Value of: Make Your Proposal for Sean Monahan

[Johnny Hoxville]

There’s very few, but a few deals I could see making some sense. Monahan for Seguin or Stamkos. Or perhaps one of the Kings good young prospects would make sense. I don’t see many deals that would actually happen.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

The fact that you guys think trading Monahan is gonna result in complete rebuild and economic disaster is just bananas and clear stat watching. Monahan is a passenger and is not the glue holding this team in a playoff spot.

imagine moving him for a legit two-way C like Danualt or picks, prospects, and cap space for a Hall or Pietrangelo.


We’re a playoff team cause we have solid depth up front, a balanced D with solid vets and good young players, and offensive leaders like John and Chuck. Lets build around our core, with great young pieces like Dube and Valimaki (who will surpass Monahan as core pieces). Thinking that trading Monahan will send us into a full re-build is absolutely bananas. As if he is the reason we’re a half decent team.

we upgraded our goalie, improved D with Valimaki and Tanev instead of TJ, and now we need to finish off the Re-tool by capitalizing on Monahans perceived value far exceeding his actual value. If our top line could score and defend (like our 2nd line) we’d have a balanced attack and wouldn’t constantly find our best offensive players pinned in the dzone. Hanifin should also be moved for the same reason. Non core guy with high perceived value and can help push us to the next level. We’re a playoff team without Monahan and with a two-way replacement who isn’t just a one dimensional scorer (and a great scorer at that)

 

[LMFAO]

The Flames should look to trade Gaudreau instead because they have a top prospect with a similar skillset (Jakob Pelletier).

They should trade Gaudreau for a right shot forward.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

I have never said Monahan is elite. He is a fringe 1st line center at best. That's widely known by everyone. However, he is also the best available option at this time and Calgary is not rebuilding. Nobody is going to trade Calgary a better established center than Monahan in a package involving Monahan, that's really basic logic. So a retool involving upgrading Monahan on the fly is not plausible. Now there is the 'option' of trading Monahan for futures that include a prospect with 1C potential like Turcotte, Glass, or Patrick. That is called a rebuild. If Calgary decides to rebuild they are guaranteed not to be making the playoffs for a few years and ticket sales take a massive drop (assuming live audiences open up again in the next year). In 18/19 when Calgary was eliminated in 5 games to Colorado, they made a net income of 3.6M. Roughly 30% of the leagues income comes from gate revenue so if Calgary takes a major hit in gate revenue they will be loosing money every year, all this while spending billions on building a brand new stadium for the 2025 season. Tell me if you were a fan of the Red Wings right now would you buy season tickets? Would you have bought them during the Datsyuk era?
However, there is a solution to not loosing so much money. Keep the core and make adjustments in different areas to try again next year. Try a different approach. A team doesn't need an elite top 10 center in the league to make a deep playoff run and we've seen it happen many times. San Jose in 15/16 and 18/19, Nashville in 16/17, Vegas in 17/18, NYR in 13/14, NJD in 11/12, the list goes on and on.

Exactly, let’s build a model like those teams, built on four solid lines that aren’t one dimensional. We don’t need an elite C, we need another very good two-Way one That perfectly fits our system. Trading Monahan and his 6 mil will open up space for us to actually make more income and set us up for a sustainable future instead of sticking with what kind of works and knowing how limited our upside Is

 

[Mazatt]

The Flames should look to trade Gaudreau instead because they have a top prospect with a similar skillset (Jakob Pelletier).

They should trade Gaudreau for a right shot forward.

That doesn't make sense at all. Pelletier has a similar skillset in that he has hands and feet and can skate. Pelletier is more about intensity and high IQ plays and playing at both ends of the ice whereas Gaudreau is about picking apart defences with elite hands and vision, both in the zone and on the rush. Gaudreau has proven to be able to run the Flames offense into contention where as Monahan is a supporting piece that is average at every hockey skill apart from shooting the puck from in the slot. Gaudreau isn't replaceable by Pelletier and trading Gaudreau instead of Monahan would be a huge mistake

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Exactly, let’s build a model like those teams, built on four solid lines that aren’t one dimensional. We don’t need an elite C, we need another very good two-Way one That perfectly fits our system. Trading Monahan and his 6 mil will open up space for us to actually make more income and set us up for a sustainable future instead of sticking with what kind of works and knowing how limited our upside Is

Look, I don't know what else to tell you besides moving Monahan in the 20/21 season is not the answer. Just agree to disagree I guess.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

Look, I don't know what else to tell you besides moving Monahan in the 20/21 season is not the answer. Just agree to disagree I guess.

Fair. If Monahan finds his role this year and we fit him into the lineup in a place that works I’ll eat my words. If not though I really think we missed out on a chance to capitalize on his high perceived value.

 

[Sparky93]

Fair. If Monahan finds his role this year and we fit him into the lineup in a place that works I’ll eat my words. If not though I really think we missed out on a chance to capitalize on his high perceived value.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that his role will be the exact same as the one that has him 29th in scoring, among all forwards, for the past 5 years.

 

[Tkachuky]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that his role will be the exact same as the one that has him 29th in scoring, among all forwards, for the past 5 years.

This.

Guy is talking as if Monahan is Rinaldo or someone like that to barely make the team.

 

[blankall]

The fact that you guys think trading Monahan is gonna result in complete rebuild and economic disaster is just bananas and clear stat watching. Monahan is a passenger and is not the glue holding this team in a playoff spot.

imagine moving him for a legit two-way C like Danualt or picks, prospects, and cap space for a Hall or Pietrangelo.


We’re a playoff team cause we have solid depth up front, a balanced D with solid vets and good young players, and offensive leaders like John and Chuck. Lets build around our core, with great young pieces like Dube and Valimaki (who will surpass Monahan as core pieces). Thinking that trading Monahan will send us into a full re-build is absolutely bananas. As if he is the reason we’re a half decent team.

we upgraded our goalie, improved D with Valimaki and Tanev instead of TJ, and now we need to finish off the Re-tool by capitalizing on Monahans perceived value far exceeding his actual value. If our top line could score and defend (like our 2nd line) we’d have a balanced attack and wouldn’t constantly find our best offensive players pinned in the dzone. Hanifin should also be moved for the same reason. Non core guy with high perceived value and can help push us to the next level. We’re a playoff team without Monahan and with a two-way replacement who isn’t just a one dimensional scorer (and a great scorer at that)

The Flames have descent depth already...they need an upgrade at #1 centre. You can move Lindolm to Centre, but then the Flames need an upgrade at #1 RW.

Splitting up Monahan's value and trading him for "depth" is just bad asset management. Where do you get this idea that hockey clubs are built on only having solid 2-way centres? We already have Backlund, who is one of the best 2 way centres in the league. The Flames need a centre who can put the puck in the net.

The Flames have a bottom 3 lines of:
Tkachuk-Backlund-Mangiapane
Bennett-Ryan-Dube
Lucic-Simon-Leivo

You're proposing the Flames move Monahan to upgrade Dube? That makes zero sense. The Flames bottom 9 is solid, and any upgrades there will be marginal at best. Downgrading the top line is the worst possible thing the Flames could do.

The best way to make a large upgrade on the roster (on paper anyways) is to upgrade the #1 centre. I agree that acquiring Hall and moving out Monahan makes sense. However, that's not what we're talking about here. In order to "capitalize" on Monahan you have to move the Hall-eque player in first. Moving Monahan without a deal already in place for a top line player makes zero sense.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

The Flames have descent depth already...they need an upgrade at #1 centre. You can move Lindolm to Centre, but then the Flames need an upgrade at #1 RW.

Splitting up Monahan's value and trading him for "depth" is just bad asset management. Where do you get this idea that hockey clubs are built on only having solid 2-way centres? We already have Backlund, who is one of the best 2 way centres in the league. The Flames need a centre who can put the puck in the net.

The Flames have a bottom 3 lines of:
Tkachuk-Backlund-Mangiapane
Bennett-Ryan-Dube
Lucic-Simon-Leivo

You're proposing the Flames move Monahan to upgrade Dube? That makes zero sense. The Flames bottom 9 is solid, and any upgrades there will be marginal at best. Downgrading the top line is the worst possible thing the Flames could do.

The best way to make a large upgrade on the roster (on paper anyways) is to upgrade the #1 centre. I agree that acquiring Hall and moving out Monahan makes sense. However, that's not what we're talking about here. In order to "capitalize" on Monahan you have to move the Hall-eque player in first. Moving Monahan without a deal already in place for a top line player makes zero sense.

It's not about two-way centres its about two-way lines. When our first line gets caved in against elite lines or d pairings we are screwed. We need both of our top-6 lines to not be defensive liabilities if we wanna be competitive against top teams. We need to make our top line more stable defensively so that when they're playing against other top players we don't get beat. Moving Monahan for a lower scoring but better defensive C, or move some pieces around the roster, we're a better team. We can't win with Money on the top line, and when we inevitably move him down the depth chart and he becomes the 50 point offensive C he should be his value will decrease significantly. That's why we should've sold high earlier in the off-season for picks so we could restock the cupboards and open up space for a Hall or Pietrangelo. Or for a guy like Danault so we can take the defensive pressure off of Johnny.

We could be a great team if our first line could effectively match up against other top lines. Our 2nd line and 3rd line with Bennett and Dube can compete against any line. Adjust the top line and we're way better off. But I'm sure you'll just see any Monahan move as a downgrade because he can score even though he's not a reliable dynamic scorer. He's a great shooter, but add a guy like Hall or Danault and we add different elements that make it a more balanced and effective line. Not saying just move Monahan for scraps but definitely some options out there, even tho Monahan himself won't return a true elite 1C. Monahan is the guy to move and only time will tell but imo he's the guy to move. Gotta take risks which you guys won't for some reason even though our core is mediocre and we're gonna need a shake-up if we play as inconsistent as we have the past 2 years.

 

[blankall]

It's not about two-way centres its about two-way lines. When our first line gets caved in against elite lines or d pairings we are screwed. We need both of our top-6 lines to not be defensive liabilities if we wanna be competitive against top teams. We need to make our top line more stable defensively so that when they're playing against other top players we don't get beat. Moving Monahan for a lower scoring but better defensive C, or move some pieces around the roster, we're a better team. We can't win with Money on the top line, and when we inevitably move him down the depth chart and he becomes the 50 point offensive C he should be his value will decrease significantly. That's why we should've sold high earlier in the off-season for picks so we could restock the cupboards and open up space for a Hall or Pietrangelo. Or for a guy like Danault so we can take the defensive pressure off of Johnny.

We could be a great team if our first line could effectively match up against other top lines. Our 2nd line and 3rd line with Bennett and Dube can compete against any line. Adjust the top line and we're way better off. But I'm sure you'll just see any Monahan move as a downgrade because he can score even though he's not a reliable dynamic scorer. He's a great shooter, but add a guy like Hall or Danault and we add different elements that make it a more balanced and effective line. Not saying just move Monahan for scraps but definitely some options out there, even tho Monahan himself won't return a true elite 1C. Monahan is the guy to move and only time will tell but imo he's the guy to move. Gotta take risks which you guys won't for some reason even though our core is mediocre and we're gonna need a shake-up if we play as inconsistent as we have the past 2 years.

Most top lines don't match up against other top lines. Most teams have an offensive line and a shut down line.

As far as defensive "liabilities" go our top line isn't even that bad. Gaudreau isn't the greatest in his own end, but he at least skates back and is quite good at takeaways. There are multiple top line wingers who will rarely even skate back into their own zone.

It's a similar deal with Monahan. He's not a world beater defensive centre like Bergeron, but he puts in a genuine effort in his own end.

The Flames two major problems have been not getting enough consistent scoring in the playoffs and having goalies collapse. Markstrom deals with the second problem. Switching Monahan (who's playoff scoring is actually descent with 10 goals and 21 points in 30 games) for Danault, who has horrendous production in the playoffs (1 goal and 5 points in 16 games) would sink the team.