FN Mailbag – 2016 Draft Edition


The big day is here and there’s lots to talk about. Goalie trade rumours! Move up! Move down! Sixth overall! Nylander, Dubois, Puljujarvi, oh my! As of this writing, the Flames still had all of their top 60 picks and were still picking sixth overall. There’s talk of a Ben Bishop pursuit, P.K. Subban being available and all sorts of wackiness.

Of course, the days leading up to every entry draft are replete with big talk and misinformation. A lot of time it turns out to be smoke. Every so often, though, a big name or two trades hands. Treliving pulled of Dougie Hamilton at this time last year… maybe he can do it again?

There’s a chance he’ll get close, but I doubt he’ll make it to the Flames. If the folks down in Florida really are listening to ex-Canucks Army analysts Josh Weissbock and Moneypuck, then DeBrincat won’t get by them at 33. Their model won’t allow it given his results. But cheer up! This mock draft has the Flames grabbing Cam Morrison, also a really good selection in the second round.

Only PL Dubois, if he falls to six, has any chance of making the leap as a teenager. Otherwise, no.

What do you think the ask is for Bishop and what is the most you would be willing to pay?

Though Bishop’s contract status makes me nervous, I’ll assume Treliving won’t make a deal unless there’s an informal agreement forwards an extension.

For Bishop I wouldn’t offer the sixth overall pick or any of the Flames core (the kids, Brodie, Giordano and Backlund) but almost anything else would be fair game. A package including multiple second round picks and any of the other prospects would be fair game.

More important for Flames to acquire this weekend (via draft, free agency, or trade): Top fwd prospect or goalie?

Obviously a starting goalie is the more important piece for the Flames moving forward, but I don’t think they absolutely have to come out of the draft with one. As I’ve mentioned, they can always approach James Reimer if other options fail or prove too expensive.

As such, I’d like to see the Flames come out of this weekend with at least one scoring winger prospect. 

I’ll go with Scott Hartnell – part of the price the Flames pay for moving up to third overall! (But then wouldn’t Puljujarvi be the first line RW? Great prospect, but that’s a lot to ask of an 18 year old 😉 ). 

I’d say it’s pretty high. With three second rounders, the team is a good bet to move at least one of them given their various needs. Seconds seem to be the most common draft asset that get moved.

Ehh, I’m not sanguine about Yakupov as a player. A third rounder isn’t worth much, but Yakupov’s ceiling seems to be a defensively suspect third line winger who can score 15 goals at best. There’s a chance he won’t even be in the league in five years.

Alex Nylander is my pick for the Flames at six if everything goes as expected. The organization is in dire need of scoring depth on the wings and none of the defenders available appear to be good enough to force the Flames to pick against need.

I’d say four years X $4M is the top end. Reimer needs a starting job almost as much as the Flames need a starting goalie and there aren’t a lot of those out there. No need to go crazy.

  • Reimer should be able to be gotten for 2.5-4mil per depending on how many suitors there are.

    Remember when Cody Franson was going to get 5.5×5 ? He ended up taking 3.325 x 2 instead when the market fell out from under him.

    Who knows anything can happen

    • Greg

      If Cam Ward can still garner $3.3M per, in a situation where they also have Lack, Reimer is not going to be signing in the $2.5M range. I’m sure his ask will start in the high 4s, and would be surprised if he can’t get at least high 3s.

    • MontanaMan

      Problem is, they won’t know Reimer’s numbers until after the draft and trades that take place in this time period. It’s a risk to assume what it will take to sign Reimer and pass up on a known during the draft. If they wanted Reimer’s negotiation rights, they should have done it two weeks ago so their goaltending situation was settled going into the draft.

  • Backburner

    This is Reimer’s time to cash in.. I highly doubt he’d settle for anything less than 4 mill.

    Having said that.. beggars can’t be choosers.

    Flames could get a great deal there.

    • PrairieStew

      Reimer’s never been a starter. He needs to prove himself. I’d give him more for 2 years (up to $4.5) than for 3 or 4 years. He plays well over 2 years and he still gets a chance to be a free agent at 30.

  • ronipedia

    I’m okay with $4m, though 4 years seems long for a guy who is kinda on the bubble for being a #1 goalie.

    Wonder if they could pry Elliot out of STL. ($2.5m next season, pretty good even if he ends up going away as a UFA) STL drafts pretty low this year.

    Really depends on how things look after the smoke clears from the draft. fun!

    • everton fc

      Hartnell and #3 for #’s 6/35/53 and one of Bouma or Jooris. Nothing more.

      I think if a team takes Tyutin or Bobvrosky, they can get the 3rd. Particularly Tyutin. Definitley gets done if a team takes Clarkson’s albatross contract.

      I like Nylander at #6. Perhaps we move the #6 to Buffalo or Montreal and take Brown #8/#9? Seems there a lot of talk about the Flames loving Brown. I’d take Keller at #8/#9, over Brown. But he won’t be pro for some time. We need help now.

      I bet we trade down. If we trade into the teens… Julien Gauthier and Boris Katchouk interest me – getting Nylander and Katchouk as our first two picks would be quite nice. (Katchouk at #35 would be as good as Mascherin at #35, at least for me – see link https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/06/21/boris-katchouk-2016-nhl-draft/)

      • PrairieStew

        Bouma and Colborne plus the 6, add in a minor league defensman ( Wotherspoon, Culkin or Sieloff) and the rights to another ( Larsson, Rafikov (?) or Hickey) for the 3 and Hartnell.

        • everton fc

          I’d rather keep Colborne.

          Make is Bouma, Jooris, #6, Wotherspoon (or rights to Nakladal) and the rights to Hickey. We take Bovrosky vs. Hartnell, they retain $1.5mill. Thoughts?

        • Baalzamon

          Backlund doesn’t make sense for the Blue Jackets anyway. The only reason for them to trade the #3 pick is if the trade gives them cap space and more flexibility in the Expansion draft. Flipping Hartnell for Backlund (say) doesn’t solve either issue. I mean, Backlund is ever so slightly cheaper, and he doesn’t have a NMC, but those are both technicalities. The Jackets want to offload Hartnell not only because of his cap hit (Backlund only makes 1 million less) but because he takes up a protection slot in the expansion draft (and they want to protect someone else). Do you really think they’d trade for Backlund and then expose him in the expansion draft?

          • Parker

            But if their desire is for an NHL centre in return for the #3 pick, that would result in them taking salary back no matter. In Backlund’s case they would be getting their centre at $1M less and 1 year less term. What is the other alternative? A centre prospect (Jankowski)? CBJ wouldn’t deal #3 for an unproven prospect. They might as well go draft Dubois then.

            Also I think they would want to protect Backlund but not Hartnell. Looking at their team, they shouldn’t have any trouble choosing who to protect as there isn’t much there worth protecting.

        • Backlund Best

          Then don’t do it, it’s pretty simple. We finally have solid centre depth after trying to find some for YEARS. Why give that up? This team gets worse without Backlund taking those tough assignments down the middle of the ice.

          I know that’s the rumour, but Columbus has their top 3 centres signed for next season (Jenner, Dubinsky, and Karlson, with Campbell being able to fill the 4th line role, Wennberg listed as a centre as well), Backlund doesn’t actually fill a need.

  • Backlund Best

    Listened to Tod Button on 960 and when he was being asked about different prospects he sounded like he was glowing when it came to Logan Brown. He just went on and on about him. If we take Brown at 6, I might actually break a TV…

  • mattyc

    My bold prediction: Dubois falls to the flames at 6, they trade a late pick for the rights to Reimer, trade a 2nd for a 2nd tier forward, and draft a coke machine with their late 2nd pick.

  • everton fc

    Wild just bought-out Vanek. Any interest in him here, on RW?? He was at $7.5mill for this coming season – how do the #s work if a team were interested? He can still score goals…

    • freethe flames

      This has gotten a lot of hate but it has merit if it was a $1m 1 or 2 year deal to help on Bennets line. Although not perfect it could buy time for someone elses development.

      • everton fc

        Yep. That was my angle. Possibly 20 goals. And he’s a pest.

        Other news:

        Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 5m5 minutes ago
        Treliving, Kekalainen and Chiarelli now deep in conversation.

      • Stu Cazz

        Good question and concern….I think Wideman, Schmid and Buoma contracts come off due to trades and insurance for Schmid. Bishop is a big time top 3 goalie that will take Flames intomplayoffs and perhaps a deep run…have to pay the price or you simply will not obtain him….

    • wot96

      That’s a stupid deal.

      Flames can’t hold Bishop to any gentleman’s agreement either. That would be an agreement to agree and unenforceable in law and a contravention of the CBA. Huge risk. Frankly as bad as the O’Reilly offer sheet fiasco.

    • Parker

      We all balked at the suggestion of trading #6 for MAF. How could we be ok with this? I know Bishop is better than MAF but I don’t like trading #6 for any goalie. Too steep!!

      • Stu Cazz

        I hear you and I agree….but your goalie is your QB…Bishop is one of the best and if you want him you will pay dearly…just saying….now you tell me with Bishop in the net for the Flames next year (and I assume beyond) what kind of team will the Flames have? Playoffs?

  • Derzie

    The 960 guys in Buffalo are saying Logan Brown goes to the Flames at 6. That kind of talk is nuts. Going off script for a guy because he is big is “Hunter Smith-crazy” or goalie in the 2nd round crazy. Say it aint so Brad.

  • everton fc

    Elliott. A 9th round pick a thousand years ago! He might be the answer. He’s 32, so he’d be a good transition towards Gillies (if Gillies even makes it to the NHL) or as a buffer to get us tot he expansion draft. Elliott also doesn’t give up a lot of goals…

    If he’s available….

  • Parker

    Imagine if we end up trading #6 for Bishop and then Edmonton surprises by picking a d-man and Vancouver sticks with Dubois? Would be a bummer to lose out on Tkachuk that way.

  • everton fc

    I really hope we don’t give up #6 for Bishop. I’d rather we acquire Elliott or Reimer for much less. Though Bishop’s only 29. Tough call.

    If we trade the #6 we’ll package the 2nds somehow for a 1st. But we’ll miss out on Nylander, who could become a 20-plus goal scorer, someday soon.

    • everton fc

      Or Bobvrosky as part of getting the #3. Dreger says Jackets and BT talking for a 3rd time…

      Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger 14m14 minutes ago
      Brad Treliving has been among most engaged in discussions as draft floor fills up. Jarmo Kekelainen and Treliving now in 3rd discussion.

  • everton fc

    Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun 23s23 seconds ago
    Treliving and Kekalainen together again now

    Any minute, people… But what will be the cost? Should we get ready for a real mind-blowing deal. I wonder if Bobvrosky is the bait? If the Jackets retained $2mill salary…