Value of: Make Your Proposal for Sean Monahan

[Double Dion]

Every offer in this thread makes us worse... I said that in like post 3 of this thread. I am personally fully against trading Monahan since we just commited to winning now with Markstrom and there is no way we can move him and expect to compete. I digress though, value wise that offer was decent.

Chytil is 21 (just turned it too). He has lots of potential still and would battle Bennett for the 3C role. Lundkvist is an expansion exempt top pair potential RHD. The value in the package is there but the team needs aren't well justified after the Markstrom signing.

I agree with the bolded. The exception I would make is if we can move him for a good RS RW and slide Lindholm over to the middle. The other exception would be a top C prospect coming over that can be a central part of our team, I'd give up the now for the future in that case.

I disagree with the second part. I don't think Lundkvist has top pairing potential and I don't think Chytil would even compete with Ryan for the 4C spot, I just don't see much there. But those are opinions and I could be wrong. People underrate how important Bennett is to our forecheck. He's also a solid 200 foot player and our most physical player.

 

[Mazatt]

I mean Trocheck already has a 31g 75p campaign under his belt. During his time with Florida, these were his scoring paces per 82 games:

57p
54p
75p
51p
54p

Outside of his rookie year and the handful of games he's played as a Hurricane, he's never been worse than a 50-60 point player (he averaged like 59 points per 82 games during his last 5 seasons in Florida). And unlike Monahan, Trocheck was actually the leading scorer on his line during his peak. Adjusting for quality of linemates, I would argue that the two have produced at roughly equal levels over the past 5 years.

I mean, he's been a consistent 50 point guy but the idea of trading him for Monahan is on the basis he improves in a higher role, or develops more and after his massive injury I'm confident he gets there. Also, no shit Monahan isn't going to lead his line in scoring when with a top offensive player???

 

[Mazatt]

To NYR: 1st, Ryan, Rittich

To CGY: Zibanejad

This joke of a proposal doesn't even make sense: hint, they're offering 2 prospects for a 1st for Monahan, Lundqvist isn't with New York anymore, now they have a high level D prospect called Lundkvist. Sort it out man

 

[Double Dion]

This joke of a proposal doesn't even make sense: hint, they're offering 2 prospects for a 1st for Monahan, Lundqvist isn't with New York anymore, now they have a high level D prospect called Lundkvist. Sort it out man

I think everyone who is posting here is aware of that. Lundkvist is essentially Kylington. He's not a Valimaki level prospect. Chytil is not a prospect. He's been in the league for 3 years now. He's a young pro who wouldn't fit into our lineup and is essentially a spare part for the Rangers. What you think is a good deal would result in us giving up Monahan for magic beans. Just like we did with Bouwmeester and Iginla. You need one legit piece coming back in a deal for a good player not 3 middling ones.

 

[Mazatt]

I think everyone who is posting here is aware of that. Lundkvist is essentially Kylington. He's not a Valimaki level prospect. Chytil is not a prospect. He's been in the league for 3 years now. He's a young pro who wouldn't fit into our lineup and is essentially a spare part for the Rangers. What you think is a good deal would result in us giving up Monahan for magic beans. Just like we did with Bouwmeester and Iginla. You need one legit piece coming back in a deal for a good player not 3 middling ones.

I'm not calling it a good deal, but the "You offered this, I don't like it, here's 3 old guys when you offered prospects" is the lamest shit I see here. No effort, no idea to argue against it or the merits of the trade. I wouldn't do the trade if I was Calgary. What I'm saying is your initial response was nonsensical and that, surprisingly, Lundkvist is a well regarded prospect and not the Capitals goalie

 

[Volica]

I'm not calling it a good deal, but the "You offered this, I don't like it, here's 3 old guys when you offered prospects" is the lamest shit I see here. No effort, no idea to argue against it or the merits of the trade. I wouldn't do the trade if I was Calgary. What I'm saying is your initial response was nonsensical and that, surprisingly, Lundkvist is a well regarded prospect and not the Capitals goalie

When people post shit trades to my team I generally try to counter with similar lopsided proposals to kind of drive the point home. Lots of people don’t follow Calgary, I get it, so a lot of the narrative around this team is driven by the most vocal fans and our biggest rivals

Like oh, Calgary wants to dump Mony or Gaudreau; better throw in all three of my spare parts to get this deal done!

 

[Deadly Dogma]

Flames are no win on this board

It’s either Gaudreau isn’t that great of a talent, or Monahan is a product of Gaudreau. Somehow it goes both ways here.

For other fans:
If you want Sean Monahan, come with a comparable top line player from a team that maybe also needs a shakeup. Preferably a right shot. That, or pony up your top prospect (blue chip) centre if your team is on the cusp looking for one more big piece. For all of Sean’s faults, he’s still a centre capable of scoring 30 goals and 70+ points in a standard season. You don’t give those away for the sake of giving those away. Yes his production is heavily influenced by Gaudreau, but you also need to skill to produce at the level.

We don’t need your middle 6 wingers ‘looking for a bigger role’ and we certainly don’t need your 1st round pick as a centrepiece; unless your team is planning on tanking this year hardcore.

trade you Tavares if he would waive

 

[Double Dion]

I'm not calling it a good deal, but the "You offered this, I don't like it, here's 3 old guys when you offered prospects" is the lamest shit I see here. No effort, no idea to argue against it or the merits of the trade. I wouldn't do the trade if I was Calgary. What I'm saying is your initial response was nonsensical and that, surprisingly, Lundkvist is a well regarded prospect and not the Capitals goalie

I wasn't saying it's the same deal. Go back and read the posts in this thread again. I clearly say my proposal is worse, but serves the purpose of highlighting how 3 spare parts don't get you a core piece. A similar trade would be Kylington, Dube and a 1st for Z obviously, but I made it worse to highlight the lunacy of it. Having to explain that to someone is pretty sad.

 

[Barnaby]

I wasn't saying it's the same deal. Go back and read the posts in this thread again. I clearly say my proposal is worse, but serves the purpose of highlighting how 3 spare parts don't get you a core piece. A similar trade would be Kylington, Dube and a 1st for Z obviously, but I made it worse to highlight the lunacy of it. Having to explain that to someone is pretty sad.

I'm not saying you should agree to that but a 1st, Chytil, and Lundkvist for Monahan isn't a laughable obnoxious offer. It sounds pretty clear that you don't know who Lundkvist is. More than likely Buchnevich or ADA would probably be going back to Calgary in a deal if there was a fit.

Chytil most likely settles in as a 2nd line center or wing, Lundkvist is probably at least a quality 2nd pair RD - maybe more, and a 1st has value. Again, not saying Calgary would or should take it, but give me a break.

 

[Double Dion]

I'm not saying you should agree to that but a 1st, Chytil, and Lundkvist for Monahan isn't a laughable obnoxious offer. It sounds pretty clear that you don't know who Lundkvist is. More than likely Buchnevich or ADA would probably be going back to Calgary in a deal if there was a fit.

Chytil most likely settles in as a 2nd line center or wing, Lundkvist is probably at least a quality 2nd pair RD - maybe more, and a 1st has value. Again, not saying Calgary would or should take it, but give me a break.

I've watched him play in the world juniors. Everyone here from Canada knows who Lundkvist is. He's played twice in the WJHC. He really struggled against the top tier teams at that tournament. It doesn't mean he's not going to play, but I certainly wouldn't say he's a top 4 lock. He's the RH Kylington. Good skater, good offensive skill, but struggles defending down low. Buchnevich is a player who I would target. I like his all around game. I would entertain a package around him if there isn't a bonafide 1C prospect or top line RW available and we HAD to trade Monahan. I'm not moving him for a collection of middling assets. I have no interest in DeAngelo. I don't like his defensive game.

I'd do something like Buch, 1st and Miller. I like Miller better than Lundkvist and Buch better than Chytil.

 

[Mazatt]

I wasn't saying it's the same deal. Go back and read the posts in this thread again. I clearly say my proposal is worse, but serves the purpose of highlighting how 3 spare parts don't get you a core piece. A similar trade would be Kylington, Dube and a 1st for Z obviously, but I made it worse to highlight the lunacy of it. Having to explain that to someone is pretty sad.

So, you still fail to get my point? That's pretty sad. Let me break it down:
The 'you make bad trade here is other pieces' is already lame as f***, using pieces completely unrelated is even worse.
You clearly failed to recognize Lundkvist was a d-prospect instead of the 35 year old goalie when you were trying to equate a centre to a centre, pick to pick, etc.

This is not the hill to die on, it's just dumb

 

[Ciao]

Honestly I feel the Flames need to move on from Monahan. What are your offers?

What? Why? Trading Monahan and not packaging on other assets to upgrade to a better 1C is stupid. The team doesn't have any replacements for him and they just spent a lot in FA to signify they aren't planning on rebuilding either. There is no legitimate return out there for him since no one is going to offer a better 1C and he can't be replaced internally. Every single offer here is going to be horrible.

I don't understand the logic of trading Monahan either.

Sean Monahan is not Connor McDavid, for sure, but he is still a pretty good hockey player in an essential position.

If the Flames could trade him with other assets to upgrade his position that would be one thing, but I'm not seeing anything that suggests a better player is available.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

I've watched him play in the world juniors. Everyone here from Canada knows who Lundkvist is. He's played twice in the WJHC. He really struggled against the top tier teams at that tournament. It doesn't mean he's not going to play, but I certainly wouldn't say he's a top 4 lock. He's the RH Kylington. Good skater, good offensive skill, but struggles defending down low. Buchnevich is a player who I would target. I like his all around game. I would entertain a package around him if there isn't a bonafide 1C prospect or top line RW available and we HAD to trade Monahan. I'm not moving him for a collection of middling assets. I have no interest in DeAngelo. I don't like his defensive game.

I'd do something like Buch, 1st and Miller. I like Miller better than Lundkvist and Buch better than Chytil.

I think you are really underrating Lundkvist, he took pretty big strides last season and broke some records in the SHL last year. He was also recently ranked #27 on league wide prospects (prior to the draft). At this point in time I would rate him above Kylington but still below Valimaki

 

[Ciao]

trade you Tavares if he would waive

Sure, from a hockey standpoint that would be terrific for the Leafs, but from a non-hockey point of view I'm not sure there's any percentage in the Leafs even asking Tavares to waive.

It just sends the wrong message from the franchise. He is unlikely to waive, and it would sour the relationship as well.

That said, I would much prefer to have a young Monahan over an older Tavares.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

I don't understand the logic of trading Monahan either.

Sean Monahan is not Connor McDavid, for sure, but he is still a pretty good hockey player in an essential position.

If the Flames could trade him with other assets to upgrade his position that would be one thing, but I'm not seeing anything that suggests a better player is available.

Exactly, there was logic to it prior to the Markstrom signing. trade off Monny and Johnny for futures and do a quick-fix retool. Now it's too late. Free agency or the draft is the only way they are getting someone better. There is no team in the league that says "I think our 1C is too good, we should move him for a lesser 1C and a decent prospect."

 

[HyPnOtiK]

Danaults 2 way game pushes him into the same tier, if not very very close.

It really doesn't though.

 

[blankall]

I think you are really underrating Lundkvist, he took pretty big strides last season and broke some records in the SHL last year. He was also recently ranked #27 on league wide prospects (prior to the draft). At this point in time I would rate him above Kylington but still below Valimaki

That's not something the Flames need. Ahead of Kylington is Valimaki, Andersson, Hanifin, Tanev and Giordano. Even then, I don't see what makes Lundkvist clearly better than Kylington. Kylington had a great year in the SHL before jumping to the AHL too. What records are these that Lundkvist broke?

 

[blankall]

Exactly, there was logic to it prior to the Markstrom signing. trade off Monny and Johnny for futures and do a quick-fix retool. Now it's too late. Free agency or the draft is the only way they are getting someone better. There is no team in the league that says "I think our 1C is too good, we should move him for a lesser 1C and a decent prospect."

Players force trades. Teams rarely want to move #1 centres, but trades involving them happen.

 

[Fatass]

Players force trades. Teams rarely want to move #1 centres, but trades involving them happen.

He’s got three years left in his current contract, right? I don’t see the Flames trading him until (maybe?) the last season, and that’s only if they feel they can’t resign him.
Monahan is a good number one centre.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

What? Why? Trading Monahan and not packaging on other assets to upgrade to a better 1C is stupid. The team doesn't have any replacements for him and they just spent a lot in FA to signify they aren't planning on rebuilding either. There is no legitimate return out there for him since no one is going to offer a better 1C and he can't be replaced internally. Every single offer here is going to be horrible.

Ah, the classic 'we may as well stick to the status quo'. After another mediocre season and early playoff exit due to our top line getting continuously caved in and not being able to score or win a match-up I'm sure we still shouldn't move Monahan because we don't have a good internal replacement!

 

[blankall]

He’s got three years left in his current contract, right? I don’t see the Flames trading him until (maybe?) the last season, and that’s only if they feel they can’t resign him.
Monahan is a good number one centre.

There was some talk about the Flames blowing it up, but Monahan was never really in that conversation. Now that the Flames have just spent a lot of money on a starting goaltender, it's become clear that the plan is to compete for the next two years at least.

The Flames will likely be looking to add at the deadline. They most certainly aren't trading Monahan for a package of lesser players. Centre is their biggest position of need. Trading their best centre for lesser players is the opposite of what they want to do.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

Glass is not top 6 ready and like Valimaki has injury issues, calling one a 1C potential prospect and the other a likely bust is contradictory or bias (since you are an Oilers fan). Theodore is a solid offensive player but he is extremely sheltered with his minutes. Obviously Piet is a good add as he is a Norris contender but Gio won it just 1 year ago. Yes Gio has regressed but with less heavy minutes he should still be one of the best LD in the league. As much as gaining Piet was good, loosing Schmidt hurts them a lot. As for Stone being a top 5 RW, Flames have 2 top 10 LW's that both are arguably top 5. Vegas' goaltending tandem is better but the better starter is a coinflip. I am not saying Calgary is the better team than Vegas but that all your arguments on why Calgary is a bubble team can also be applied to Vegas, yet no one is treating them like that.

Please please stop comparing us to Vegas. Stone is so much better than any of our forwards because he is an absolute beast who can drive a line to win matchups against other teams top players. If we had a SINGLE guy who could do that up front we'd be an entirely different team. On top of that they have 4 lines that play hard and win matchups consistently, we have one line (Chucky-Backlund-whoever) that has been able to do that consistently. Sometimes you can't just compare the roster players 1 for 1 and have to look at the entire team and play style to realize Vegas is a far better team than we are. The reason we can't be compared to Vegas is because they are built with excellent depth from top to bottom and were able to add Stone and Pietrangelo to an already deep team that has demonstrated a winning formula. If we added an elite two-way force like Stone then we would be able to compete against other great teams that just have more firepower than we do. But until then we are stuck in neutral

 

[RasmusAndersson]

I don't understand the logic of trading Monahan either.

Sean Monahan is not Connor McDavid, for sure, but he is still a pretty good hockey player in an essential position.

If the Flames could trade him with other assets to upgrade his position that would be one thing, but I'm not seeing anything that suggests a better player is available.

This is the opinion that confuses me the most. What about Sean Monahan's game and play style do you believe makes him a pretty good hockey player and part of a 'solution'? He is an excellent scorer with a deadly wrist shot for sure, and he can win face-offs. However, he is already slow, only getting older in a league that is getting faster every year. He loses match-ups consistently and is a liability defensively. A straight up liability. Anyone watching him play a full season with playoffs knows he cannot be trusted defensively and cannot be counted on to create offence. He is a similar player to James Neal; excellent offensive IQ and a lethal shot but worthy of being scratched in big fast games when he gets absolutely caved in on the regular. Yes he is a goal scorer but when he is getting out-chanced almost every important game does that even matter? If he is on the top-line he is a defensive liability against other top players, and he cannot be relied on to drive a 2nd line because he is simply a complimentary player. He can't initiate zone entries and movement through the neutral zone because he is not nearly as fast or dynamic as other top-6 players in the league. Sure you can glue him to a guy like Johnny and he'll show up on the scoresheet but we will lose that match-up against other good teams. Sure they will win matchups against Detroit or Ottawa but against good teams that can shut you down he is hopeless. If you throw him on the 2nd line (which is typically our shutdown line) he is a defensive liability. If you throw him on the 3rd line he is way overpaid and still can't drive offence for a line.

I know it is impossible for many fans to imagine life without Monahan's 30 goals, and can always point to the days with Iggy when we didn't have a true 1C, but the reality is he is a liability on this roster. Ideally he is a 2C on a team where the first line handles tough match-ups and the 2nd line can be relied on to score with some creative scoring wingers, but even then he isn't nearly as dynamic offensively as people give him credit for and makes any line worse defensively and in transition due to lack of foot speed. Do we have a perfect internal replacement? Of course not, but is he a part of the solution? In my opinion definitely not. His play style is outdated and his lack of speed and IQ anywhere other than the slot will continue to get worse as he enters his late 20s.

Obviously no team is going to give us a better 1C in a package with Monahan, but there are SO MANY other options out there. An extended Danault? A pick+ prospect in the 10-15 range and 6 mil in cap space? A similar low-end C that could help us win match-ups instead of a guy who can only contribute as a complimentary scorer? A good young C prospect that has potential like Brassard for Zibanejad? We shouldn't just give him away but we should definitely look to move him because I don't think he is part of the solution and I don't see how his play style is conducive to winning if he's given a top-6 C role.

 

[Flamesfan62]

It really doesn't though.

Yes it very much does. Monahan isn’t existent defensively and had a very bad year.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Ah, the classic 'we may as well stick to the status quo'. After another mediocre season and early playoff exit due to our top line getting continuously caved in and not being able to score or win a match-up I'm sure we still shouldn't move Monahan because we don't have a good internal replacement!

God, I really wish you would just go cheer for another team already. We dont have any internal replacements for Monahan and the Markstrom signing was a very clear indication that management has zero intention in tanking to draft one. Also there is not a single GM oit there who would downgrade their 1C for Monahan. Calgary had the 3rd highest GF/GP this playoffs, so they went out and got a top 10 goalie and revamped the d-core. Not sure how that is "sticking to the status quo."