Flames Off-Season Roundtable

The Flames have been out of it for about a month now and with no real news to speak of, many fans minds have begun to turn to the inevitable "what if’s" that populate the time between now and the start of the new season. And, as usual, the club is facing a lot of uncertainty after a disappointing finish and no obvious or sure-fire cures for what ails them. 

With all that in mind, I recently sent some questions out to Nation writers Two-Line Pass, Jean Lefebvre and Pat Steinberg to get a sense of where their speculation has led them thus far. Here are their responses.

1.) Before getting to specifics, what would you consider the Flames primary goal to be next season? Stay competitive, take a step forward or begin the re-build? Your answer will likely inform the rest of your decision making.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

TLP: Ideally they will both take a step forward as far as the standings go (i.e. playoffs) and be able to ship off several unwanted pieces for literally anything they can get in return, but unfortunately I think both of those goals are going to be difficult to achieve. As to performing better as a team, yes, I think the 2010-2011 Flames will be better once all 82 are played and that this season was indeed a speed bump rather than a sign of things to come. And by "think," I clearly mean hope. There is, we can all agree, far too much dead weight on the roster and it’s unlikely to go anywhere, so while Darryl Sutter should have the goal of rebuilding the team as well as the farm, that’s far too long-term of a goal to have any hopes of achieving in any meaningful way within the next calendar year. Making the playoffs and being competitive in the division (ha ha), however, would at least keep the wolves from his door for another year until he can get out from under at least some of his cap issues.

Jean: Start to rebuild. For several seasons, the Flames had been mired in that middle ground of either being just good enough to slip into the playoffs. This past year, despite an impressive bounce-back season by Miikka Kiprusoff, they were just bad enough to barely miss the post-season. Given the age of the core and the relative shortage of ready-to-contribute prospects, there isn’t much reason to believe immediate progress is in the offing and in fact a further regression is not unreasonable. The Flames could conceivably squeeze a big year out of this group but the odds aren’t so good and a win-now attitude could result in moves that further hurt the club’s already cloudy long-term situation.

Pat: I really believe the Flames are still in a position to stay competitive, but it has to be done the right way.  So I guess my answer would be a hybrid of two answers…they need to stay competitive by re-tooling a little bit.  This team is handcuffed a little by having a number of longterm contracts, but I think this offseason can start building for strength down the road without dramatically sacrificing competition level.  Whether it be a deal to acquire picks, or spread out salary by trading a big $ contract, I don’t believe it means Calgary will regress to the bottom of the pack.  Maybe expectations would need to be tempered a little, but I think it’s possible to re-stock for the future without killing Calgary’s ability to compete in the West.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

2.) The Flames have about $53M in cap space committed to next season, giving them precious little budgetary wiggle room. I think we can all agree that Steve Staios, Cory Sarich and Ales Kotalik are boat anchors and are going to be very difficult to move in a trade. If you could eliminate ONE of these contracts (via demotion or buy out) which one would it be? Why?

TLP: I’d like to offload Kotalik. Of the three, his contract is of middling expense, and he seems the least likely to produce relative to any expectations placed upon him. Sarich, while obviously the most expensive against the cap, at least serves some sort of purpose as a 4-5 defenseman even if he is grossly overpaid. Staios is clearly the most "past it" of the three, but he’s also the cheapest. So if he needs to be scratched — and he will be — it’s the least costly scratch the team can make. Plus he does seem to be genuinely well-liked and regarded as a leader in the dressing room.

Jean: Eliminate Kotalik because for all his flaws, he’s scored 20 goals as recently as two seasons ago and Calgary is thinner up front than on the back end. That leaves the choice between Staios and Sarich. In a buyout scenario, Staios is the more disposable option because he’s due just $2.2M for one season compared to $7M over two seasons for Sarich. In a clean-break situation (i.e. dump trade) Sarich would be the preferable exorcism from the payroll.

Pat: Jeez, I don’t like this question at all, because I can’t say "all three".  I’ll give Sarich and Staios a pass here though, and here is my reasoning:  Staios has a contract that runs out at the end of the season…was it an odd move?  Yes, but his $2.7 million cap hit is gone at the conclusion of the 2010-11 season, so to eat that for one more year I guess you can stomach.  Yes, the 3.3 on Sarich might be a little high, but I really liked his play the final 30 games of the season.  When he’s healthy, I believe he can still be effective.  That leaves Ales as the easy answer, but I just don’t know how you get around that contract.  If there was an option of the three, I’d go with him.

3.) The Flames don’t have a lot of free agent decisions to make this summer with just Eric Nystrom (UFA), Chris Higgins (UFA), Craig Conroy (UFA), Brian McGrattan (UFA) and Jamal Mayers (UFA) set to be free and clear come July 1st. Being mindful of the cap crunch, which of these guys do you re-sign and which do you let walk?

TLP: Of that group, just Higgins for sure and maybe Nystrom and Mayers, depending upon how cheaply they can be had. Conroy just doesn’t have it any more and the only way I’d like to see him stay in Calgary is if he wouldnt mind being shuffled up to the broadcast booth. McGrattan is either made redundant by Mayers or, if the latter doesn’t re-sign, is easily replaceable if Darryl really feels like he needs someone to punch guys like Derek Boogaard and Raistis Ivanans in the face 12 times a year.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Jean: Let Higgins and McGrattan walk. Based on his short tenure with Calgary, the former has no motivation to give the Flames a hometown discount and Calgary can’t afford to pay what figures to be his market value even after a disastrous 2009-10 campaign. Meanwhile, the latter had already been phased out of the Flames’ plans by this past season’s end. The targets then are Nystrom, Mayers and Conroy. Mayers is a marginal player at this stage of his career but does just enough in the mucking and faceoff departments to earn his keep as a depth player. Besides, his presence may dissuade the Flames from going out and getting their annual one-dimensional knuckle-chucker this summer. Conroy should be obsolete by now, but one look at the Flames’ depth chart at centre tells you he really isn’t. He’s already taken one sweetheart deal to stay in Calgary and nobody should put it past him to do it again.

Pat: In my mind, there’s three tiers…yes, maybe, and no.  Nystrom is the only one that falls into the yes category for me, as I think there are so many good things to like about his game.  His offence is never going to wow you.  Instead, it’s his compete level, work ethic and desire to win that you really admire.  His production last season was hampered by a groin injury that affected him from November through February. When healthy, he was one of few that would actually drive the net with the puck.  I put Higgins in the maybe category, even though I’ve heard the Head Coach really wants him back. The big if with Higgins is whether or not he can regain his offensive touch. For Conroy and Mayers, I’d say no, for two reasons…38 and 35.  I liked Conroy in the faceoff dot and on the cycle, but at 38, I think maybe it’s time to go in a different direction. I was a huge fan of the jump Mayers brought each and every shift, but again, as a 35 year old UFA, I’d go a different way. McGrattan didn’t see game action from the start of February on…that one is easy to me.

4.) Perhaps the most contentious free agent decisions will be whether or not to re-sign Ian White (RFA), who after scoring 13 goals and 38 points is rumored to be in the $3-$3.5M range. Should the Flames invest that much in yet another defender? Trade his rights prior to free agency? Court a free agent offer sheet?

TLP: If at all possible, he needs to be re-upped. Needs to be. You don’t find good, young defensemen like him every day, and if he is allowed to leave, then the return for Phaneuf was Matt Stajan, and that might make me cry. If he does absolutely have to be let go, then I’d prefer it be by way of an offer sheet. I imagine the return in trade would not be worth it.

Jean: This depends on the outcome of Point 2). If another defenceman doesn’t hit the bricks, it’s hard to imagine a significant financial investment in White. On the other hand, cutting bait with White would mean one less asset on hand from the Dion Phaneuf deal. Assuming something can be done with one of the other bodies on defence, go ahead and sign him. There isn’t enough case history to rely on the offer-sheet route being a smart way to go.

Pat: White had a great season, no question. I guess this question would be more easily answered if we knew the answer to question 2, but we don’t. So, at face value, I’d say yeah, the Flames should make a push to re-sign White. The salary range seems about fair, and White did say he’d like to return. The good thing is, he’s a controllable asset, so the other two options are viable if need be.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

5.) Even after dumping one of the boat anchors, the Flames may need to make a tough decision with one of their big ticket players. Jarome Iginla ($7M), Daymond Langkow (4.5M), Robyn Regehr ($4.02M) and Miikka Kiprusoff ($5.83M) are all past 30 and take up a significant portion of the Flames budget. Would you move any of these guys this summer? More than one? Why or why not? Also…what would you demand in return?

TLP: Langkow for sure. Any void created by anyone else’s being dealt would be impossible to fill even if the return was good, which it likely wouldn’t be if a team was taking on that kind of salary. Langkow will not garner much, but he also doesn’t contribute much, certainly relative to his salary. It would just be $4.5 million off the books. Anything gained in return would be a bonus.

However, I do think that the idea of trading Kiprusoff is an interesting one. His value is certainly higher than anyone else’s; after all he could have been a Vezina finalist if the ballot allowed for one extra goaltender to be listed (or, more accurately, if Marty Brodeur wasn’t living off reputation). The team would be nearly crippled for the near future but the haul could be substantial. Something to consider but I wouldn’t do it quite yet.

Jean: Listen to Flames fans (and TLP! – ed.) and read their messageboard pleas and there seems to be a considerable push to dump Langkow. Even after a down year by Langkow’s standards, it’s hard to understand the sentiment. As mentioned, the Flames aren’t exactly overflowing with centremen and, even if his scoring has dipped, Langkow still does a lot of underappreciated grunt work. Besides, Langkow’s trade value isn’t so hot right now. Same goes for Regehr. There’s an obvious emotional consideration when it comes to Iginla but the simple truth is he’s an increasingly bad bet to provide value for his $7M over the next three seasons. Is the city ready to cut the cord, though? Is Iginla even willing to let Darryl Sutter swing the axe? Based on the sell-high principle, there may never be a better time to trade Kiprusoff. The caveat there is you have to be ready to commit to Option C) of Point 1) (The Great Rebuild).

Pat: Would I move one of those guys? Yes. Can you?  Different question. If there was the potential to move out a player like Regehr or Langkow and not bring back significant dollars in return (ala, draft picks), I’d be for it.  I don’t think it’s totally out of the question, either, as there are teams who could use a veteran down the middle or on the blueline. If Calgary was able to free up some salary via that avenue, it might open things up a little more to sign the aforementioned White.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

6.) It’s a fairly average UFA crop this season. The best forwards available (Marleau, Kovalchuk, Plekanec) will be pretty expensive and probably beyond the Flames reach. Considering your other moves, is there anyone else you would target up front? Are there any defenders worth considering?

TLP: Honestly, no one in the Flames’ price range interests me all that much. The focus should be more on getting White signed than pursuing any other free agents. But if the White negotiation falls through, I am particularly enamored of Rangers RFA d-man Dan Girardi, who would obviously require an offer sheet but would come cheaper than White and is really pretty good.

Jean: The Flames aren’t or shouldn’t be in the market for defencemen, especially if they sign White. The Class "A" free-agent forwards are out of their price range. Reasonable second-level targets would be guys like Matthew Lombardi, Vinny Prospal, Matt Cullen and Alex Tanguay. There’s a lot of baggage with some of those guys, however.

Pat: The term thin is an accurate one, especially when it comes to who the Flames would be able to go after. First off, I think there’s a very strong chance both Marleau and Plekanec remain with their current teams. But even if that wasn’t the case, the only one who would make sense would be Plekanec at 26 years of age.  But his play this postseason may very well price him out of Calgary’s range.  I just don’t know if high-priced UFA’s make sense for the Flames this offseason, with most of them being in the 32-37 age range. That doesn’t mean they won’t try and make a splash though, because I believe they will.

7.) What’s to be done with the Flames back-up situation? The kids have struggled on the farm this year and having Kipper fully entrenched as the starter makes it difficult to sign a capable NHL veteran (emphasis on capable).

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

TLP: Two words, and I’m dead serious: Vesa Toskala. If he can be got for anything like what the hockey fan community at large perceives his value to be, then I wouldn’t hate 10 games of what he gave the Flames this season. Please stop laughing. (That’s not me you hear laughing. It’s Maple Leaf fans. – ed)

Jean: The netminding vicious circle continues. In the summer, there’s a reluctance to commit any funds to backup goaltending because the need is greater elsewhere. In February, when Kiprusoff is buckling under the weight of a heavy workload, the angst about an unreliable backup shoots way up and pointed questions are asked about why the area wasn’t properly addressed in the previous off-season. Seeing as how none of the kids are ready, the veteran rote is the way to go. There always seems to be an abundance of Ty Conklins, Alex Aulds, Johan Hedbergs and Jocelyn Thibaults out there (this year they’re called Antero Niittymaki, Brent Johnson, Andrew Raycroft and Curtis Sanford, among other names) and acquiring one would hardly break the bank.

Pat: You can find a capable backup in the $1 million range. From the past two seasons, is anyone going to be adverse to the Flames spending a little more at that position?  There are UFA goalies out there…Budaj, Hedberg, Ellis etc.  There are RFA goalies out there too, in Harding, Pavelec, Schneider. If you could wrangle a way to get someone signed at 1.2, I’d be all for it.

8.) Matt Pelech will turn 23 years old in September and has 3 AHL seasons under his belt. Do you pencil him in on the Flames starting roster?

TLP: I do. He doesn’t have much left to prove at the AHL level and if nothing else he can fill the role of the Adam Pardys of the world for fairly short money. What else will he do in Abbotsford?

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Jean: No. There’s no obvious room for him and besides, Pelech is a "young" 23 from the standpoint that injuries have retarded his normal development.

Pat: Yes. Under my "maseter plan" the Flames would move out one of their current top 6 without a player coming back in return, preferably to free up some dollars and add a draft pick. Calgary would re-sign Ian White, and Matt Pelech would be promoted to the top 7.  From what I’ve read, he was strong before an injury knocked him out this season, and Jim Playfair has been high on him for years now.

9.) The Flames have a dearth of quality prospects and high draft picks. Would you try to re-stock the cupboard this summer? If so, how?

TLP: Of course I would, who wouldn’t? But that "how" part is the question, isn’t it? Ideally Sutter can work some magic via trade before the draft but… Haha I couldn’t even finish. The only way to restock the cupboard is to totally tank this season and next and next and next. Load up on high picks that way or not at all. But that tack will likely cost Sutter his job as the growing tide of negative public sentiment washes away both he and likely everyone else. 

I don’t see what it accomplishes, from Sutter’s point of view (that the team could have made the playoffs this year but for a few bad breaks), to unload everyone worth anything as soon as possible. The team will be Oilers-bad for years if he does and ownership likely won’t stomach that. Sutter sure won’t be saved by his winning personality.
Jean: If the commitment is made to Option C) of Point 1) (The Great Rebuild, in case you’d forgotten) then any all trades should involve getting younger and adding or at least upgrading draft picks. Yeah, there’s always the danger that prospects won’t develop and draft picks will go all Jesper Mattsson on them, but how much bigger is that risk compared to one the Flames would take by maintaining the status quo with this particular group and trying to fill an inside straight on the river?
Pat: I would. And I’d do it via the draft. I realize Calgary lacks a first and second round pick for this season, but I believe a deal could be made to acquire a pick in the first 60 picks, and there is your start. You’re not going to stock yourself with a glut of quality prospects all in one off season, but you’ve got to start somewhere, and getting into the top 60, preferably the top 30, would be the way to do it. And I think it can be done.

  • George.T.

    Just a quick list of things i would do as an “arm chair GM”

    Iggy,Lankow,Kotalik,Regehr,Sarich,Mikka all gone, i really think its time for new blood, faster legs, and youth. I dig everyone but Kotalik, its just time for a change.
    These guys make a combined 28.9 mil +/-
    I believe there is a couple of first round picks along with a few prospect in trading these guys, Bos, NYI, Philly, Atlanta, and Florida need something we have. Example: Philly needs a goaltender in the worst way.
    Islanders have massive cap space.

    I just think it wouldn’t be so bad at the bottom of the league for a couple of years we can build up , and stock pile our future. cause this mediocrity is killing me.
    Not that i dont like these guys, some of them are heart and soul, but its time for change.
    What do you think, too far? maybe not enough? or totally unrealistic?

  • The scorched earth policy is only ever engaged in when it’s clear that the team, as it’s currently constructed, is beyond salvage. That’s somewhat sensible because there’s risk in selling off proven performers for future assets, one that is magnified if a GM is perceived as leaving wins and points on the table by doing so.

    Of course, the other side of the coin is a terrible teams assets are usually fairly depressed in terms of perceived value around the league, meaning they often garner less for them during the ensuing fire sale than they would have had the pursued the same strategy before stepping into an elevator shaft. Meaning: there’s also risk in trying to remain competitive right up until it’s unmistakably proven that you aren’t.

  • Oyo

    I worry about a rebuild, do you really want D. Sutter to be able to hand pick an entirely new team from other teams prospects and table-scraps? We may end up with 13 or 14 d-men…
    Personally, I don’t think we need a rebuild, a good no 1 center and improved years from most of the guys, which SHOULD be expected at this point would easily have us competing for the Northwest division title.
    I worry that if Sutter rebuilds we’ll end up right back where we are with 4 or 5 tough years of being a bottomfeeder to show for it.
    I think where we really need to improve is our scouting, especially in Europe. How many Flames first round picks in the last ten years have actually made any kind of impact at the NHL level.
    Kris Chucko anyone??? There are lots of teams that draft far below the Flames that seem to end up with some pretty solid players. Look at Detroit.

  • The biggest issue with a scorched earth policy is that, IMO, its not an effective way to build a winning franchise. We can name the examples of how this lead to Crosby drafted by Pitts, and Kane & Toews in Chicago but realistically I geinuinely believe you can be a competitive team and continue to rebuild. The biggest knock on Sutter is that he will trade away so many draft picks when he should be utilizing them. Get better scouting staff and there are many diamonds in the rouch that can be had in the bottom half of the drafting round. Some of the more successful teams did not start from scratch to “build a winning mentality.” They had winners, and exposed new prospects to this culture to build on year after year. I’m thinking of the Detroits, Bostons, Buffalo’s, Phillys, and Toronto’s of the world (just kidding). We are not near the unsalvageable situation that Burke is presented in. That being said, I truly would not be surprised to see them make the playoffs or spot 9 next year.

    Let me put it this way, does anyone truly believe the Edmonton Oilers will be prepared to compete for the cup in the next 10 years with their scorched earth mentality? Didn’t think so…

  • That’s fair enough. The issue usually is: scorched earth has to be done because the team has been completely run into the ground. It’s almost always done out of necessity and that means the team is no longer anywhere near competing – which is why you have an extended “rebuild” periods, often punctuated by the eviscerating of the management who steered the ship into an ice-berg (Edmonton excepted of course. They simply promoted Lowe instead).

    The funny thing with the Oilers is they DIDN’T go this route. They spent to the cap the last few years. They heavily pursued high priced free agents in the off-season. It only looks scorched earth because they failed so miserably at maintaining a competitive team.

    Anyways, the Flames aren’t going to go that route, I suspect, until and unless Sutter’s alchemy fails completely and the team is no longer competitive. If they decide to completely rebuild, it would be better to gut the management and start anew. But that won’t be happening this year.

  • Graham

    Some talk in Ottawa about moving Spezza before his July 1st no trade clause kicks in.

    Would a Spezza for Iggy trade +/- something make sense?

    Roughly same cap hit, although Spezza is under
    contract for longer… to offset this, you might
    get Ottawa to take on Kotalik or one of the other boat anchors.

  • If you look at what the Flames need I dont think Spezza is the answer. First and foremost the flames need to find places for all 3 of Sarich, Staios and Kotalik. Buy outs are stupid because the player stays on the cap but I’m sure Kotalik and Sarich can be had for 9th round draft picks.

    Second they need to resign Nystrom, Higgins and White. I’m amazed at how many people feel these payers are expendable and dont help teams win when these are truly the winners on the team. Going after big flashy players like Spezza is stupid because, while they are very talented, very rarely do they work out; its right up there with big ticket UFA signings. Spezza is a high talent no heart player.

    Its time to look at getting the players that are competitive and filled with heart and good at what they do. I put all 3 of these players in the same category as the Joel Wards, David Moss’, and Curtis Glencross’ of the world. They arent flashy but great with the corsi, have compete and want to win. Jokinen is talented but didnt want to win. Buowmester is likely the same. I want more Gelinas not Jokinens. Gelinas are way more fun to watch is nothing else.

  • George.T.

    anyone know if the cap is going up or down? If it goes down how does D.Sutter clear cap space with all this dead weight on the team? I agree with Brent buy outs dont help the situation. Next question who has a No trade on their contract of all the players that need to go?
    Me thinks its gonna be a messy off season.

  • Jean Lefebvre

    I think that we forget that a team isn’t built or scrapped in one season. If we move players – who do we pick up, this years crop of UFA is not that deep and neither is the draft outside of the top 5 picks. This years edition of the Calgary Flames underachieved – I think another year under Sutters system and a year watching from the outside may motivate these guys.

  • Balthazar


    The fire sale won’t happen, but a couple of moves could give the battery a bit of a boost. With the core still having a few years left, Daz will likely ride it out for 2 more years with tweaks to see if he can get the formula just right to threaten if th Flames get in the playoffs.

    Let’s move past the wishful thinking of turning a package of Kotalik/Sarich/Staois into Tyler Hall. If they can be dumped, great, but don’t hold your breath. Daz didn’t trade for Kots and Staios to dump them.

    Part of the challenge is to find a GM who needs what you got to trade. Look at someone who needs help to make the next step – the Caps, for example. They ran up against a hot goalie and need a bit of luck and a bit of sandpaper in the playoffs.

    If Daz can move (and I don’t say this cuz I want him to go, I kinda don’t) Regher to Wash, clear $4M and get a prospect/pick/package … that’s a start.

    Now, I think Daz loves Robyn and after moving Dion out I don’t think he’s also going to move him…

    So… maybe we can turn a package of Kotalik/Sarich/Staois into Tyler Hall!

  • Balthazar

    The issue with moving Regher is that he is so hard to replace on the blue line. Lets assume for a moment that they will resign White. White was a pretty solid piece of the return for Phaneuf who they want to succeed. Has anyone stopped to consider that White was likely an effective player because he was playing with Regher. Why pay 3.5 mill for a player and trade his line mate whom they had a lot of success. Maybe he can pick up where he left off with another partner but its a riskier game to do so. In addition to this how is regher expendable? There truly is no reasonable replacement for him ($4 mill is fair market value for him too). If we were to trade regher then the defensive corps would look like:


    That has to be one of the NHL’s weakest defensive line-up around. If they can just get rid of Sarich for nothing then they have something like:


    Its still not great but for a moment think that Sutter may pull his head out of his a$$ and Darryl can get rid of Staios to the minors too and promote Pelech then we are looking at something like:


    Thats a pretty darn good looking top 4 and the bottom 2 should be able to be okay against 3rd and 4th liners. I personally quite enjoyed Pardy and dont know a huge amount about Pelech. He will likely provide the same results to Staios at about 1/5th the price.

  • RCN

    Late to the party…

    1. Re-bulid on the fly.

    2. Move Kotalik (to Europe a la Marcus Nilson if nothin else) & Sarich (for anything).

    3. Re-sign Nystrom & Higgins… maybe ^^ Mayers.

    4. Re-sign Ian White (unless a beneficial trade could be worked out… but that goes for anyone).

    5. Move Langkow AND Regehr. I’d like to see them remove Regehr’s corpse-like persona from the dressing room and replace it with a younger version with a bit of a pulse… someone like Matt Greene comes to mind. I feel as though the removal of Regehr’s all-business, Mr. Serious-like personality, coupled with the introduction of a jokester that can keep the room light would do wonders for this club. Plus, how could you not love to see Matt Greene smashing Oilers heads in for the next 5 years!

    6. I’d look at a guy like Colby Armstrong. I like Dan Hamhuis, but it’d depend on exactly how the rest of the D shapes up.

    7. Toskala or any other backup under a mil. Vesa’s probably a good fit with Kipper for next season given their relationship.

    8. Pelech stays… and hopefully usurps Pardy & Staios as a #5

    9. Its never a bad idea to add picks & prospects… EVER!


    Pelech- Staios/Pardy



    And still the need for a #1 C.

  • Oyo

    I like ross creeks thoughts.
    although instead of another grinder type such as armstrong (even though he possess scoring potential) i would rather get an offensive player…like a svatos or something. someone with the knack of putting the puck in the net and throw backlund in 2nd line instead of stajan

    bourqe ?? iggy
    hagman backlund svatos
    dawes stajan higgens
    glencross sutter nystrom

    bouw – white
    gio – sarich
    pardy – staois / pelech

  • Oyo

    plus if we could swing another top 4 D man with some speed that would be benficial. to sum up i would love to see regher ( i know he has a NTC), kotalik and mcgratten go to TB for lecavelier. (only because i heard from fan960 that TB may be looking to move his big contract to free up room to build around stamkos.)
    then trade langkow, moss, and sarich? for the likes of brad boyes (thoughts?? i like him but has had an off season) and carlo colaiacovo.

    so it would be
    bourqe lecavelier iggy
    hagman backlund boyes
    dawes stajan higgens
    glencross sutter nystrom

    white bouwmeester
    gio colaiacovo
    pardy staois / pelech