FN Mailbag – January 11, 2016


It’s only the second week of January, but already every game is taking on the desperate feel of a “must win”. The Pacific Division is so tightly packed that any team not named “The Kings” can be in or out of the playoffs on the turn of a two game winning (or losing) streak. 

Right now the Flames are tied with the Sharks for 5th in division with 40 points. But they are only two points behind 3rd placed Vancouver (with two games in hand) and three points up on the basement dwelling Oilers. 

There isn’t much more clarity if we pull back and look at league wide standings. The Flames currently occupy 26th overall, but are only six points up on last place (Columbus) and six points back of 15th (Ottawa). A good January or February can put them smack dab in the meaty part of the standings, but a prolonged losing streak will put them in the Auston Matthews race. 

From the perspective of the trade deadline, the Flames aren’t clear buyers or sellers at this point. Hopefully the next few weeks simplifies things for Calgary’s decision makers. 

With that in mind, we mull over some the clubs trade options in latest edition of mailbag, including Jonathan Drouin, Ben Bishop and Kerby Rychel.

Drouin is a very interesting trade target. He put up stupidly good numbers in Junior and he was only marginally behind Nathan MacKinnon for consideration as the best prospect in the world during the 2013 draft.

The problem is his progress has been slower than many of his peers and we have very little information on him as a pro to this point. Drouin has only played 89 games in the NHL, mostly as a 4th liner, and scored around a 0.46 PPG. That may not be indicative of anything given his age (20) and circumstances, but this isn’t quite a Tyler Seguin situation. By the time Boston moved Seguin, he was already a very, very good NHLer.

That said, I’d be willing to take the gamble on Drouin. He has sublime offensive talent and instincts, which tend to be both very rare and very expensive to acquire in the NHL. There’s a small chance he doesn’t put things together in the bigs, but his history and pedigree suggest he’s an excellent bet despite the slowish start to his career. 

I can’t say what the Flames chances are of landing Drouin. Like the Hamonic situation, the problem here is the team doesn’t really want to trade the player so they’d rather sit and wait than accept a less than stellar return. 

The one bargaining chip Calgary may have is their first round pick this year, which, as mentioned in the intro, could very well fall into lottery territory if the team stumbles down the stretch. That could be very persuasive to the Lightning because it essentially guarantees that they will “recoup” the asset. 

My completely speculative guess would be something like this: the Flames 2016 first round pick, Jiri Hudler (depth for a playoff run) and another decent level prospect (Kylington).  

From the Flames perspective, the gamble plays out in reverse: if they finish bottom-5 in the league, it’s a probably bad trade. If they finish higher, then it’s a much better proposition. 

Of course, if Treliving puts this package to Yzerman right now, the Lightning GM will probably ask to sit on it so he can see where the Flames are closer to the trade deadline. That would give him more assurance that the Flames pick will be high. In contrast, The Flames don’t want this because Drouin’s acquisition could theoretically help them move up in the standings. And, if the team is ensconced in a playoff spot by the deadline, then Yzerman is much more likely to pass on the deal. 

Short version: it’s complicated. 

Bishop is an interesting trade target, but as discussed in this article there’s a lot of variables to consider in his acquisition. Not the least of which is his pricetag which is likely to go up from his current sticker price of about $6M after this year. 

That’s a problem for the Flames with guys like Gaudreau, Monahan and Giordano all getting sizeable raises in 2016-17.

We shouldn’t assume Ramo will continue to put up elite numbers, just as it was safe to assume he wouldn’t keep putting up league worst results (which he was doing in October and November). The truth is somewhere in the middle. In fact, his current average for the year (.914 SV%) is in line with his career norms and closer to what we should expect for the rest of the season rather than either of the two extremes.

The Flames goaltending situation still remains unresolved. We probably won’t know more until the season is over because that’s when teams tend to try to figure out their net minders.

If they remain in the playoff picture, I think the Pittsburgh Penguins might come calling about Russell. Their blueline is highly suspect once you get past Kris Letang and Trevor Daley. Right now, Ben Lovejoy averages the second most ice time per night behind Letang on the Pen’s back-end. Yee-uck. 

The Chicago Blackhawks could have interest as well. After their top-3 guys (Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson) there’s a big drop off to a second tier featuring Trevor Van Reimsdyk, Viktor Svedberg, Eric Gustafsson, David Runblad, Michal Roszival and Rob Scuderi. Lots of hopefuls and has beens in there.  

Likely nothing. If the Flames couldn’t move Wideman after his career season last year, there’s no way there will be a market for him as a third pairing guy with one goal and 18 points in 40 games. Wideman’s contract extends for another season at $5.25M. Maybe they move him at the deadline next season if he rebounds to some degree, but chances are the 32-year old just plays out his deal.

As for Wotherspoon, it’s getting to a point where it’s clear the team doesn’t really consider him a prospect of note. His NHL exposure has gone backwards each year since he turned pro and this year he hasn’t even been talked about as a potential call-up at any point (he has just 3 assists in 28 games on the farm). Wotherspoon’s contract expires after this year and it wouldn’t surprise to see the Flames either cut him loose.

A Rychel deal could mirror the recent Emerson Etem swap (Etem for Nicklas Jensen), where the two teams more or less traded equivalent level prospects. In the Flames case, they may have to sweeten the pot a little given they don’t quite have anyone similar to the former 19th overall pick (Emile Poirier might be the closest).

Picking up a top-6 forward or top-4 defender is going to be much more difficult during the season. At this point in the year, everyone is looking for those and very, very few are offering them. Travis Hamonic remains the one true top rotation guy ostensibly on the market, but clearly the Islanders aren’t in any hurry to deal him.

Not much should be taken from the WJC’s because it’s a very small snippet of time. As such, my view of McDonald wasn’t swayed much by his performance or even his inclusion on the team. He’s had a good (though not great) year so far in the QMJHL, but I don’t really start to evaluate goalies until they hit the pro ranks (unless they are ridiculously dominant in their junior/college days like Jon Gillies). 

McDonald still has a long way to go to really be in the conversation as a guy of note for the Flames organization. Let’s wait to see what he does when he’s 22 or so.


1.       Open a Sports Interaction account.

2.       Deposit $20 or more and get an instant 100% Cash Bonus up to $200

3.       Place a moneyline bet on any NHL game and if you don’t win, Sports Interaction will refund your bet up to $20!

  • King Quong

    Thanks Kent!

    The latest rumor out there is that Yzerman, wants a young prospect of equal skill/value in return for Drouin (i.e. Bennett).. I just don’t see a match there for the Flames.

    Of the players rumored to be available right now, Stamkos and Hamonic intrigue me the most, but I think those deals are made around the draft/ free agency.

    Best option for Treliving at this point is to be sellers at the deadline (Hudler, Russel, Hiller, Wideman..) and try to make the playoffs with the group they have now.

    Mid-season moves are kind of risky, especially if you’re not a contender.

    • ChinookArchYYC

      Exactly right

      I think Kent’s speculative value of Drouin is close to the mark. If a Flames loose both Kylington and the 2016 first, it’s too rich for my liking.

      • everton fc

        Drouin has yet to prove himself in the league. Bennett has. Hayes is a big RW. We need a RW. Hayes is also scoring at this level. What do the Rangers need? Or did they make their one call by moving Etem, meaning they’ll hold Hayes?

        Would the Bolts do Drouin for Poirier and a d- man? Would the Rangers do the same, with Hayes?? Would anyone do a trade like this???

        Kylington won’t be moved. The players I think we’ll try to move are Hudler, Wideman or Russell (still think they hold onto Russell), Hiller, Raymond… Maybe Jones (hope not) and maybe Colborne (but probably not, unfortunately). “On paper”, do we really have any assets outside Hudler and Russell? Wideman may prove interesting to a team at the deadling – ditto Jones – but the rest? Who wants them?? (Also, Bernier seems to be putting it back together – too bad we couldn’t have moved Hiller for Bernier!)

      • Parallex

        Not sure if his value is close or not as it seems that Drouin has issues “getting it” much like Sven. No way in hell I’d give up a 1st, possibly Kylington, and Hudler. That is the kind of payment for a young player who is “getting it”. Remember we only got a 2nd for Sven who may not have been a 3rd overall pick but was the same kind of player.

        • Parallex

          Except that Sven didn’t have Drouin’s draft pedigree, perceived upside, and was several years older (important). No one is going to get Drouin for a second round pick.

          • Parallex

            Sven had a fairly high perceived upside. Drouin’s problem is that he doesn’t know what to do without the puck. That’s why he hasn’t been playing in Tampa. Sure he has great skills with the puck but so far really not good without (what I’ve heard). He’s not sticking in the league so far so I would say he’s far far closer to dud than superstar. Yzerman for sure is selling that 3rd overall draft pedigree just to get a higher price. Time will obviously tell but I would not give Tampa a possible top 4 pick, a very high upside D and another skill player. That would be insane.

          • KiLLKiND

            I beg to disagree. Sven and Drouin are rolling along at about the same pts/game so far in their careers are they not (thought I heard someone mention that another time)? They both have had the same knocks about their game, and they both had pouted when they didn’t get what they want. Sounds pretty similar to me…

            Just because Drouin can dangle like few others doesn’t mean much if he cannot learn to play without the puck or use his teammates. Not everyone can or will learn these things. I think you are way overvaluing Drouin just because of a flash of skill.

            This is a player seriously lacking in certain aspects of his game which people are willing to overlook at the moment because of his hands and draft pedigree. Maybe he will turn out as a superstar in this league but as of this very moment dud – disappointing 3rd line player is more likely.

    • King Quong

      I don’t think anyone is going to bite on Hiller unless the flames keep salary and the “buyer” is truly desperate. He hasn’t played much this year and gave up soft goals when he did, plus there are the rumours about his attitude, for what they are worth (and I don’t know if they are true or BS. Collectively I see those factors driving his value down, a lot.

      I just don’t see Hiller as a chip. The rest of the players you propose? Yes, probably, for the right deal whether the Flames are in or out of the playoffs.

      • piscera.infada

        Completely agree. I honestly don’t think that “deadline selling” will be contingent in anyway on where the Flames sit in the standings. They’ll sell because as Treliving says ad nausea “[they’re] still in the asset acquisition phase”. This pertains to Hudler and Wideman (if a deal comes along). I’m a little more skeptical that Russell gets moved (unfortunately) simply because he’s a top-4 defenseman on this team, and he’s playing those minutes (whether he’s playing them well is debatable). I doubt you see him moved if the Flames are near a playoff spot, unless the return is reasonably substantial.

    • cberg

      Might be willing to do a top prospect plus a draft pick for Drouin, something like Poirier/Klimchuk and a 2nd, or substitute a young D. Not sure TBL would be interested but I guess it depends on other offers. A 1st, Hudler and Kylington is way overpayment from my perspective and I’d never do it. That is severely cutting your prospect pool (assuming Hudler for picks/prospects) for a very talented but not yet established single player. To me it’s giving up three assets that each could develop into the equivalent of Drouin for one. The odds for success are much better keeping our own guys.

      I still would like to get Hamonic and I still believe TBL will either pay full price for Stamkos or lose him for nothing. Every week that passes without resolution the pressure increases on Yzerman.

  • King Quong

    Maybe im out to lunch but I think there would be something poetic about the flames picking up Drouin and having him become a superstar for us. I know its a completely different situation than Marty St. Louis was but just with all the history of the two teams (the hockey gods owe us from 04 anyways) I think it would be a neat little cycle if he came to Calgary and helped us win a cup. (even better if it was against Tampa)

  • Parallex

    Guy I’d be most interested in taking a shot at would be Kevin Hayes. Unfortunately it’s hard to see a trade with the NYR that works factoring in the cap.

  • Byron Bader

    2016 1st, Hudler and a guy like Kylington, Klimchuk or Poirier I’d do in a second for Drouin. Even if we finished as a bottom 5 team and got a great pick in 2016 … what are the chances that he has a higher ceiling than Drouin. Risk is minimal IMO.

    • everton fc

      No one will take Klimchuk. Poirier and a 1st, and maybe Wideman, for Drouin and another asset/pick/something. Still don’t know if Drouin’s worth that much.

      Personally, I’d like t see us go after Hayes; put him on RW w/Johnny and Mony – see what he can do. Move Hudler the other way, in some sort of package…

      Hayes/Frolik/Jones/Jooris looks pretty good downt he right side, with Raymond/Colborne on deck.

      • Byron Bader

        Don’t mind the idea of Hayes but hate the idea of our top 2 rw both being lefties. They need a legit rw not another lefty that prefers to play on the right.

      • Cfan in Vic

        We must also remember Drouin’s #’s put up in junior were with his teams top six players, McKinnon etc. With the Lightening he spent most of his time fourth line. IMO I wouldn’t sell the farm just yet. There have been some good points put forward in this article that demands close consideration as how to move forward.
        I myself would prefer the likes of Hayes, this club to me needs the size and skill as compared to just skill with Drouin.
        Hayes has been a force to recon with for almost every team that has met the Rangers this year.

  • everton fc

    Drouin could potentially be a dud….why would the Flames give up a 1st rounder (potentially Auston Matthews) and other level A prospects for him?? Non-starter for me…

  • Kevin R

    I don’t really know how I feel about Sean Monahan – he’s put up decent numbers, but his possession game is still struggling. He gets outscored 5v5. He doesn’t seem to carry his line. He’s young, yes, but is he the answer at C? I can see a lot of teams being interested, and the return being pretty damned good.

    Can we stand to lose him? We have Bennett in the pipeline, and there is good reason to be bullish there, even if the goals haven’t come yet. Granlund is looking like he belongs in a 3rd line role; Backlund can run the second line until a younger 2nd line C solution is found. We have other centres in the mix that we need to make room for on lower lines(e.g. Derek Grant, Bill Arnold). And we need wingers. Desperately.

    Trading Monahan would be a tough call, but maybe we’d dodge a bullet, too. Trading Monahan would mean keeping our 1st and we could potentially land another high 1st in return, or a first and a prospect. Or perhaps a team takes a problem off our hands as well (e.g. Dennis Wideman’s contract).

    I’m not sure it’s the right move, but I think the flames need to at least consider it.

    • piscera.infada

      Lest we forget the days where the Flames had literally zero centre depth. I’ll agree with you that Monahan’s possession game is struggling, but I’ll go ahead and call “absolute garbage” on trading him.

      I’ll say again: no, I’m not sure Monahan is the future number one centre on this team, but even if he settles in as “only” a 50 to 60 point number-2, is that a bad thing? Is that a worthy reason to trade him? No. The Flames could end-up in a situation where they need to spend another decade scouring the league for great centre depth in order to compete with the good teams.

      It sounds so easy to say “trade Monahan for a prospect, and a high first round pick, and then you draft a better centre than Monahan”. That’s not an easy proposition at all. In fact, it doesn’t even make sense. Trade Monahan, to draft a player that you hope ends up as Monahan or better with better possession stats? Yeah, that’s the easiest thing to accomplish.

      The simple response to this is thus: centre depth is a requisite to truly contend in the NHL. I’ll hedge my bets for Monahan being a 50-60 point NHL player (because we know he is) and improving his possession game, than this magical ‘draft-pick’ turning into a 60+ point centre with a better possession game.

      • mk

        A further comment – I’ll bet Monahan’s possession stats improve if he is pushed into a #2C role, where the #1 guy takes the harder opposition.

        IMO, often times bad possession stats aren’t an indictment of the player, but rather a poor deployment: players that are put into roles above them because of poor coaching or lack of options.

        Monahan is a very valuable player that the Flames shouldn’t part with unless he brings back a better centre of same-or-younger age. We are getting a great idea of what he is as a player (he can still improve a bunch, too), but the only way you get someone better is by taking a HUGE risk on a prospect who’s fallen out of favour or getting a high draft pick – neither one assures you of even a player as good as Monahan.

        • SmellOfVictory

          FWIW, Monahan sees the easiest zone starts of all Flames centres – 40.3% OZ starts 5v5 as per Puckalytics.com. If he sees tougher composition, it’s not because Hartley is misusing him. It could also be that he gets the puck into the o-zone, but doesn’t generate many shots.

          Either way, I don’t think the risk is as huge as you think, particularly since there are very few misses in the top 5 of the draft nowadays. The Flames would ideally wind up there either by trading Monahan and subsequently sucking, or by trading to a crappy team and taking their top 5 pick.

          • cberg

            Frankly, you are way overvaluing shots. Personally I like goals a lot more, and last time I noticed Monahan is at or near our very best goal-getter on the team.

          • Johnny Goooooooaldreau

            Also per Puckalytics, Monahan is 160/188 in ZS-adj corsi % for centres with at least 200 minutes played this season, and 147/188 in ZS-adj Corsi rel.

          • KiLLKiND

            I’m replying to this one instead of your last comment but if you think the best way to handle Monhan is to trade him so we can get Wideman off our books you are insane. I don’t care what his possession stats are you are actually suggesting giving up on Monahan simply for cap room is insane. You might have made ok points about yes he isn’t the best possession player yet, and yes maybe he doesn’t get 70-80 points but if you want to get rid of him for another high draft pick for cap room you aren’t thinking.

            Getting a high draft pick is something you might know doesn’t happen for Calgary very often in fact him and Bennett are two of our highest drafted players EVER. Maybe bring this idea up around draft day but Monahan got 61 points last year and without him and Gaudreau leading the way in December we would likely not even be mentioning playoffs.

            We will not trade Monahan for Drouin, Hamonic, Rychel, maybe him plus our 2nd for Matthews but no team is going to trade Matthews. the two Finnish wingers are going to take longer to develop, have 0 garauntees o being better or even as good. Why cut our winnings short on Monahan in hopes of winning bigger on someone else?

          • cberg

            “Why cut our winnings short on Monahan in hopes of winning bigger on someone else?”

            Well, it depends on whether Monahan is good enough, and I think that is what our debate is about. If he is not the kind of C that will help us become a contender, even as the #2 C, then we need to keep looking. I’m not sure he is that C, but others seem more convinced. Fair enough, I see both sides of the argument.

            My point is that he might be overvalued, in which case it might be a good time to cash out. As for getting a high pick, that is a function of where a team is in the standings, not where they are located, conspiracies about Edmonton not withstanding. That’s why doing something before the deadline would not make sense – we might be looking at a high pick anyway.

      • mk

        I think you’ve twisted my words a bit… I never said it would be easy to find a replacement. But if Monahan isn’t the solution (which I’m undecided about), then it doesn’t make sense to sink effort and money into that.

        Guess who has 200 pts over his last 295 games, averaging out to 55 pts/82? Tyler Bozak. Maybe he’s been underestimated, but most people wouldn’t want Bozak as a top 2 centre on their team. So it is possible to score 50-60 pts consistently but still not be very good. Of course Monahan is only 21 and his best years are in front of him, unlike Bozak.

        Is there any evidence that possession improves in leaps and bounds after turning 21? Because Monahan is one of the worst relative possession players on a bad possession team right now. Look at other 1/2 C’s when they were Monahan’s age – the majority were posting better possession numbers. Even if he improves a lot, he’d still just be treading water. Is Monahan going to keep shooting 15% for the rest of his career? There are just as many “ifs” surrounding Monahan as there are trying to draft another top 2 C. One of the reasons Calgary had no C depth for so long though was that they kept trading first rounders. I don’t see this as a problem now. If we suck after trading Monahan, we’ll pick high and have a good shot at an equivalent player*. If we’re fundamentally better after trading him, then we can’t complain.

        *Of centers taken in the top 5 since 2006, all are playing top-6 roles on their teams, and only Dylan Strome (2015) is not yet in the league.

        The best trades are made when perceived value is greater than actual value (or vice versa). The rest of the league sees Monahan as a guy with 70-80 pt. potential. Nobody has a crystal ball, but there is some reason to think 50-60 is more realistic. That would still be solid production from a #2 C of course. But Monahan could bring back a high 1st (depending on team) and a prospect, or could also help us unload an overpaid veteran (Wideman), creating valuable cap space to sign potentially more important players like Gaudreau and Bennett (who I know, isn’t RFA until next year), or flexibility for other moves.

        I agree wholeheartedly that C depth is a prerequisite for contention: Is Monahan really going to be a top-flight C for us long term though? Or will he plateau as an okay but not world-beating 2-C. Does he have a shot at reaching on the same level as Toews, Kopitar, Seguin, Backstrom or Bergeron?

        There are no certainties is not a good argument. I could counter-argue that it’s not certain Monahan continues to reach the 50-60 pt. threshold over his contract. No more certain than drafting another top 2 C in the next couple years.

        I wouldn’t make a move just now – Monahan could improve dramatically before the deadline, and the team could bottom out by the deadline anyway, ensuring a high pick. It could be coaching style that is holding Monahan back, and I’d like to see Hartley replaced first. Still it’s ultimately an option worth considering.

        Sorry for the long-winded treatise.

        • cberg

          That’s a LOT of what-ifs to consider. The one thing we know for sure, given your trade for a pick scenario, is whoever we picked it would be another 2-3 years before they were fully up to speed in the NHL, and that’s IF everything goes right. Talk about a way to derail a re-buid fast!

          Look, Monahan is not a dynamic Centre and probably never will be. He is, however a prolific scorer and a pretty reliable player with size. As he continues to develop I expect he will continue to learn to be more consistent defensively and use his size more effectively. That’s just me talking but I believe its a pretty low bar for him to achieve in the next 2-3 years.

          Last year the top line was very effective, until we got to Anaheim who shut down the top line with size and intense checking. Hence this year getting bigger on the top line, with Ferland tonight being the latest (and hopefully best) audition for that role.

          We all hope Bennett continues to grow and develop into another Top6 Centre, if not a dynamic #1C. Down the pipe we have Jankowski as a dark horse candidate for Top6 C (#2C), and Backlund already as a pretty acceptable #2C if needed. Worst case scenario for Monahan is he moves to the RW with Bennett and (?) as Centres and he becomes a killer RW shooter.

          NO WAY I trade Monahan now or likely at any time in the foreseeable future. The guy has done nothing but perform and get results (best pick from his draft class to date, ahead of McKinnon, Barkov, Drouin, and etc…), has great character and is exactly the type of guy we need a few more of.

          • Johnny Goooooooaldreau

            Well, trades are always about what ifs. Not making a trade is also a decision with what ifs attached.

            As for last year, well, luck. The line flew under the radar and had a ridiculously high S%.

            If it’s goals you care about, Monahan is being outscored at evens right now, and hasn’t done a tonne with the PP despite getting lots of minutes. Obviously that’s not all on him, but he’s not elite (yet) by any measure.

            I am excited to see what Ferland can do tonight. And I really hope Monahan continues to evolve – my suggestion of a trade is see what we could get, because a lot of teams may see more in Monahan than I do. And the return would have to be worth it. I’m not saying he’s worth a bag o’pucks.

          • SydScout

            Respect for having the balls to put your thoughts on trading Mony forward. While I disagree, I like how you reasoned your plan. Its just that its undervaluing a known-but-unknown top tier prospect.

            To my mind, Cfan in Vic said it best: ‘If someone came in with an insane offer for Mony, of course BT is going to have to listen, but trading him for the sake of trading him is ludicrous.’

            What I would like to see is Hayes in Calgary. Then bring up Billy Arnold and reunite the deadly BC Eagles Gaudreau-Arnold-Hayes top line of a few years ago. Advanced stats may argue against ‘chemistry’, but it is something that I’d be delighted to see BT take a bit of a chance on.

          • cberg

            Thanks, wasn’t trying to be ballsy, but I knew it wouldn’t be popular.

            Absolutely, the offer would need to be awesome. I’m not saying trade for whatever – a 1st and prospect at minimum, the first would need to be high ie. A team in the lottery. Even then, would need to wait until the deadline or offseason. BT would have the advantage though, because the perceived value is so high.

  • Parallex

    I like Matt Read as a RW David Jones replacement. Plays the PK, is 29 years old and I don’t imagine Philly will be asking the moon. Joe Colborne plus a pick we get (maybe the pick we get from trading David Jones). Throw in Tyler Wotherspoon if it makes them happy.

  • RickT

    I think a Colborne + something could get a deal for Hayes done.

    Maybe. They get the size that they want up front, plus a little something extra (a pick? a lower-level prospect?)

    And, honestly, it would be an upgrade via subtraction.

    Even better, Colborne + Bollig (with salary retention) + Russell for Haynes + pucks + one of Lundqvist’s old mitts.

    • mk

      As a fourth line RW that can move up the line up or change to C or even LW, as required, he is just fine, at his price point. He is completely mis-cast otherwise and the real issue with Joe is how he is used and that is on BH and the team’s failure to find a better alternative. It is not on Joe (and I’m not one of his fans).

      I don’t think Colborne is a chip. If the Flames want him, they’ll get to re-sign him in the off-season. If someone else wants him, they’ll get to sign him in the off-season.

      He is what he is and we all know that to be a guy with a lot of tools that doesn’t use those tools when we want/need him to. Everyone else sees that too so why trade for something you can pick up soon? He won’t be the difference between a cup and no cup. Anywhere.

  • MontanaMan

    I would be very reluctant to gamble with the Flames first rounder this year. The club is teetering with the playoffs but they could just as easily pick in the top five. Imagine if Ramo sustained an injury and then imagine where the team would go. There is not enough wiggle room for me to gamble a lottery pick for an unproven former first rounder.

  • SmellOfVictory

    Yikes, that’d be a lot to give up for Drouin. I understand he was a highly-touted kid in 2013, but the top players in 2016 all look like home runs (at least, Matthews and the two Finnish wingers do). I don’t think I’d want to give up a top-5 pick alone for him, much less adding Kylington and Hudler.

  • Cfan in Vic

    For cjc:

    What I get from your take, is that you seem to think that Monahan has hit his plateau at 21 years old. He may be a bit over his head on the 1rst line, but that doesn’t mean he can’t progress from here, especially if he ends up facing lesser competition in the future.

    If someone came in with an insane offer for Mony, of course BT is going to have to listen, but trading him for the sake of trading him is ludicrous.

  • Kevin R

    Jeez freaking Louise. Monahan is 21 years freaking old, one of a few players that hit 30 NHL level goals in one year at his age & we want to flip him because we are still in need of some high level players in our top 6 & he is only on a heaven forbid 25 goal pace this year. Cmon. We could really use a player like Drouin, but why make a problem for us to fix Yzermns problem. Same deal with Snow, Hamonic is his problem. Would love to get both these guys. But the deal has to be in the best interest of the Flames. Somebody may over pay for Drouin but who knows. All I know is that this years 1st rounder is off limits, period. I would part with the 2017 1st but no to this year. I would rather take a bad cap contract off of Tampa like Carle than part with our 1st. Porrier, Russell & a conditional pick in 2017, a 1st if they don’t resign Russell & a 3rd if they do. Porrier & a resigned Russell & a 3rd is a pretty good return for Drouin.

    I think we need to consider selling Wideman at 50% off the cap to get any kind of return but at that price, the return should be reasonable.

    Colborne & a 2nd for Rychel? I’d do that. Columbus may want a centre back after the Johansen deal. Colborne has been playing on our top line

  • KiLLKiND

    Totally agree that it would be super nice if the Flames either exploded or kicked the bucket in the next few weeks to bring some clarity. Right now they are a won one lose one team and have been that way for about 10 games.

    I wouldnt touch Drouin if it means giving up our first this year… too risky.

    That said Id like Treliv to strategically move out Hudler, Russel, Jones, Colborne ASAP in hopes it criples us. Not just for Matthews. The Fins at RW are great and there are other great prospects in this draft. It would be nice to get some more picks maybe another first and move up in this draft.

    We need to address our weakness at the wing and maybe add another Goalie in this draft. So far we havent been able to address weak areas via trade.