Speculation: Armchair GM 2024-25 Season, Craig Conroy's Can Do Calgary Flames

[Kielbasa]

Fun fact: Frost has already had a better season in his career (19-26-46) than Lindy’s best season was prior to being traded to the Flames (16-28-44) and their stats are virtually identical this season. You could argue that Lindy brings a defensive pedigree that Frost isn’t really known for, but is that really worth the extra $5.65M per season for Boston to be in the exact same place in the standings as Calgary? Lindy’s one season riding shotgun to Johnny and Chucky was the outlier that gave the sense he was a 1B capable when he is probably better suited as a middle-six. Cozens had his first 30-goal season at age 22, which was miles better than Lindy’s season at the same age and he still makes almost a milli less. What tf has Backs proven? He’s literally been the definition of mid for his entire career. You’re not going to convince me that Lindy-Naz-Backs is any better than Naz/Zary-Frost-Cozens, and we had one of our best offensive seasons ever with the former, plus it makes the Flames younger, and keeps the cost controlled moreso than if Conny were to throw top dollar at the first 1A to hit the market. Re-up Frosty on a three year bridge deal for like $3-4M per, and suddenly you have a decent window of time with versatile centers on every line.

As for Raz, it makes zero sense to re-up him for 6-8 years (and you know he’ll want that term) when RHDs are something we actually have an over abundance of, and when he’d likely fetch a 1st, or a 2nd in a deal like the one I proposed for Cozens. Not sure how you can consider that “gutting the defense” when Bahl-Weegar and Solo-Pachal could have the 1st and 3rd pairings on lock. Any two of Poirier, Kuznetsov, Parekh, Brzu, and Grush would undoubtedly be better than Bean, Barely, and Miro have been for us this year. Dealing Raz, either for a package that includes Cozens, or for another 2026 1st is just smart asset management.

First of all, that is Backlund libel. The man has finished top 10 in Selke voting three times. Just because he doesn't put up as many points, now Cozens is the better player? I get that he's a little cooked now, but that wasn't the case in 2022 when the decision was made.

Honestly, I get the sense we rate players very differently. I just can't get onboard with tossing any prospect in the AHL straight onto the second pair without a NHL proven D partner. That's bad development. Bruzstewicz? Dude hasn't even finished his rookie AHL season!

 

[Darth Vladar]

First of all, that is Backlund libel. The man has finished top 10 in Selke voting three times. Just because he doesn't put up as many points, now Cozens is the better player? I get that he's a little cooked now, but that wasn't the case in 2022 when the decision was made.

Honestly, I get the sense we rate players very differently. I just can't get onboard with tossing any prospect in the AHL straight onto the second pair without a NHL proven D partner. That's bad development. Bruzstewicz? Dude hasn't even finished his rookie AHL season!

Backlund libel? lol the Flames have made the playoffs a grand total of five times in his now sixteen seasons in the NHL, and only ever made it to the second round three of those five times. That is mid as mid can be. He might be valuable as a role player say, as the fourth line center as his career winds to a close, but ain’t no way in hell that man justifiably gets another Selke vote. I can’t say Cozens is the better player because he is twelve years younger, but yeah it’s worth noting that he’d already trumped Backs’ best season at 22 years old.

Re: the D, I didn’t mean hang these kids out to dry. Just that we literally have three RHD studs with arguably top-four ceiling, and another one on the left in Morin (two if you include Poirier). We’ve seen a 20-year old 62nd overall pick Lane Hutson flirt with NHL history straight out of college, with literally zero time as a pro. Not saying we should expect any of our three guys to do what he’s done, but there should be at least the one spot reserved for whichever of them has the best camp, and locking two of those right side spots down with Raz and Pachal for the next 6-8 years make it less feasible that we do so. Factor in that Raz could fetch us another 1st we could use to improve in another area.

I say lock that bottom pairing in place with Solo and Patches, play one of the studs with Bahl and the other with Weegar, and let the chips fall where they may. Parekh typically plays left side anyways, and Brzu usually plays on the right, so why not roll with that to start:

Parekh - Weegar
Bahl - Brzu/Poirier
Solo - Patches

Morin, Mews, Grush, Kuznetsov, Jamieson, and Aspirot would be holding down a stacked asf Wranglers D corps. And we’d be another 2026 1st rounder richer from moving Raz (or 2nd if we deal him for Cozens, plus an RHD prospect like Brunet!)

Morin - Brunet*
Kuzy - Mews
Aspy - Grush
Jamieson

 

[Volica]

Andersson paired with Dahlin today. Common Dahlin, convince the man Buffalo on the way up and to go play with him

(For the record I would prefer one of the younger prospect centers than Cozens, although with another piece cozens would do)

That coupled with a tough schedule could be a “we played well but ultimately come up short” and back down to a better draft pick and the rebuild continues

Byram has been Dahlin’s partner. I'd have to think Calgary would probably want to pull the trigger on that.

 

[Figgy44]

First of all, that is Backlund libel. The man has finished top 10 in Selke voting three times. Just because he doesn't put up as many points, now Cozens is the better player? I get that he's a little cooked now, but that wasn't the case in 2022 when the decision was made.

Honestly, I get the sense we rate players very differently. I just can't get onboard with tossing any prospect in the AHL straight onto the second pair without a NHL proven D partner. That's bad development. Bruzstewicz? Dude hasn't even finished his rookie AHL season!

I think get where @Darth Vladar is coming from though. The contingency plan is 4x 2C if we can't get a bonafide 1C. That's valid.

But I also assume you're saying that if we can get 4x 2C, just pay the price to get a 1C.

Is that correct? If so, you're talking same page different paragraph. I'm pretty sure @Darth Vladar isn't saying that we should settle with what we have right now for C. I'm saying that he perceives that after two drafts, if we don't have a 1C, then go back to jack of all trades backbone.

I think he's talking contingency, not primary plan. I think you're talking primary plan, not contingency. TBH, I think the two of you are mostly agreeable.