without any arbitration cases) then they don't really have that option to exercise on him

Well we can almost guarantee we will have an arbitration case with mangi. Personally I would just change the lines up next year to get more out of toffoli instead of playing him with the offensive black hole that is Backlund.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Toffoli
Mangi - Dube - Tkachuk
Pelletier - Backlund - Coleman
Phillips - Ruzicka - Lewis

 

[Mazatt]

Well we can almost guarantee we will have an arbitration case with mangi. Personally I would just change the lines up next year to get more out of toffoli instead of playing him with the offensive black hole that is Backlund.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Toffoli
Mangi - Dube - Tkachuk
Pelletier - Backlund - Coleman
Phillips - Ruzicka - Lewis

My question then is; what's the intent of the line change? Is it purely to put Toffoli in the spot where his value is the highest? Because if Dube is at centre the top line can stay in tact while the worry of an offensive 2nd line centre is covered.

But my point isn't that they should trade Toffoli it's rather not to write it off as an option. He's an effective middle 6 winger rn imo, and while he isn't exactly old he isn't fast so there is room to anticipate a drop off. So despite his PK and PP contributions, Toffoli has to remain an option for the fact you can move someone who is a passenger more than anything (speed and play-wise, not goal-scoring) to maintain a strong top 4 group of skaters while still making a profit.

For example getting a high-ish pick as well as a winger with potential that could take Toffoli's spot would be the blue print, not just throwing him away and not having any replacement in mind

 

[TheHudlinator]

My question then is; what's the intent of the line change? Is it purely to put Toffoli in the spot where his value is the highest? Because if Dube is at centre the top line can stay in tact while the worry of an offensive 2nd line centre is covered.

But my point isn't that they should trade Toffoli it's rather not to write it off as an option. He's an effective middle 6 winger rn imo, and while he isn't exactly old he isn't fast so there is room to anticipate a drop off. So despite his PK and PP contributions, Toffoli has to remain an option for the fact you can move someone who is a passenger more than anything (speed and play-wise, not goal-scoring) to maintain a strong top 4 group of skaters while still making a profit.

For example getting a high-ish pick as well as a winger with potential that could take Toffoli's spot would be the blue print, not just throwing him away and not having any replacement in mind

The point of moving toffoli up is to give dube the best linemates possible to make the transition to centre as easy as possible.

The fact remains that moving out a pking winger that has the ability to score 30 goals in this league who only makes 4 million while simultaneously trying to win the cup in the immediate future doesn't make much sense unless you get a better cheaper player which seems extremely unlikely. Getting a pick doesn't help win a cup next season, which is the stated goal of the coach so while it might make sense in a long term view that isn't the approach we are taking, and if we are getting a better winger one has to wonder why that team would ever make that trade.

If we are going to move a player it is most likely Mangiapane if he wants a big pay day or Tkachuk if he wants to be a top 5 paid player, if anything I'd argue having toffoli is to help Tre negotiate against those 2 as he has a replacement in house to fill their roles all be it a downgrade.

 

[Mazatt]

The point of moving toffoli up is to give dube the best linemates possible to make the transition to centre as easy as possible.

The fact remains that moving out a pking winger that has the ability to score 30 goals in this league who only makes 4 million while simultaneously trying to win the cup in the immediate future doesn't make much sense unless you get a better cheaper player which seems extremely unlikely. Getting a pick doesn't help win a cup next season, which is the stated goal of the coach so while it might make sense in a long term view that isn't the approach we are taking, and if we are getting a better winger one has to wonder why that team would ever make that trade.

If we are going to move a player it is most likely Mangiapane if he wants a big pay day or Tkachuk if he wants to be a top 5 paid player, if anything I'd argue having toffoli is to help Tre negotiate against those 2 as he has a replacement in house to fill their roles all be it a downgrade.

I then have to ask;

how is it untenable for Toffoli to be moved while trying to remain competitive, while moving Mangiapane/Tkachuk would be an option? If the reason not to move to Toffoli is "we cannot move a PKing, 30 goal potential forward" why is there even the thought of moving Mangiapane who PK's, drives 5v5 play, and scored 30 with very little contributions from the PP? Similar for Tkachuk with how he contributed to the top line in all of hockey; how can him being moved be an option with the goal of being competitive over the middle six winger that has thrived mostly off the PP (in my opinion, of course)?

The major point is still, Lucic + Monahan can have the associated costs basically looked at as 'Picks for Gaudreau/Tkachuk' to ease the loss. But in terms of scaling things upwards, in my mind there is a scale of who you are willing to move if the cost for Lucic/Monahan is too high, and it starts with Toffoli and Backlund, and at some point in there I guess Mangiapane and or Tkachuk have to be considered, but moving the peripherary players is always going to be more desirable than moving the play-drivers

 

[TheHudlinator]

I then have to ask;

how is it untenable for Toffoli to be moved while trying to remain competitive, while moving Mangiapane/Tkachuk would be an option? If the reason not to move to Toffoli is "we cannot move a PKing, 30 goal potential forward" why is there even the thought of moving Mangiapane who PK's, drives 5v5 play, and scored 30 with very little contributions from the PP? Similar for Tkachuk with how he contributed to the top line in all of hockey; how can him being moved be an option with the goal of being competitive over the middle six winger that has thrived mostly off the PP (in my opinion, of course)?

The major point is still, Lucic + Monahan can have the associated costs basically looked at as 'Picks for Gaudreau/Tkachuk' to ease the loss. But in terms of scaling things upwards, in my mind there is a scale of who you are willing to move if the cost for Lucic/Monahan is too high, and it starts with Toffoli and Backlund, and at some point in there I guess Mangiapane and or Tkachuk have to be considered, but moving the peripherary players is always going to be more desirable than moving the play-drivers

Well to be honest I'm not convinced Tkachuk wants to be here long term atleast not at a number that works with keeping the rest of the team together. As for mangiapane he could very easily be looking for 6+ in a long term deal which depending on other deals could be hard to make work. I have hope that everything will work out and believe paying what it costs to move lucic is the best option especially because him being on the roster is Tre's fault to begin with. But moving the most cost controlled top 6 player outside of Lindholm makes very little sense especially if it's for picks or a young player with potential since we specifically brought in Toffoli over using one of our young players with potential.

Simply put you have to pay what you have to to get Lucic off the roster because ultimately the goal is a cup in the next couple of years and the best chance is with keeping Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Kylington, and Toffoli.

I think it's extremely unlikely Tre moves a guy he just brought in, has publicly said he wanted for a long time, and has a great contract. Is it possible? Sure but I think it's extremely unlikely especially when you account for a replacement player you are only saving about 3 million which isn't a ton of room, I think the most likely option is moving Lucic with a 2nd to Arizona after his bonus is paid

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I don’t think moving Lucic will be an issue. He might even decide to retire (after he’s paid his bonus), especially if the team goes on a deep run.

 

[Nanuuk]

So here are some questions I've been pondering.

Stockton has clinched the Pacific Division in the AHL and gets a bye in the first round of the play-offs. The AHL season ends today.

So how does Stockton keep their players sharp when are sitting our the first round?

Can Calgary call up three or four players and play them in the last three league games? Presumably the call-ups would be waiver exempt.

Would Sutter even want to do this as he wants the team as is to bear down going into the play-offs?

 

[Backlund]

So here are some questions I've been pondering.

Stockton has clinched the Pacific Division in the AHL and gets a bye in the first round of the play-offs. The AHL season ends today.

So how does Stockton keep their players sharp when are sitting our the first round?

Can Calgary call up three or four players and play them in the last three league games? Presumably the call-ups would be waiver exempt.

Would Sutter even want to do this as he wants the team as is to bear down going into the play-offs?

Pretty unlikely I'd say. The only way I see any of them getting called up is for some practice with the team and Treliving wanting to reward them with a NHL paycheck. Wolf only got called up to ensure Markstrom got the full night off. Sutter wants this team preparing for the playoffs. He isn't trying to play anyone on Stockton unless he has to.

 

[Nanuuk]

Pretty unlikely I'd say. The only way I see any of them getting called up is for some practice with the team and Treliving wanting to reward them with a NHL paycheck. Wolf only got called up to ensure Markstrom got the full night off. Sutter wants this team preparing for the playoffs. He isn't trying to play anyone on Stockton unless he has to.

Yeah, I've come to that conclusion as well. Sutter wants his current group sharp which means you play your extras if need be. No need to muddy the waters with new faces.