Flames Sign Deryk Engelland

After a couple of solid signings in Raymond and Hiller, the Flames add their first eyebrow raiser in Dereyk Engelland for 3 years at $2.9M per year. 

Engelland plays both defense and forward, though he mostly acts as a d-man. He’s big, he’s mean, can drop the gloves…and he’s not very good at much else. He averaged a team low 13 minutes of ice for the Pittsburgh Penguins last year, faced lower tier opposition and had some of the worst underlying possession numbers amongst Pens defensemen. Clearly, like Bollig, this is another step in the new regime’s quest to “get bigger and protect the kids”.

Engelland is a 32 year old tough guy and third pairing defender. At best, he’s a way to get the Flames over the cap floor finish line for the next few seasons and a skating harm deterrence. At worst, he’s their next Shane O’Brien.

        • supra steve

          No, not because you don’t like the signing (I am not crazy about it either). You have made yourself abundantly clear on your feelings on the signing. Now it’s time to take a deep breath, and get on with other things that you have going on in your life.

          Or you can come up with new ways of saying how much you hate the signing, if you really have nothing else to do.

        • playastation

          Washington shored up their defense by signing Pittsburgh’s 4th and 5th defenceman for how much money?

          Robida got how much? and how old is he?

          Komarov signed for 4 years at 12 million and has a career high of 9 points.

          Are you mad all your money is going to this guy or something? Like you’re personally paying him? Like we’re hamstrung for money for the next 3 years?

          Seriously? You should overreact some more.

          • jeremywilhelm

            Well seeing as we are on talking about this on an Engelland thread on a Flames site. Why the heck would it matter what other teams did with their terrible signings?

            I don’t even think I am overreacting anymore, you are overreacting to my opinion far more than I am at this point. It’s part of the discussion. If you can’t handle feel free to leave.

            The door is that way —–>

          • DoubleDIon

            In what world is the top pairing of the Penguins #4 and 5 defensemen? The Orpik deal was horrible, but Niskanen had the 6th highest +/- in the league last year, put up 46 points and played against the 2nd toughest competition of any player the Pens had. In no world anywhere is he a 4th or 5th defenseman. Orpik was brutal though for that term and cash.

          • playastation

            You really think his contract is worth that one year at 40 points?

            We obviously don’t know how he’s gonna translate on another team. Another player who had similar career point totals and 1 40 point season is Dennis Wideman.

            They could easily be hamstrung by the combination of the two contracts in year 2.

            Care to comment about the leafs signings? Should we really all be losing our minds about this signing?

            I mean this literally causes no problems to the flames. Other than Butler sucks, and his replacement still sucks, but kids are on the way.

          • DoubleDIon

            He’s not Dennis Wideman. Wideman has always been a liability in his own end. Niskanen is a very good 2 way defender. For the record, I don’t think he puts up 40 points next year, more like 35 or so. But I do think he’ll continue to be a reliable 2 way defenseman. I’d move Wideman’s contract in a heartbeat for Niskanen’s.

            I don’t like the Leafs signings, the Orpik was one brutal, the Panther’s one was awful.

            Just because other teams do stupid things doesn’t mean we should. I’d rather overpay for an actual need, then overpay for something stupid like a #7 defenseman who can drop the mitts. Sign Steve Ott or Brian Boyle for a short-term overpayment. They at least fill a functional role and brings toughness/size.

            Or sign something you need. Like a number 3/4 defenseman. Pitkanen or Gilbert.

        • supra steve

          the flames are a laughing stock for a number of reasons… mainly because they aren’t a very good team right now.

          I have barely heard any chatter about the Engelland contract coming out of anywhere but flames fans. The reason for this is simply that nobody cares about Engelland. I’m with you that it’s a stupid contract. But you’re acting like the flames have somehow mortgaged the future to bring Engelland in… that’s just not true.

          In the grand scheme of things I just don’t get why you/and others of the same opinion are getting SOOO worked up over Deryk Engelland.

      • jeremywilhelm

        Jeebus, Thomas was 31 when he started being contributing in the NHL (and a massive fluke no less). The others were already good players before they were 32.

        try harder.

        Also, Thomas hadn’t had much of a chance to prove either way if he was an NHLer. Engelland has had ample chances to prove he isn’t.

        • playastation

          All listed had their best years after your 32 year old cut off. More and more players, especially defensemen are playing very well into their 30’s. Kunitz became a 1st team all star at age 33 and an Olympian at 34. St. Louis was a 1st team all star at 38.
          St. Louis was an Olympian this year at 39 but not at 35.
          Why do you say Tim Thomas was a fluke?
          Johnny Bower is in the Hall of Fame and didn’t become a full fledged NHLer until age 33.

          Did I try hard enough?

          • jeremywilhelm

            So, Engelland is going to go from a 6-7 horrid Dman to an all star?

            Was that your point? Because if it wasn’t, I am unsure what your argument is…

          • Brownblazer

            You said no player has more to give after age 32 and that the gm was full of it. I disagree with you and say today’s player often is still very good well into their 30s and some even play better.

          • jeremywilhelm

            Yes, good players can still be good into their late 30’s.

            Shitty players never suddenly become not shitty in their 30’s…

            I still don’t see your point here. And I think you missed mine.

          • jeremywilhelm

            Yes, good players can still be good (maybe even great, most of them were already good and just had a situational change) after they are 32.

            Bad players don’t suddenly become good or useful after they are 32. Especially proven horribly bad players (like Engeland BTW).

            I think you missed my point.

  • Willi P

    Agree or not with this particular signing, I believe that BT wanted to get to the cap floor yesterday so that he would be in a position of strength with the other GM’s. By reaching the cap floor, other GM’s won’t be able to use any leverage (you need to get to the cap floor Brad, take my Clarkson) when he tries to upgrade via trade. Now he can focus on trading with other teams, improving each position incrementally (if it makes sense)and not being forced to take on bad contracts. I see this as a sound strategy and don’t really care about the truculence factor at this point. The kids will get ice time and that’s a big win. Time will tell if it is the right way to go.

  • I think if we are looking at any young D in the UFA/RFA pile, we need to be seriously considering Cody Franson.

    Leafs were willing to trade him for Josh Gorges…what would it take from us? They need help at Left D and Center…..

  • TheoForever

    Yeah, Engelland contract makes Flames look like bunch of idiots and a laughing stock around the league.
    Getting nothing for Cammy doesn’t improve that perception either, shows we are stubborn, great.

    The drafting direction has changed back to Sutter type, something I was afraid of when Feaster got let go.
    Flames have been the most boring team to watch for endless time and we are heading right back to that.

  • Jeff Lebowski

    Who is better at hockey:

    -Scott Hannan who was signed for $1 M/ yr at the end of FA period.
    -Deryk Engellend @ $2.9/yr x 3 on THE FIRST DAY of FA

    Again, the dollars are not the focal point. I’ll allow the cap argument even tho it is ridiculous (BT even said so).

    Are people suggesting a Hannan type won’t be available later this year? Does Engellend provide intangibles that are ~$2 M per year more than what Hannan or a player like him provide? RH shot got that much of a premium? Can’t be true.

    You see what an org values by where their money goes and what they draft.

    Please, for the love of hockey don’t let this be the new normal.

    No body values intangibles over ability to this extent. It’s ludicrous. Put it this way, off all the busts in history, which kind of player busts the most those lacking ability or those lacking intangibles? I’m not certain but I’d place my money on those lacking ability that bust the most. Character is important! I don’t want prima donnas but skill has to always be at the top, followed by character. What have they shown they value highest (albeit to date)?

    It is exactly the path Sutter took. It leads to over paying later for stuff you could’ve had for free. More Rene Bourque trades and subsequent contracts.

    Cap hell because you have to use 27 yo discards from successful drafting teams and then overpay because you don’t draft skill consistently because most draft picks don’t pan out.


    No. Don’t go down the path of compete, heavy over ability, offense. It’s already been proven here to fail epically.

    • Jeff Lebowski

      On the positive side we won’t have to worry about having too much skill and no support players like the coilers. I

      t’ll be easy to fill in some skill via trade and UFA once our face punchers develop.

    • RexLibris

      Totally man, if there’s one thing I’ve noticed for the three signings that Treliving has made in Free Agency is that he is modelling after Sutter and trading away our draft picks. This totally defines him as a GM, he’s the worst. Why wouldn’t we just sign Stralman or Mezaros, and sheesh did you see that Brad Richards signed for only 2m to Chicago! Like why wouldn’t we spend that 2.9m we wasted on a 6th d-man, to Brad, he totally would’ve come here. If I was GM we’d probably be a cup contender.

      Believe it or not, we aren’t the most sought after team to play for. When you have the cap space, and you know you aren’t getting your pick of the litter why not go for a guy that you think has character and could mentor the kids? Do I like the signing, no. Am I outraged and ready to hit the panic button because we might not win the Stanley cup next year, no.

      Treliving said before the draft that he intends to build a team that allows the younger players to develop at the appropriate level, and to have appropriate expectations on the players when they play. (Remember the Flamesnation post last year expecting Sven getting 50pts in his rookie season). Fact is we’re a bad team, and Treliving is adding pieces to serve as placeholders until prospects are ready to fill/or challenge for those roles. Personally I would take that over the Oilers “throw them to the wolves” approach that has worked so well for them.

      And please don’t say we are in “Cap Hell” because we signed a dman for 2.9m for three seasons, or implying that this signing is indicative of every signing and decision BT will ever make. That’s a complete joke.

      • supra steve

        de is not good has never been good and probably won’t provide value on this deal. don’t make dumb moves and we won’t criticize. i’d be willing to give bt more of the benefit of the doubt if he hadn’t punted more than half of his moves already, but he has, and it shows that the franchise and their thinking is still stuck in the mud. if you need to waste money on a dman, make it a better dman than this – and i’m not talking pie-in-the-sky guys either – guys like raphael diaz and maybe 11 or 12 others are better than he is and are still fa.

        • DoubleDIon

          I agree in some regards. He got the Bennett pick right at least. 2nd and 3rd rounds were very underwhelming. I was fine with the Raymond and Hiller signings. I’d say he’s punted less than half his moves. We took the right guy at 4, our late picks were solid and 2 of the 3 signings were solid.

          I disagreed with not QO’ing Byron too I guess.

        • RedMan

          according to the Herald article, there were 8 OTHER teams after Engelland … I have no reason to doubt that as factual, but I DO wonder if they HAD to pony up 3 mil per? that’s what it took? We can only assume it is. Engelland himself said he was a bit surprised at the level of interest.

          While many think that BT’s comments about him playing real hockey were silly, just look how serious they were about playing McGratton like a real hockey player… makes me believe he is serious, even if so unbelievable.

      • Jeff Lebowski

        And please don’t say we are in “Cap Hell” because we signed a dman for 2.9m for three seasons, or implying that this signing is indicative of every signing and decision BT will ever make. That’s a complete joke.

        Nobody is saying that we are in cap hell because of Engellend. What I’m saying is, if you value things other than being good at hockey at the top (being heavy, leader, character etc) you end up not having players who can play at the NHL level.

        If you think a guy who is a great leader but is effectively a numbered pylon is where you should be directing your resources then you’re screwed.

        Because you have to ice players who can play. So you have to trade for or pay the playing ability AND you will over pay. You will over pay for the guys who aren’t coveted by their own teams. We love them and need them because we got nothing. We got nothing because we valued size and compete over skating and offensive ability.

        That overpay pushes you eventually up to the cap…

        Basically what Darryl did.

        And we saw from Feaster that Button can deliver ability. Button delivered something else (on the whole) because BB/BT demanded it.

        I hope you’re right. It was a short term fix. I hope in the future we see playing ability the attribute most coveted.

        But all this mgmt regime has not signaled it yet.

        I concede that perhaps the lack of movement out of here of Feaster kids can be that signal. But I also saw size get preferred over ability.

        The specific moves are really secondary. It’s the intentions or aspirations or philosophy that they hint at.

        Look at Johnny. Will we draft another Johnny? Based on everything you’ve seen and heard. Granlund? The answer appears no. Bollig for a 3rd rounder?

        You want to ignore the evidence, go ahead. You want to love the stories about character and gumption and how these guys play for keeps. Feel free.

        • piscera.infada

          Look dude, we get it, you’re worried that somehow a few depth signings/trades (ie. Bollig and Engelland) are a harbinger that this team is forsaking talent for size. I’m not sure how else to say this, but not every player on a given team can be Johnny freakin’ Toews. Calm the hell down.

          And I know, you’re going to make the “draft” argument. So let’s run through that:

          First pick, they took the consensus player there, awesome (we “surely can’t give anyone in the Flames front office credit for that” – at least they didn’t take Ritchie, am I right?). Bennett is skilled and tough.

          Second they took a goalie (a face-punching goalie, I’m sure…) – sure, maybe you don’t take a goalie there, but they stuck to their convictions on that one, how dare they (that my friend, is how you draft Poirier over Shinkaruk last year).

          Third, a big-boy. Hunter Smith, have you seen him play? I haven’t. Yeah, he’s a big. Yeah, he put up PIM’s. Yeah, he was the fastest riser of the season on NHL Central Scouting’s NA list (#140 on mid-term rankings, #39 in final rankings). So sure, maybe it doesn’t work out. But I’m not so sure Flames management was sitting around between bong tokes and decided they’d take a flier on the guy “because he’s big and nothing else”. It’s fair to say that at least one other person (outside of the Flames organization) saw something in this kid, and for that reason I’m alright with it – second year of draft eligibility or not.

          Fourth, Brandon Hickey. Tall, not overly big, but he is described in everything I’ve read as an A+ skater. Sure, he came out of the AJHL, but he’s a fourth round pick. Actually seems like an intriguing prospect, if you ask me – project or not.

          Fifth, Adam Ollas-Mattsson. Don’t know too much about him. Again, he’s big. Considering he captained Swedens U-17 team, he doesn’t seem like a complete plug. He’s a shutdown defender, but you need those.

          A Finally, Austin Carroll. Yeah, meh, whatever. Seventh round pick, were you really expecting Zetterberg? Maybe he is Zetterberg? (Fingers crossed)…

          So yeah, they traded a late third-round pick for a player who is a (boarderline) NHL’er. I mean, it seems like “maybe you get someone there”, but you likely don’t. If this becomes a recurring theme, then yes, by all means start getting worried – I know I will. But as I’ve been saying all along, this whole rebuild thing is just an exercise in flexibility. That’s really the only way they’re going to be successful (well, that and some luck). But I’m not going to say that the Flames organization suddenly “doesn’t value skill” because that runs completely contra everything they’ve said.

  • RedMan

    I don’t think the Engelland contract is really up for debate….

    It wasn’t a good contract period. He was given a 512% raise and he didn’t earn it with counting stats or with performance.

    He is a big guy and that is the new mandate.

    There were better guys out there and ones that were had on better contracts (Gilbert 2 @ 2.8)

    It doesn’t really matter about our cap, that isn’t the point. The point is that at no time should you sign a bad contract because you need to be as flexible as possible.

    (note: if you are taking a bad contract for a high draft pick that is different, especially if you using a compliance buyout)

    For example if at trade deadline any team wanted Engelland and he had a cap hit of 1m or so he could be parlayed into a pick. Now for that to work we have to eat salary on the deal for 2.5 years if we want to trade him away at deadline.

    When I thought of BT my first through was wow Phoenix seems to be a budget team every year that finds great value on most of their players

    That move to me says either he doesn’t care about value or that he is listening to BB and cares more about bigger and fighting then scoring and possession.

  • RedMan

    I’ve never seen so many people angry about a 3 year, >3 million/year contract for a guy who bridges the gap for our younger defense prospects to grow properly in the AHL and into the NHL. It’s not like they gave him a 7 year contract, or paid him 7 million dollars a year. I think people have a hard time believing that NOT EVERY ONE WANTS TO SIGN FOR A REBUILDING TEAM. I’m sorry but did you really expect Stasny and Niskanen to sign on to a rebuilding team just for an extra million a year (which these same people would have complained about as well). As far as I’m concerned, I think we’ve done pretty good in free agency. A #1 goalie who we can play 50/30 ratio with Ramo, a top 6 RW who plays his best games in Calgary (which he’ll hopefully be playing in for around 41 games this year), and a depth defenseman (#5/6 dman who easily replaces Butler/O’Brien) with a contract that expires sooner rather than later, and can be easily bought out if need be. This contract for Engelland isn’t going to be the end of the Flames, dear lord people.

    • Parallex

      Yeah… but c’mon… he’s a pretty bad hockey player. Do many players want to sign with a rebuilding team? No, they don’t… but that’s not really the issue the issue comes when you ask a different question, that being… Would even just one available player that possessess more talent then Engelland been willing to sign for same or similer money? Considering how poor a player Engelland is the answer to that question has to be “yes”.

      • DoubleDIon

        @Parallex I’d rather have him plugging away for the next year or two than to throw out a young defenseman who needs more experience in the minors just for the sake that he (obviously) has more potential skill but maybe isn’t quite ready to step into a top 4 role (and can get more experience playing the top 4 minutes in Adirondack). I wouldn’t doubt that at least 1 or if not 2 of Wotherspoon, Sieloff and Ramage surpass Engelland, and by then you could buy him out if you can’t trade him. But until then let the rebuild take its course. This isn’t NHL 14 on Rookie, where you can stack an entire team of 21 year olds and still win the Cup.

        I never the contract was good, it really should have been 3 years for 2.9 million total, not per year, but something tells me Treliving did pursue the better defenders and they all opted to play somewhere else. I thought we were all on the same mindset NOT to rush the rebuild, and NOT to try and go all out in free agency this year? None of these contracts hinder Calgary, and they allow our young players to develop without being thrown to the wolves, and the wolves are the beast of the Western Conference.

    • BitGeek

      It’s really not that many people that are actually angry about the signing. Just a few people that won’t stop whining about it.

      Everyone else has come to the same conclusion, realized there’s nothing we can do as fans, and have moved on.

      • DoubleDIon

        The purpose of a hockey blog is to talk about hockey. If you’re here for the news try CBC. Otherwise, expect people to discuss the decisions about players made by the club.

  • playastation

    The only explanation for the Engelland contract that makes sense is that BT meant to sign him to a 3 year contract worth a total of $2.9M and made a mistake…………all other explanations are redonkulous…….or maybe he thought he was signing someone else…………or he was really, really drunk……….but that is it; there are no other explanations.


  • jeremywilhelm

    I think I figured it out.

    Treliving already has one of the worse outshot forwards in the entire league in McGrattan. He wanted to make it a matched pair with one of the worst Defensmen.

    It’s genius really. Beat that Buffalo!

  • Parallex

    Anyways, really this is all about getting a good shot at McDavid.

    Seriously, every team below us in the standings has improved their overall roster and ours has gotten worse.

    C’mon draft lotto odds… do us this one solid.

  • piscera.infada

    Look, the contracts horrible – I don’t think anyone’s arguing that. Engelland isn’t getting any better – I don’t think anyone’s arguing that.

    That said, I have to take Treliving at his word that three year contracts were the maximum the Flames were willing to go – sounds reasonable, no? The only player I would have targeted that actually ended up signing the short-term mid-range dollar contract, would probably have been Meszaros (1 year at $4.125 million). Most of the other free agents went for 4+ years (not a fit for the Flames). Again, I have to take Treliving at his word that the three year length bumped the dollar value up.

    In reality, this signals nothing aside from that fact that the Flames are actually taking this rebuilding thing seriously. As @Parallex said earlier (hope it’s alright that I re-post you):

    Looking at the salary charts on Capgeek I’ve come to the conclusion that this offseason is basically almost entirely an exercise in cap management.

    With the three free agent signings and the qualified RFA’s still to come Calgary is basically at the floor. So that’s that for this year. Next year we’re looking at the salary for Glencross, McGrattan and Ramo (if they don’t resign him) coming off the books along with cap inflation but I would imagine that longterm extensions for Backlund & Brodie eat that up. The year after 20M is scheduled to come off the books but I would imagine one of the current goalies is extended past that as will Giordano (probably with a raise) that would still be an awful lot but Monahan and Gaudreau will be hitting their 2nd contracts and if they’re as good as we hope they are that will eat a bunch of money out of that.

    Basically I see these guys as cap space filler until the top prospects/young players start to age into some money.

    That is the justification, plain and simple. Sure, we could have offered Dan Boyle $4.5 million per for 2 years, Kyle Quincy $4.25 million per for 2 years, Willie Mitchell $4.25 million per for 2 years, Ron Hainsey $2.83 million per for 3 years, or Robidas $3 million per for 3 years. But seriously, are any of those guys that different? If they are, would they sign here?

    So, I’m very sceptical of those espousing the view that this signals some massive deviation from the organizational plan. Nor do I believe the draft was such an outlier that it was a 100% search for goonery – many independent publications have said it was average, many have said the Flames were one of the top teams – but then again, I have a hard time labelling an 17, 18, or 19 year-old prospect a “face-puncher” without seeing him.

    The simple fact is yes, McGrattan, Bollig, and now Engelland are all on the payroll, but we’ve yet to see how they’re used, or if all of them will even be on the roster opening night. Point is, the whole rebuild situation is by it’s very nature a fluid situation. Better get used to it, because in all likelihood you won’t see the Flames signing Duncan Keith to a 3 year, 9 million dollar contract any time soon.

  • RedMan

    what the flames needed was to spend whatever money it took so we could get 4 or 5 spots higher in the standings… i can face finishing 22nd or 23rd, but 27th or 28th? Could we have gotten a better defender? Darn right, and then we could be more respectable by finishing 22nd or 23rd!!!

    this way, we are stuck rebuilding, giving prospects sheltered minutes, moving guys up and down from the minors for experience, all leading to drafting high next year for one of the generational players – none of which are good things, right?!?!?!?

    sure, it makes no sense, get over it. it will not slow down our development. we have lots of face punchers to spread out over several leagues

  • DoubleDIon

    also, in the future – please do not talk about non-sports related things here, including politics and religion. nothing good comes from those discussions, as you can plainly see above.

  • RedMan


    @tsnscottcullen: RT @ryanspark1: @Hope_Smoke @tsnscottcullen I would rather have Engellands agent. That guy makes magic happen.

    ouch, no need to pour salt in the wound Scott!

  • loudogYYC

    Wow, this post really turned in the Jeremy & Lebowski show hey? I haven’t read every post but I get it, you’re really really unhappy about the decision to sign this contract.

    That said, I doubt this team will be full of goons in the future. Between Bollig, the Dancing Bear and the British Bulldog (new nickname, I’ll take the credit, thanks) there will be plenty of size on the team.

    Please also remember that we are pegged to finish bottom 3 next season and maybe one more season after that, so let’s not get bent out of shape over a contract who Management themselves dubbed an overpayment but one they can afford given the circumstance. We are in Alberta after all, where city dwellers drive giant pick ups with decorative balls hanging off the hitch. Being over the top is normal here.

    • RedMan

      Ok……as bad as the Engelland signing is, it’s not the end of the world…..

      I’m much more concerned about our second and third round drafting and how that effects our team in the future, when we should be ready to compete….it sounds like BB BT think that is in 3 years.


  • DragonFlame

    Sorry about the politics previously. Everyone who slammed my stupidity was 100% correct.

    As for hockey:

    People keep bringing up all these other defensemen because they are better than Engelland.

    How much better are the Flames going to be by signing a Scott Hannan (who sucked the first time around here and still sucks) Tom Gilbert or Anton Stralman?

    Engelland gets the Flames to the floor, fills out the roster and congrats to him for getting a nice retirement package.

    Burke is not going to get up in front of the cameras at the end of the year and tell everyone, “We’ll probably only end up with 70 points next season.” He sees what is going on, but has to give delusional fans something to look forward to . . . the realistic among them know exactly how the Flames fare in the Western Conference.

    The Flames have got some great kids looking for a shot. If Calgary had gone out and signed some killer FA’s, what hope is there down on the farm? And would the Flames be playoff-bound?


    As for Engelland and his family, I can only hope they don’t read all the negative comments posted here.

    Lastly, Rob Kerr said it well this afternoon on the Big Show (I am paraphrasing):

    “When GM’s start listening to fans, it is only a matter of time before they are sitting in the stands beside them.”

      • piscera.infada

        An old teammate is a relative. The player obviously went where the money was but is legitimately thrilled that it was Calgary that not only bucked up but made it clear they value the leadership qualities and work ethic he will bring. He will, I believe, be a valuable short term mentor on the rebuild.

        • loudogYYC

          After my initial reaction, I’ve changed my tune. Clydes post is what I predict. He’s no #3-4 dman, but I think he will honestly be valuable calgary flame, cap hit aside. I hope flame fans accept him, from what I’ve read he’s a good guy.

    • DragonFlame

      Do you forget the Richards chase, ROR fiasco, tanguey signing, the not trading jokinen, the regehr trade, as well as the brutal returns for Jbo and iggy, etc, etc that quickly?

  • RexLibris

    Vrbata signs with the Canucks for 2 years at $5 million per.

    That should’ve been a slam-dunk for Treliving. The three best RWs have all signed (Iginla, Hemsky, Vrbata) and the Flames have virtually no one to play that side without being converted from LW.

    There has been some mention of mentoring and sheltering in this thread.

    Management’s inability to address that hole on the roster is also a failure to whomever is forced to play out of position or further up the depth chart.

    Raymond and Hudler are listed as LW/RW by some sites, so lets give them the benefit of the doubt, and Colborne, if he is playing 4th line, is probably versatile enough in that limited role to be able to play either wing.

    Scanning through some of the depth charts for the coming season and the Flames’ roster stacks up among the worst in the league alongside the Sabres, Senators and Canucks.

    I will be very interested to see Hartley’s approach to icing this roster.

    • DragonFlame

      The holes are there for the younger players to come in and show the team what they either can or cannot do.

      Stop with the over-reacting.

      The Canucks (as much as I hate them) are still much further ahead than the Flames.

      Vrbata won’t help the Flames. He will take up a roster spot that could be filled by Poirier, Gaudreau, Van Brabant, Reinhart, Baerstschi, Wolf, Arnold etc.

      This is a RE-BUILD!

      What point is there in signing a guy like this when we have to weed out the potential pretenders in Adirondack?

      • Willi P

        I agree. We have 3 vets on the right side. 2 for the top 3 lines and one for the 4rth. That leaves us a valuable top 9 spot for a young player to develop while still being sheltered. Plus, I don’t think guys like Iggy and Vrbata could be offered enough to come play here at this stage of the rebuild.

      • MC Hockey

        Agreed. Better young UFA RWs with good size And talent available are:
        1) Frolik (26, 42 pts when given a chance in Wpg),
        2) For checkers possibly Skille and Weise (checkers),
        3) And due to his exceptional potential, I would consider signing LW Killorn (only 24, scored at .50 PPG over 2 years).
        4) Matt D’Agostini who may rebound to his 46 points in the right situation at RW

        BUT I really wish Downie was signed by Flames for truculence and annoying ness to opposition teams.

    • Bean-counting cowboy

      Perfect. Eichel or McDavid > RNH & Yakupov combined. Been doing some reading on Eichel. Yes please! Big centre with skill. Imagine the depth chart: Eichel, Bennett, Monahan, Backs.

    • RedMan


      -I’m not sure Colborne has ever played LW before. He spent almost all of last season on RW.

      -Hudler spent AT LEAST half the season on RW

      -IIRC, Hudler has played more RW than LW

      The RW/LW distinction is the most overrated dichotomy in ice hockey. By far. Almost all wingers can play on either side, and if they play both they’re generally (not always) listed as a LW for no apparent reason.

    • playastation

      This seems like a really good plan to get the flames to 21st place. We are literally biding time for the kids to mature.

      Iginla would not have come here unless we have him something stupid. Vrbata maybe. Who knows about Hemksy. For what? None of those guys are stars. We wouldn’t compete for a cup, let alone a playoff spot.

      And then what? Then people overreact about how they have no plans and how you need to build through the draft.

      What is your plan? Do you want them to build through the draft? Or do you want them to be in a perpetual Feaster fix it every summer and not make the playoffs tailspin?

      When we have home grown stars as most teams do, then we can go all out on free agents. Let’s not be ridiculous here.

    • loudogYYC

      There’s no need to fill every hole this early into next season Rex.

      You can’t milk Philly, Toronto, Boston & Chicago for cap space if you address every “hole” in the roster.

      Speaking of Philly, they signed Nick Schultz to a 1 year deal giving them 7 NHL defensemen. Grossmann, Schenn or Coburn will be traded soon.

    • MC Hockey

      What will be interesting is what philosophy of icing a team they will employ? Will it be the A: standard top two lines, a checking line and an energy line, or B: three lines that play regular shifts and an energy/enforcer line or C: play 4 lines of equal ability.

      IMO: I am not sure they have the high end talent to employ A. Down the road I think we have some potential to have this but not today.

      B: is what I think Hartley tried to use last year and what I suspect he will use again this year.I have not had time to digest how the two new guys will impact the lineup.

      C: Roll four equal lines, shelter the kids by playing them with vets, play them in many different situation, protect them with a physical presence on each line this will help in their development. This of course would be my choice.

  • DragonFlame

    In addition to my previous comment, I will also note that Vancouver is pretty much following the Flames’ demise to the letter:

    Keeping older players around (Sedin twins, Hamuis, Burrows) and trying to “fill holes” with aging veterans because the management team still thinks the Canucks have one more shot at Stanley Cup glory (and like the Flames after ’04, they don’t).

    As much as I claim the Canucks are better than the Flames, as long as Vancouver management refuses to believe the Sedins are a wasting asset, the city will soon find out the cost of hanging on to — and trading for — players who are well past their prime.

  • Willi P

    Quote of the day on TSN dot CA

    team rehab

    2 hours ago

    Vrbata could work out fine. Can’t have too many 20-30 goal scorers. Benning/Linden are doing fine despite their limited experience. GMs basically just need to look @ what the oilers have done, then do the opposite.