Overpaid Bouma and Engellund...Hiller wasn't great in hindsight.


Raymond!!! (I get that he was to replace Cammi but that contract

He's been pretty good, but not perfect.
- Saskabush

Meh. Hiller and Raymond were decent bets at the time. Signing Hiller for only 2 years was brilliant, I thought. Last year didn't work so well but the 1st year balances it out. Raymond looked good playing in TO. Engs was definitely overpaid but again, that may have been Burke's influence early into BT's tenure.

AussiePen is right in some respect, we just differred the goal tender issue to next year. Did we hurt ourselves doing so? Nope Giving up the #6OA for Fleury or Bishop is a big hell no & Tre made the right call.
Have we solved our goal tending issue? Nope
He is right however. What if Gilles does excellent in A next year & Elliott plays good as well? Then what, do you sign Elliott for a 5 year deal that he's going to want? We just have to wait & see. Personally, Fleury with 2 years could be the perfect timeline bridge for Gilles. But my tune may change big time come June next year.
- Kevin R

half full or half empty... perspective my friend.
To me though the organization is holding the cards as opposed to the other way with Hiller/Ramo. GM's knew we were desperate and I'm sure the discussion and the ask of the Pen's was reflective of that. Our GM took the safe choice in signing both guys. It allows us to be competitive and evaluate where we are. I'd rather have too many options than none like we had going into the draft...

If Elliot fails, he can be set loose and then we look at what the market has either pre-expansion draft or or the fallout from it. Maybe its MAF, Bishop or someone else. The point is we have more negotiating power than we did and look what BT was able to accomplish.

AussiePen is right in some respect, we just differred the goal tender issue to next year. Did we hurt ourselves doing so? Nope Giving up the #6OA for Fleury or Bishop is a big hell no & Tre made the right call.
Have we solved our goal tending issue? Nope
He is right however. What if Gilles does excellent in A next year & Elliott plays good as well? Then what, do you sign Elliott for a 5 year deal that he's going to want? We just have to wait & see. Personally, Fleury with 2 years could be the perfect timeline bridge for Gilles. But my tune may change big time come June next year.
- Kevin R

He may want it but the odds are long against him getting it from anyone. The market will only get tougher as the summer and the expansion draft get closer. He or Johnson may be offered a 3 year deal but teams will be scrambling to move potential expansion draft targets, which makes for a tough market for G's

Trading a 3rd for Bollig was dumb. But that could have been Burke since BT had just joined the team prior to the draft and likely didn't have control yet. Signing Bouma to $2.2 for 3 years was dumb as well.
- TandA4Flames

At the time, it didn't look as bad though. We didn't even know what JG/Money would really be like at that time. And Ferly wasn't on the radar as he had some court issues.

I don't like the deal now....but can't really hold that one on him either.

he's doing pretty good.

Worst deal.....probably mason raymond. But again that made some other players earn their spot

At the time, it didn't look as bad though. We didn't even know what JG/Money would really be like at that time. And Ferly wasn't on the radar as he had some court issues.

I don't like the deal now....but can't really hold that one on him either.

he's doing pretty good.

Worst deal.....probably mason raymond. But again that made some other players earn their spot
- numbear

Are you referring to the Bollig trade? That was a dumb move. CHI, as usual was in cap hell and CGY traded a 3rd rounder for a 4th liner. They probably could have gotten him for a 5th. And in what world do you think he's doing pretty good?

Overpaid Bouma and Engellund...Hiller wasn't great in hindsight.


Raymond!!! (I get that he was to replace Cammi but that contract

He's been pretty good, but not perfect.
- Saskabush

Engelland was overpaid but we needed a D man and a guy who kept the kids from getting killed ...Engelland isn't good but he ended up being necessary

Raymond was an ok signing ...no one could have predicted the kids playing as good as early ...no one wanted to come to Cakgary so overpaying for a local boy to fill top 6 minutes wasn't terrible IMO

Hiller was great two years ago ...it want crazy to think he could repeat ...it would have been crazy to think he could rebound

Booms is overpaid but he earned it

Are you referring to the Bollig trade? That was a dumb move. CHI, as usual was in cap hell and CGY traded a 3rd rounder for a 4th liner. They probably could have gotten him for a 5th. And in what world do you think he's doing pretty good?
- TandA4Flames

I meant BT is doing pretty good

Bollig. paid a bit to much. but at a time where ferland/JG/Money were unknowns and Big ern on the way out. was needed.

Filled that gap, didn't cost that much. can easily move on. Thats better then raymond, who ended up going down.

Engelland was overpaid but we needed a D man and a guy who kept the kids from getting killed ...Engelland isn't good but he ended up being necessary

Raymond was an ok signing ...no one could have predicted the kids playing as good as early ...no one wanted to come to Cakgary so overpaying for a local boy to fill top 6 minutes wasn't terrible IMO

Hiller was great two years ago ...it want crazy to think he could repeat ...it would have been crazy to think he could rebound

Booms is overpaid but he earned it
- Redmile247

thats basically it. he seems to fill gaps with out overpaying too much.

And where theres gaps, teams tend to overpay....and he didn't overpay that much in all those cases.

Engelland was overpaid but we needed a D man and a guy who kept the kids from getting killed ...Engelland isn't good but he ended up being necessary

Raymond was an ok signing ...no one could have predicted the kids playing as good as early ...no one wanted to come to Cakgary so overpaying for a local boy to fill top 6 minutes wasn't terrible IMO

Hiller was great two years ago ...it want crazy to think he could repeat ...it would have been crazy to think he could rebound

Booms is overpaid but he earned it
- Redmile247

thats basically it. he seems to fill gaps with out overpaying too much.

And where theres gaps, teams tend to overpay....and he didn't overpay that much in all those cases.

thats basically it. he seems to fill gaps with out overpaying too much.

And where theres gaps, teams tend to overpay....and he didn't overpay that much in all those cases.
- numbear

Now if he made some of those moves now I'd be a bit more skeptical

Now if he made some of those moves now I'd be a bit more skeptical
- Redmile247

yup. not needed.

lets let the team role as is. he filled the gaps. If a true RW(gritty if possible) pops up during the year, that would be the thing to look for

half full or half empty... perspective my friend.
To me though the organization is holding the cards as opposed to the other way with Hiller/Ramo. GM's knew we were desperate and I'm sure the discussion and the ask of the Pen's was reflective of that. Our GM took the safe choice in signing both guys. It allows us to be competitive and evaluate where we are. I'd rather have too many options than none like we had going into the draft...

If Elliot fails, he can be set loose and then we look at what the market has either pre-expansion draft or or the fallout from it. Maybe its MAF, Bishop or someone else. The point is we have more negotiating power than we did and look what BT was able to accomplish.
- geta02it

As I said I wouldn't of traded for MAF with the #6 either - that's just Xmas come early if that goes down.

But I only used that as an example of what could have been the 'better' option in line with your prospect goalie coming through - known commodity in net, known $ & known term. Now you have a starter that wasn't the full time starter on his former team for 1 year then the process starts again whether by FA or trade. Now a lot can happen in a season & for example if Price or another top end goalie goes down then there will certainly be 1 of those options used by that team whether by trading for a soon to be FA or a contracted Goalie like Flower or Crawford. There is also the Dallas dilemma if they can't get either of their goalies going 1 will be out the door in my opinion. There are a few other teams with ? In net so it may not be a huge buyers market next off season as a lot are saying.

Realistically I doubt your GM signs a Bishop type if your prospect is looking good, & if Elliot (as I said before), is good he'll be looking for term & $ - he's not going to miss out on his big chance.

Wouldn't surprise me if these 2nd tier goalies that fulfil the criteria for Vegas are actually traded for by organisations with the intent of putting them up for the expansion draft (although there's probably only 1 team - us, that needs to do that unless MAF waives his NMC as is being bandied around as a possibility). Not sure we even have a 2nd goalie yet for our Baby Pens to go with Jarry (another very well regarded prospect), so we may even be trading for a goalie ourselves??

As I said, this is all in relation to your blogger putting in writing that you guys found your cheap solution in goal. If he had of stipulated it was for 1 year & you would be back in the same position (so was it actually a good move??), as you were 2 months ago then we aren't discussing this!

As I said I really do like the Flames & want you to succeed. I just questioned the decision to trial a 'stop gap' for 1 season when your prospect isn't that far away, but not quite close enough to do that.

As I said I wouldn't of traded for MAF with the #6 either - that's just Xmas come early if that goes down.

But I only used that as an example of what could have been the 'better' option in line with your prospect goalie coming through - known commodity in net, known $ & known term. Now you have a starter that wasn't the full time starter on his former team for 1 year then the process starts again whether by FA or trade. Now a lot can happen in a season & for example if Price or another top end goalie goes down then there will certainly be 1 of those options used by that team whether by trading for a soon to be FA or a contracted Goalie like Flower or Crawford. There is also the Dallas dilemma if they can't get either of their goalies going 1 will be out the door in my opinion. There are a few other teams with ? In net so it may not be a huge buyers market next off season as a lot are saying.

Realistically I doubt your GM signs a Bishop type if your prospect is looking good, & if Elliot (as I said before), is good he'll be looking for term & $ - he's not going to miss out on his big chance.

Wouldn't surprise me if these 2nd tier goalies that fulfil the criteria for Vegas are actually traded for by organisations with the intent of putting them up for the expansion draft (although there's probably only 1 team - us, that needs to do that unless MAF waives his NMC as is being bandied around as a possibility). Not sure we even have a 2nd goalie yet for our Baby Pens to go with Jarry (another very well regarded prospect), so we may even be trading for a goalie ourselves??

As I said, this is all in relation to your blogger putting in writing that you guys found your cheap solution in goal. If he had of stipulated it was for 1 year & you would be back in the same position (so was it actually a good move??), as you were 2 months ago then we aren't discussing this!

As I said I really do like the Flames & want you to succeed. I just questioned the decision to trial a 'stop gap' for 1 season when your prospect isn't that far away, but not quite close enough to do that.
- Aussiepenguin

You're disagreement is based off of too much speculation and the fact that this is a mere "bandaid" fix. I could just as easily say that if Elliot plays 60 games next year, posts similar numbers to his past 3 seasons, then the Flames sign him for 5 years @ 6 million per year, and he goes on to be a top three goalie until 2022, that this was the best most ever. But I am not going to.

As I said I wouldn't of traded for MAF with the #6 either - that's just Xmas come early if that goes down.

But I only used that as an example of what could have been the 'better' option in line with your prospect goalie coming through - known commodity in net, known $ & known term. Now you have a starter that wasn't the full time starter on his former team for 1 year then the process starts again whether by FA or trade. Now a lot can happen in a season & for example if Price or another top end goalie goes down then there will certainly be 1 of those options used by that team whether by trading for a soon to be FA or a contracted Goalie like Flower or Crawford. There is also the Dallas dilemma if they can't get either of their goalies going 1 will be out the door in my opinion. There are a few other teams with ? In net so it may not be a huge buyers market next off season as a lot are saying.

Realistically I doubt your GM signs a Bishop type if your prospect is looking good, & if Elliot (as I said before), is good he'll be looking for term & $ - he's not going to miss out on his big chance.

Wouldn't surprise me if these 2nd tier goalies that fulfil the criteria for Vegas are actually traded for by organisations with the intent of putting them up for the expansion draft (although there's probably only 1 team - us, that needs to do that unless MAF waives his NMC as is being bandied around as a possibility). Not sure we even have a 2nd goalie yet for our Baby Pens to go with Jarry (another very well regarded prospect), so we may even be trading for a goalie ourselves??

As I said, this is all in relation to your blogger putting in writing that you guys found your cheap solution in goal. If he had of stipulated it was for 1 year & you would be back in the same position (so was it actually a good move??), as you were 2 months ago then we aren't discussing this!

As I said I really do like the Flames & want you to succeed. I just questioned the decision to trial a 'stop gap' for 1 season when your prospect isn't that far away, but not quite close enough to do that.
- Aussiepenguin

I guess thats were I disagree with you. How is elliott a stop gap and MAF wouldn't be?

save %...I think elliott is better there.
age...I think the age works fine for calgary for what they have coming up. MAF would actually cause an issue like you have in pitts,
price....elliott won there for now. which fits in perfectly as they sort out JG/Moeny. and next year if the performs they can pay more since Wideman is off the books and a few other plugs. If he leaves...oh well. But if all goes well I think he'd prefer staying on a team on the way up where he has the chance to play 2-3 more years and lead in the new guys. the timing is right for him in CGY.

Its the word stop gap that I think is getting you targeted. Hiller and Ramo were stop gaps. we all knew that. scenario is a lot different now and theres stuff growing in the farm behind them.

Engelland was overpaid but we needed a D man and a guy who kept the kids from getting killed ...Engelland isn't good but he ended up being necessary

Raymond was an ok signing ...no one could have predicted the kids playing as good as early ...no one wanted to come to Cakgary so overpaying for a local boy to fill top 6 minutes wasn't terrible IMO

Hiller was great two years ago ...it want crazy to think he could repeat ...it would have been crazy to think he could rebound

Booms is overpaid but he earned it
- Redmile247

I still to this day stand behind the Engelland signing. For what D men make it's still a good deal IMO. He's done everything asked of him and he provides good leadership.

Raymond signing was mehhhh, prob give it a D just cause it was too long. Don't mind giving him a shot but 1 or 2 years max would have been better. I bet he plays well next year in Anaheim.

Agreed on Hiller.

Bouma is overpaid and everyone saw this coming. He is what he is, and he didn't really earn anything IMO. Now he thinks he's a big shot and can party and be late for practice haha. What a bum. I legit think that BT learned his lesson and this is why Colborne was not re-sgined. #buyoutbouma

I guess thats were I disagree with you. How is elliott a stop gap and MAF wouldn't be?

save %...I think elliott is better there.
age...I think the age works fine for calgary for what they have coming up. MAF would actually cause an issue like you have in pitts,
price....elliott won there for now. which fits in perfectly as they sort out JG/Moeny. and next year if the performs they can pay more since Wideman is off the books and a few other plugs. If he leaves...oh well. But if all goes well I think he'd prefer staying on a team on the way up where he has the chance to play 2-3 more years and lead in the new guys. the timing is right for him in CGY.

Its the word stop gap that I think is getting you targeted. Hiller and Ramo were stop gaps. we all knew that. scenario is a lot different now and theres stuff growing in the farm behind them.
- numbear

He's just assuming that Elliot will be gone regardless....

If he plays like he did last year for 60 games why in the hell would the Flames not re-sign him? Trade the prospects away for all I care

I guess thats were I disagree with you. How is elliott a stop gap and MAF wouldn't be?

save %...I think elliott is better there.
age...I think the age works fine for calgary for what they have coming up. MAF would actually cause an issue like you have in pitts,
price....elliott won there for now. which fits in perfectly as they sort out JG/Moeny. and next year if the performs they can pay more since Wideman is off the books and a few other plugs. If he leaves...oh well. But if all goes well I think he'd prefer staying on a team on the way up where he has the chance to play 2-3 more years and lead in the new guys. the timing is right for him in CGY.

Its the word stop gap that I think is getting you targeted. Hiller and Ramo were stop gaps. we all knew that. scenario is a lot different now and theres stuff growing in the farm behind them.
- numbear

We are all saying the same thing, in different ways.

Snowball effect... We had such poor goaltending last year we ended up being a goal or two down before my first beer was consumed... That caused the team to try and create offense which meant D having to jump up and the snowball started to build and gain momentum... no playoffs

In theory BT was able to take a Tender in Elliot that should be a significant upgrade from what we had. The opposite effect is timely saves, players playing the system (whatever that will look like next season) and again in theory more wins. Elliot earns a contract-no need for a MAF or whomever.

If Elliot
Its a win-win

I still to this day stand behind the Engelland signing. For what D men make it's still a good deal IMO. He's done everything asked of him and he provides good leadership.

Raymond signing was mehhhh, prob give it a D just cause it was too long. Don't mind giving him a shot but 1 or 2 years max would have been better. I bet he plays well next year in Anaheim.

Agreed on Hiller.

Bouma is overpaid and everyone saw this coming. He is what he is, and he didn't really earn anything IMO. Now he thinks he's a big shot and can party and be late for practice haha. What a bum. I legit think that BT learned his lesson and this is why Colborne was not re-sgined. #buyoutbouma
- The-O-G

Thats just dumb. Season before he earned that contract. We all thought it was a slight overpay but come on. The dude played most of the season injured and were he healthy I seriously doubt we'd be female doging overly. Is a part of the core? nope but is a heart and soul guy that if healthy can contribute 4th line minutes, yep. Besides if he plays well, for sure he's a part of a deal for something this year...

anyways... more July ramblings... 83 days to go... out!

We are all saying the same thing, in different ways.

Snowball effect... We had such poor goaltending last year we ended up being a goal or two down before my first beer was consumed... That caused the team to try and create offense which meant D having to jump up and the snowball started to build and gain momentum... no playoffs

In theory BT was able to take a Tender in Elliot that should be a significant upgrade from what we had. The opposite effect is timely saves, players playing the system (whatever that will look like next season) and again in theory more wins. Elliot earns a contract-no need for a MAF or whomever.

If Elliot
Its a win-win
- geta02it

Gotta be more like Oilers fans and shotgun one at puck drop.

Gotta be more like Oilers fans and shotgun one at puck drop.
- The-O-G

Freebase

Thats just dumb. Season before he earned that contract. We all thought it was a slight overpay but come on. The dude played most of the season injured and were he healthy I seriously doubt we'd be female doging overly. Is a part of the core? nope but is a heart and soul guy that if healthy can contribute 4th line minutes, yep. Besides if he plays well, for sure he's a part of a deal for something this year...

anyways... more July ramblings... 83 days to go... out!
- geta02it

Haha I know I am hard on him, but that super bowl thing really pissed me off. He had only played 15 games and had only one (frank)ing point to date on the season and he shows up late. He should be the first guy there and the last guy to leave. I agree that he can be a heart and soul guy on the 4th line but we need guys who make $600,000 doing that i.e. Hathaway. Plug him in and take out Bouma and nobody will even notice.

Freebase
- geta02it

The only way to enjoy an Oiler game

I still to this day stand behind the Engelland signing. For what D men make it's still a good deal IMO. He's done everything asked of him and he provides good leadership.

Raymond signing was mehhhh, prob give it a D just cause it was too long. Don't mind giving him a shot but 1 or 2 years max would have been better. I bet he plays well next year in Anaheim.

Agreed on Hiller.

Bouma is overpaid and everyone saw this coming. He is what he is, and he didn't really earn anything IMO. Now he thinks he's a big shot and can party and be late for practice haha. What a bum. I legit think that BT learned his lesson and this is why Colborne was not re-sgined. #buyoutbouma
- The-O-G

While I agree on the colborne part I also think they looked at what Brouwer would bring that colborne wasn't ...if joe ever used his frame as a power forward instead of a center he may have been re-upped and Brouwer may never been acquired

He's just assuming that Elliot will be gone regardless....

If he plays like he did last year for 60 games why in the hell would the Flames not re-sign him? Trade the prospects away for all I care

- The-O-G

I know it won't be popular but if we could get a proven 60+ game starter that has at least 5 years of solid goaltending left I wouldn't be apposed to using one of our goalie prospects to help add another piece

out of right field though.

What about paul gaustad as a 4th liner face-off specialist? he's big/mean and very good on the dot.

rather have him floating on the 4th line then bollig. and makes that 4th line useable clearing a zone