Calgary’s less obvious trade chips

salty-chips

Right now, much of the trade talk surrounding the Calgary Flames is focused on pending unrestricted free agents Jiri Hudler, David Jones, and Kris Russell.  Any and all conversation surrounding the futures of those three players is very much warranted. But those three aren’t the only potential trade chips the Flames have right now. With less than six weeks to go before the deadline, I’ve got three less obvious players to keep an eye on, too.

Joe Colborne

Colborne’s utilization has been one of the biggest hot button topics among Flames fans this season. But regardless of how much or little you think he should be playing, I do know a few things for certain about Colborne: he’s 6’5, he has pretty decent hands, and he’s a former first round pick. These are all things that some people in the hockey world value highly, which means Calgary might be able to turn Colborne into a pretty decent return.

There are other things that make Colborne potentially attractive in a trade, too. At the age of (almost) 26, he’s not considered old and might still have another year or so left of progression in him. Colborne is also on an affordable contract that carries a cap hit of just $1.275 million, making him easy to fit in other salary structures. On top of that, Colborne is a pending restricted free agent which keeps him a controllable asset for any team acquiring him.

I’d have no problem if Colborne were to remain with Calgary on another affordable, short term contract. He’s passable if used somewhat sparingly and, as I said, might still have another year left of gradual improvement. In the end, though, Colborne is not a core member of this group and could very well be enticing to other general managers. If there’s a trade that might fetch, say, a third round pick, I think it’s something the Flames need to consider doing.

Markus Granlund

This is a very interesting player to me. I like Granlund as a prospect and I think there’s a decent amount of potential for him at the NHL level. As it stands right now, he is a very ineffective NHLer and likely shouldn’t be playing everyday minutes at the highest level. However, at the age of 22, there’s still plenty of time for him to develop. Typically this would not be a player I’d include on a list of potential Calgary trade assets.

What makes this case different, though, is the organization’s depth at centre. Granlund is not going to play ahead of Sean Monahan or Sam Bennett down the road, that much is certain. Could he be a potential replacement for Mikael Backlund down the road? I mean, yeah, maybe that could happen, but he’s not on Backlund’s level right now and is likely a few years away from that ever happening. At the NHL level, there doesn’t seem to be a natural fit longterm for Granlund.

What makes things even more convoluted is what else the Flames have in the system down the middle. Prior to his injury, the team was very high on Bill Arnold’s season in Stockton. Mark Jankowski is in his senior season at Providence College and is a former first round pick of this team. Drew Shore, Derek Grant, and Freddie Hamilton are all 25 or under right now, too. The fact is, there’s just as much of a chance Granlund is replaceable in the organization as there is of him solidifying his spot in the big picture.

So where does this put him when it comes to a trade? Well, because Granlund is still young, there’s going to be some natural interest in him. I see Granlund as part of a bigger deal that goes to address an area of need elsewhere. I think he’s a less likely player to move before the deadline, but I would not surprised to see Granlund be a part of a package moved out during the offseason.

Karri Ramo

Ramo’s future with the team could very well be tied to their exploits on the ice over the next month or so. If this team fights their way back into hot contention for a Pacific Division playoff spot, then this probably isn’t a relevant topic. It’s a far more valid conversation if the Flames are still five or six points out closer to the deadline.

Ramo has played some pretty decent hockey in recent times. Specifically since December 1st, Ramo has given Calgary number one quality goaltending over a decent stretch of time. It’s the first time since joining the Flames, and the first time in his NHL career, that Ramo has played at a number one level for an extended period of time. It’s not enough to convince us that he’s a bona fide everyday starter going forward, but it is likely enough to pique the interest of other NHL teams.

For a team looking for a little more backup insurance between the pipes come the postseason, Ramo could make a nice fit. Maybe just as importantly, Ramo could very likely help a team trying to rest their number one goalie down the stretch in the regular season by playing a decent amount of games in March and early April. It’s tough to manage the minutes of a number one goalie at a desired rate while still fighting for a decent playoff seed. Bringing in a guy like Ramo could potentially make that job a whole lot easier.

Remember, just like Hudler and Russell, Ramo is a pending UFA at the end of the season. For a team looking for some help, that probably makes him more attractive. Thus, that boosts the value the Flames could potentially get back to him. More than the other two players mentioned here, though, his trade status is far more tied to where the team is in the standings.

  • RKD

    Outside of Gaudreau, Brodie, Monahan and Bennett everyone else is tradeable imo. For the Flames to entice buyers in a trade they will need to throw in more than a roster player, either a prospect or a pick. I’m really indifferent if they trade any of the 3 above, there are bigger problems and areas of concern to address first.

  • Franko J

    Regardless who the Flames trade between now and the deadline, from an organizational standpoint it is imperative they improve the talent level on the RW.

    Treliving managed to trade for Hamilton which addressed a need on the right hand side of the defence. I would think outside of maybe solidifying the situation between the pipes, finding a RW to compliment Monahan, Gaudreau, and Bennett, is priority #1.

    After last nights results, the Flames have a ways to go before they can compete with the “big boys” in a seven game series. Might as well keep accumulating talent, skill and building depth throughout the lineup.

  • VoRaCS

    I’m having a tough time figuring out why so many have anointed Mony an untouchable part of the Flames’ future and want to see him receive a king’s ransom. He is not a great skater or passer, his play has levelled off this season (despite having every opportunity to succeed) and, more importantly, as the touted “200 foot defensive specialist he is supposed to become, he seems to struggle in his own end as well. On the other hand, it’s been pretty easy to se the innate talent of Johnny and Sam. They are truly gifted and the offensive leaders of the team moving forward. It makes me wonder what kind of success they might have if they had actually played together this season. In returning to my main point, though, I want to emphasize that it would be a mistake to offer SM too much money right now.

  • KiLLKiND

    3 other less likely trade chips that could come into play; Lance Bouma, Mikael Backlund, and Matt Stajan.

    Bouma has had an unfortunate start to the year but he is a warrior and a player that other teams would love to have going into playoffs.

    Stajan is a lesser Backlund, great defensively, occasional offence and creating a logjam at center for our prospects.

    Backlund is a great center and I love him. We do however have a great big logjam at center and could get back a 1st and more from him. He could take a playoff tteam to Stanley Cup contender and the package we get from him could be used to get a top line RW. This isn’t a trade I’m saying should happen but what team wouldn’t want Backlund? We could get amazing value from him and not hurt our team too much.

    We have players in Stockton that should be playing in the NHL this year or next year. It would be ideal to simply move out our “deadweight” players such as, Bollig, Colborne, Raymond, Engelland, etc… If we want to get a top flight RW to play with Gaudreau and Bennett in the future we will likely have to give up something we really like. Is trading away Backlund a huge gamble on Bill Arnold and Derek Grant? Yes. It is a calculated gamble though, because our lord and saviour Jankowski will be here next year. Or at the very least a 2nd round pick, which might be worth more.

    My point is that we do have options for trading and acquiring pieces that will help build our team. Our top priority is finding a way to use these assets and getting a top tier RW. Personally I would like to see Agostino and Grant playing in the NHL full time after the trade deadline. If they don’t work out oh well we weren’t winning the cup this year anyways. We still don’t know what we have in either of them though and best case scenario is we trade away players, for more than their value should be while these two can step up and fill the gap.

    • RealMcHockeyReturns

      Agree with some of what you say but 1st rounder will not come back in a Backlund trade unless you add a lot more, he is a solid 3rd line C only. As for packaging guys, if we can Get Stamkos (condition he must re-sign immediately), the I am OK with Monahan, a 1st rounder from 2017, a top propect, and another non-core but strong player to Tampa (e.g Backlund). Stamkos could be a top C or RW for us. Doubt it happens but you can dream.

      • KiLLKiND

        only %30 of 1st rounders make the NHL, if we trade Backlund we aren’t getting an early 1st we are getting a 27th-30th. He is worth more than a 57-60th pick so maybe a 2nd and a 5th. I think you are correct that Backlund won’t get more than a 1st and I over estimated his value during my earlier comment. trading him shoud still be looked intto though as he isn’t a UFA and that would most likely be a bonus to whichever team trades for him. teams have traded 1st and more knowing that they were only getting a rental, with Backlund he would be around for at least another season.

        As far as Stamkos I wouldn’t trade Monahan for him straight up even. We are still a rebuilding team, we don’t need a star player that is already slightly past his prime and will be paid over $7 million. He won’t put us closer to the cup which is the end goal. We would become the Calgary Flames before the rebuild where we kept going for it because we had Iggy, and Kipper. Now we would be going for it cause we have Stammer, and Gio.Yes we have other great player now like Gaudreau, Brodie, and Hamilton, but we still won’t win the cup, with this group alone. trading for Stamkos would effectively end this rebuild but we would have to start again in 5-7 years.

      • Kevin R

        No to Stamkos. He hasn’t been the same since the broken leg & he is going to want 10.0 mill per. I would rather go after #freedrouin to Flames from Tampa. Winger for Bennett or maybe move Gaudreau with Bennett on top line & put Drouin with Monahan. The two players game would probably compliment each other pretty well.

  • KiLLKiND

    As far as trading Colborne I’m all for it, if we aren’t going to play him in a role that he can handle we shouldn’t keep him. I would be fine if we kept him on as a 3rd or 4th line LW, but if he is in the top 6 there is something wrong.

    Trading Granlund does sound like a good idea, but would likely not get done until the deadline. He isn’t good enough for a team going for it to want and for teams acquiring assets it doesn’t make sense either to get him before the lottery. Given that I think the best scenario is to see what role we can fit him in.

    I’m done with the rotation of goalies stick with Ramo if he finishes the year well sign him in the offseason. He is younger and has shown that he can at least provide average goaltending. If a trade we can’t refuse comes up take it, but having consistency in net would be nice for the team and he appears to once again be the top UFA goalie this year. So if we need to sign goalie this year we could have to settle for someone considerably worse.

      • Kevin R

        I agree.

        I’m not a Colborne booster. His biggest problem is his deployment, imo, and that’s not on him. If he gets traded, I obviously won’t cry over that but I wouldn’t mind him staying either, provided he doesn’t get slotted into the top six. He is a low cost bottom six or bottom three alternative.

        Try Granlund at wing, if he works, great – that will increase his value for trade or play purposes. If it doesn’t work, get what you can get – but at the draft, not at the TDL as I think he needs a fair shot on wing.

        With a caveat, for Ramo, I’d be tempted to re-sign him for a couple of years if his price point comes down. I think the team is done with Hiller but there isn’t anyone in the system ready to step in full time. On the other hand, you can’t sign him too long because if you do, that may slow the development of the goalies in the system.

        The caveat is that if someone offers you something stupid for Ramo, I think you consider it very, very, hard but bear in mind that Hiller is probably gone at the end of the season because no goalie likes to be ignored for 30 games especially after the off-season trade rumours. Instead of a three headed monster, the Flames could end up with no proven goalie if they peddle Ramo. I know that’s a possibility whether they trade him or not, but that could easily delay the rebuild and lead to a premature graduation of Gillies to the NHL.

  • Graham_CGY

    “That said, anyone not named TJ, Johnny, Monny, Sam, Dougie or Gio is a trade chip. I would put Frolik in that core group in pencil as well.”

    I don’t believe that applies any longer. I’m going to say this with a GREAT deal of sadness…

    Monahan or Bennett?
    Brodie or Gio?

    Really, in today’s NHL, or your core is 4-5 players max. let’s compare:

    Money only

    Toews = Monahan or Bennett

    Kane = Guadreau

    Keith = Brodie

    Seabrook = Gio or Hamilton

    And then you need a core Goalie.

    I love Mony… he’s been my favorite player all 200 games. I just don’t see them being able to keep both Bennett and Monahan long term… and that SUCKS!

    • cberg

      You are missing a couple core pieces for Chicago, like Sharp/Panarin and Hjalmarsson and Hossa. We can afford both Monahan and Bennett and need them both, or better.

    • CofRed4Life

      It’s all about allocating resources and being smart with contracts. You can either lock up more money in wingers, defensemen, goalies, or forwards.

      And don’t forget, even though Chicago is a great model to follow, it’s not the only way. We can keep both Bennett and Monahan long-term. Having that kind of center depth is a key to long-term success.

      • Tomas Oppolzer

        Chicago pays its star players well…and as soon as the 3rd and 4th liners. 2nd and 3rd pairing D-men become too expensive, you bring in less expensive players – that is the salary structure the Flames should aim for…unfortunately at this point in time the Flames have some unwieldy salary/contracts which makes it hard to follow the Hawks model!

      • Kevin R

        I was talking about it with some buddies last night, but what if? What if the Flames plod their way to a 27th over all finish (highly possible) & by the grace of the Hockey Gods they shine down upon us & we win the lottery & we pick Matthews. Suddenly our stud centre men become Bennett & Matthews. What do we do with Monahan? He certainly isn’t a 3rd line centre. Wouldn’t that be a lot of heated conversation between the results of the draft lottery & the draft. Do we trade it for the 2nd or 3rd pick & get other pieces & throw in a few other pieces with the acquired ones to acquire the other 2nd or 3rd overall pick & we scoop both Finnish forwards Sedin style :-}

        Meh…..back to reality… Oil down to $27.00, no move in BoC rate blah blah blah.

        • Tomas Oppolzer

          I’ve actually thought about this. If we trade Hudler for a 1st (optimistic, I know) and we get Matthews, I say the best course of action would be to try and trade Monahan+1st from Hudler trade+2nd or 3rd rd pick for the 2nd or 3rd overall pick and get one of Puljujarvi or Laine.

          Trash away, but if Burke/Treliving could pull that off it would be perfect IMO.

          • RickT

            Honestly, I agree. If Matthews is received, trade Monahan.

            He has a high worth right now, the chances that Matthews will be as good are very high, the chances that he will be better are pretty decent.

            That would be a very ballsy move, though. And maybe unpopular.

        • flamesburn89

          Even if they don’t get Matthews, they’ll have the chance to add an elite winger if they draft in the 3-5 range. At this point in the season, they sit 5th last in the league.

      • Graham_CGY

        LA is very similar

        Kopitar
        Carter
        Doughty
        Muzzin
        Quick

        St. Louis, Anaheim, also… but you can see they will have to lose “key pieces”.

        My concern is if you’re to forward heavy like the Flames will be… you become Edmonton.

        Look in 2 years:
        Monahan, Bennett, Backlund, Gaudreau, Frolik, Stajan. A lot of cap for those 6.

  • CofRed4Life

    I think if Hiller gives more quality starts like the game against Edmonton, his trade value will rise, and BT can point to October as an anomaly since Hiller’s historical numbers are much better. I would much rather keep Ramo as a stop gap for a couple years because he’s been much more calm and impressive in net, and he’s a few years younger than Hiller. What do you guys think we could get for a more consistent Hiller? A 3rd or 4th rounder?

  • CDB

    We know who is part of the core of this team moving forward. Literally everyone else should be on the trade block. There is so much dead weight on this team it’s ridiculous

  • cberg

    I like all the guys you listed as potential trade chips. Of the bunch the one I would like to keep is Hudler at a good contract rate because he is the best and most effective, especially with younger guys who we have a lot of.

    In addition to the above, I think you add Wideman, Smid, Engelland, Stajan, Jooris, Hiller and Raymond, with different potential values to other clubs, if only as depth insurance.

    The key will be team position in about another month from today. If e’re basically out if it it’ll be easier to get into a Sell mode and put our last month focus on bringing in prospects and seeing what they have to offer.

    The next month is 7 Home and 6 Away games with easier opponents early and tough later so we should have a pretty good idea by mid-February.

      • cberg

        There is “Sell mode” and “SELL MODE”. Last year Arizona went into SELL MODE 100%, which we should try if we are out of it. If we aren’t you continue on pressing for the playoffs, which should always be the goal of the team, while selectively selling off a couple players that don’t fit now or down the road.

        There are many benefits to making the playoffs, one of which is its a stepping stone to making a deep run and the Stanley Cup. You don’t throw that away just because. As we saw this past summer there are many ways to add top flight players, not just the draft and hopefully successful development over many years…

  • ChinookArchYYC

    If Hiller is given some more starts and continues to paly well, opposing GM’s may be given the option to pick either for their playoff plans.

    My preference is to keep Colburne and slot him in as a 4th line RW only. THe trouble with this is Hartley constantly puts Colburne in positions that he shown he can’t succeed in. So, he has to be traded (IMHO). As for more development, I’ve seen enough to say that we know what he is now.

    • CDB

      Or, you know, bring in a coach who is at least competent in player usage, doesn’t just play favourites, and understands how to best utilize the guys on his team. Hartley proves game after game he is incapable of this.

        • smith

          Person who thinks coaches are incapable of making mistakes and bad decisions, “because they are the coach and you are not derrrrrrrp”

          FN mod – edited slightly

          • cberg

            Of course coaches can make mistakes and bad decisions, never said or even hinted that is not the case. However, I’m pretty certain the guys who are actually on the ice, in the room and in the lives of the players and the team, and have succeeded at every level they’ve worked at have a far better idea of what they are trying to do than someone looking from afar with little to no clue what is really going on. In addition, its totally different to be the person trying something (succeed or fail) versus an armchair quarterback second-guessing decisions after the fact….

            But hey, perhaps you’re like, the assistant coach who really knows what is going on and is using this forum to voice an alternative view? If so, please fill us in, we’d all love the insights.

          • hulkingloooooob

            I’ve got to agree, all the Hartley slamming is getting real old. i for one think he’s doing a good job. what’s his primary job right now? well, it’s actually not playing the way a cup contending team plays night in night out, no we are not Chicago yet, not even close. but we could become that down the road, and by that i mean a serious contender for 5-8 years straight. so….what’s his job then, well, his job is to teach these young guys how to play, fast track them to becoming veteran like players 3-4 years into their time in the league. I’d say johnny is already on his way, Mony has shown real good strides, and although he hasn’t been the best lately, he’s improved at face offs and is still growing, Bennet, well, he’s logging those ever important first 100 games and learning every night. And Hammer-town? well we’ve all watched him grow into this team. these days you need to teach your team how to play the game with various approaches/systems, you can’t just be a rush team or a dump and forecheck team, you need to be flexible, especially in the playoffs, so you can mitigate matchup challenges and make the most of your opportunities. these are long term goals here folks. we are not trying to make a run right now! and finally, Hartley’s other job is to help maximize the value of players the team may not need deep into the future, players who are not core. so if Colby had buried a few of his chances while rocking top line or PP min, and started to get a little hot, you’d all be calling him a mad genius for getting joe’s trade value maxed and then getting a decent offer on him. sometimes things don’t go the way you hope, but if you don’t try you’ll never know. Joe’s value for example as a fourth liner vs. someone who had some usefulness on first line/pp is a huge difference, and well worth trying. did it work, no. remember two things Hartley bashers, your hindsight is 20/20 and no, we are not trying to win a cup this year, this is a long term project and we will get there eventually with patience. or sure, blow up the team and fire the coach, oh, and trade the only goalie we have right now…..sure, then we’ll see what we’ve got. Hartley, I for one back up your hard work with these youngsters. Go Flames Go!

          • hulkingloooooob

            thanks for the thoughtful response…..i’m just trying to get some new dialogue on here…but if all you guys wanna do is dis people, well, seems to be the norm around here so i guess yer in the right place. now go ahead and tell me “yer” is not a word, cut me down, you know you want to….why bother talking hockey anyway….

          • Tomas Oppolzer

            We’re trying to help you. You aren’t going to get a dialogue started with a 20 line block of text with no paragraph breaks. Nobody wants to read that, let alone start a dialogue based on it.

            Reflecting on my comment, though, it was a little rude. jiL’s though, it was perfectly polite and reasonable. Take criticisms for what they are instead of being defensive.

          • hulkingloooooob

            Thanks Tom, I didn’t know i needed your help. You know, maybe you can help me understand what a “hyper kid hat” is…..

            Just for you, I’ll write in nice little paragraphs.

            cool?

            cool.

            Still, no thoughtful response to my thoughts that Hartley is actually doing a decent job, and that this is a long term process? All Bickering aside, let’s talk hockey. GFG!

          • hulkingloooooob

            so if you’ve got it all figured out, why don’t you tell me how it is….or would you prefer to just cut people down. that’s all you seem to be doing here, so what’s interesting or thoughtful about that? three direct responses to my original comment, non of which address what I’m saying. this forum is going down hill fast…..

        • smith

          Sure you can have favourites. But when you stubbornly play those favourites in situations they absolutely aren’t suited for, to the detriment of your own team, that’s a serious problem.

          • RKD

            I dont’ agree with all of Hartley’s decisions but for the most part he gets it right. I hated that Johnny would not get much 4v4 OT time early in the season but that changed. He still does not use him on the PK and I think that is a mistake especially if the team needs a goal. He likely wants to keep his minutes down so I kind of get it.

            I also did not like that he was not a beleiver in Sam Bennett at the start of the season..rarely used on the PP. I just thnk he is old school, you have to keep showing him what you can do but then you are still only half way there. Players need to fit a role in Hartley’s mind. He recognizes that players like Johnny and Bennett need to be surrounded by top 6 forwards to maximize their potential. However, it can be argued that most players play better when surrounded by better players.

            So, what determines if a player is give Top 6 considerateion, it can’t be based only on Junior/college since most players drafted or signed have decent resumes. If we would have let FN readers run the team, we likely would have fired Hartley, traded Hamilton, and sent Bennett to the AHL.

            For the most part, I think Hartley has a good grasp of his players. I also think he is forced to play the hand that he is dealt. If it was up to him, I don’t think he would have waived Byron and I don’t think he would have started teh season with 3 keepers. These are management decisions irrespective of the coach.

            The Flames are like a lot of teams they have 5-6 really strong core players, the trick is moving the rest of the pieces so that they compliment the core. That is really where most of the difference of opinions takes place. Should Colbourn start over Jooris, should Bollig start over some other players. All long as teams label players as Top 6 and Bottom 6 ability there will always be discussion.

          • RKD

            He has 14 forwards and 7D to choose from. He has access to video and advanced stats. He has two centers that should be the top two on the team. He has a defensive specialist center and another similar center. He has three top defencemen that teams drool over. He has enough talent to ice two decent PP units.

            Not a big Russell fan, but why use Wideman instead on the next one. After two giveaways and a pass to nobody, why does he get the ice for the final minutes with the goalie pulled? Seems to me I have seen this movie before.

            Granlund is best preventing goals or as a winger that can shoot. I understand the PK time, but why continue to use him as a #3C when you could use Backlund or Stajan.

            Whenever the game starts off bad, we get the lin-blender, not a change to coaching strategy. Continue to walk the puck into the first 5 feet of the O-zone then pass laterally.

            The coach needs to look at the systems and find out what won’t work anymore. Try 4 forwards? Ship the puck past a trapped blueline when the forwards are moving? Keep a line together for longer than 2 shifts?

  • Derzie

    One thing is becoming crystal clear: we have some really nice core pieces but the drop off after that is huge. Stockton is in the basement due to our less than exciting crop of callups. We have some work to do to compete with the Blackhawks of the world. That said, anyone not named TJ, Johnny, Monny, Sam, Dougie or Gio is a trade chip. I would put Frolik in that core group in pencil as well.

    • everton fc

      I’d “hold” Ferland, as well. Still to raw to move.

      Jones/Stajan/Hudler/Granlund/Hiller/Russell/Wideman – I’d try to move this group.

      Raymond I think we’re stuck with.

      Bouma may end up a 4th liner. Jooris needs to play – or do we think he’s reached a “ceiling”, we know what we have, we have other alike him in the organization, and he becomes potential tradable bait due to his time in the league? When do guy like Grant/Poirier/Hamilton2/Hathaway/Shore/Arnold/others (Elson?) get a look up here? Or are we realizing this group of “prospects” isn’t too exciting, “on paper”?? Derzie hits this on the head, I think. Or is it the development of these prospects? (Troy G, anyone?!)

      Smid is only 29. Playing well. He’d be a guy a team would look at, as well. As for Colborne – poor Joe. Only 26. Probably reached his ceiling, as well. Do we want Jooris, Granlund or Colborne? Too many of these types of players on the big team. Time to move a few. I like Chinook’s idea – keep Colborne on the 4th line, and realize that’s who he is. He can be used in other roles, pivot/wing, other lines… He’s got flexibility.

      Then again, so does Jooris, and he sits more than he plays.

    • Derbyherb

      To be fair to Stockton the NHL club has pillaged them pretty well over the past two years. Jooris, Granlund, Ferland, That’s a first line right there. Bouma and Byron the year before.

    • cberg

      I believe we do have lots of very good players in Stockton. With no goaltending due to multiple major injuries and few AHL vets (versus many other teams) it is going to be a hard slog down there, but that doesn’t mean the prospects are no good. Quite the opposite, they are getting more opportunity than many which I think will shine through in a couple of years.

    • Colin.S

      Trading Colborne in the summer would have probably gotten more. Colborne played well over his head last year and got favourable counting numbers. And with the inclusion of Frolik it was less and less likely that Colborne was going to continue to get those favourable deployments that got him those numbers, though somehow Hartley has managed to give him first line PP time, but look what he’s managed to do with that opportunity.

      Now instead of getting a good return, the Flames would be lucky to get what they gave up to get him.