Honestly, we've fielded worse D-cores before. While we have no bonafide #1 D, Andersson/Weegar are a solid top pairing. Kylington with a full training camp under him should round back into form for next season, so is a good #3 with a chance at developing into something more. The rest of them are solid bottom pair guys with potential to be good second pairing guys. Plus we have a handful of other guys like Kuznetsov and Poirier who can and likely will, see some time next season too.
Confirmed with Link: Markstrom (1.875m retained) to NJD for Bahl & 2025 1st round pick (top 10 protected)
- Thread starter Lunatik
- Start date
I won’t disagree about having iced worst groups. For me, there’s a couple things that are keeping me from even saying “that’s an average NHL D core”.
The first is how poor Andersson/Weegar looked as a pair after losing the Hanifin/Tanev pair. I know it’s a smaller sample size, but their performance after losing that insulation (and arguably our best pairing) gives me some hesitation. Like, they got split up, and, among other things, I’m sure their poor performances were a factor in that. They were bleeding chances against.
The second is that there has to be more projection than I’m comfortable with in regards to a possible Bahl/Kylington 2nd pair. We all think Kylington is a great story for coming back, but his play was certainly a let down in comparison to two years ago (understandably so). If he plays like two years ago, sure, that’s a good #3. But almost two years off can be a BIG factor, even with a full training camp and offseason. Bahl, I don’t think, has yet to be an actual #4 and we’re needing to project a decent amount of growth there for him to get there.
It could turn out to be solid, but I have a couple question marks that prevent me from giving it that label right now. But it does look better with Bahl than without.
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
Kylington - Weegar needs to be a thing.
If the Markstrom good, Markstrom bad, Markstrom good, etc. trend continues that first round pick might be a good one.
If the Markstrom good, Markstrom bad, Markstrom good, etc. trend continues that first round pick might be a good one.
Last edited:
Bounces R Way
Registered User
Good to hear Connie give Wolf a vote of confidence today. I don't think it's his net right off the bat but he should be given a lot of rope next season.
A lot to work with there. Kind of a weird split between guys that are all offense or all defense. I think Brew and Solo are maybe our most balanced guys. If the Flames can find two or three decent top 4 guys out of that group that's a good base. They also have a ton of picks over the next two drafts so maybe all these D acquisitions they feel free to go heavy on fwds.
A lot to work with there. Kind of a weird split between guys that are all offense or all defense. I think Brew and Solo are maybe our most balanced guys. If the Flames can find two or three decent top 4 guys out of that group that's a good base. They also have a ton of picks over the next two drafts so maybe all these D acquisitions they feel free to go heavy on fwds.
Turning Mangiapanese
Registered User
- Jun 18, 2011
- 1,563
- 636
Glad to see it finally got done. Would have been an unnecessary distraction going into training camp to have Marky still around. Not because I dislike him but because he clearly (and understandably) was one foot out the door since TDL. Good goalie, good guy, our only genuine starter since Kipper.
Happy with the return as well, wasn't expecting a first rounder to be honest. Bahl looks like an NHLer, however he will be playing more minutes than he should here because of our D-man fire sale. So I expect he'll face some not entirely deserved fan ire. Hope I'm wrong and he steps up big time!
Happy with the return as well, wasn't expecting a first rounder to be honest. Bahl looks like an NHLer, however he will be playing more minutes than he should here because of our D-man fire sale. So I expect he'll face some not entirely deserved fan ire. Hope I'm wrong and he steps up big time!
I think people are forgetting about Miromanov. He looked the best out of all the new acquisitions, and IMO easily in the top 4
Bahl would be a very good bottom pairing guy with Pachal. They'll also likely be paired on the PK.
I feel for Solo though, as he was so close to earning a spot at #6. He's still young though, and will get games this year as the 1st callup. I just don't want to see him be the frequent scratch - let him play big minutes with the Wranglers. We have Hanley to be the 7th guy.
Bahl would be a very good bottom pairing guy with Pachal. They'll also likely be paired on the PK.
I feel for Solo though, as he was so close to earning a spot at #6. He's still young though, and will get games this year as the 1st callup. I just don't want to see him be the frequent scratch - let him play big minutes with the Wranglers. We have Hanley to be the 7th guy.
Welp, seemed like the writing was on the wall. Reasonable return. Maybe Bahl can develop like Zad did and lessen the penalties. It's hard to believe Marks is the age he is as well. We're stocking the picks cupboard as well. Overall I'd give this a pass to above pass.
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,811
Just in case it gets lost in all of the rhetoric... Thank you Marky!
HighLifeMan
#SnowyStrong
- Feb 26, 2009
- 7,448
- 2,768
Are people really still buying the notion that it was Murray who nixed the deal at the deadline? I think he's a cheap prick too, but he just retained on multiple years of Markstrom.. There is zero reason to believe he wouldn't have done so at the deadline. The two teams simply couldn't come to terms on a deal in time.. It happens.
Also we were never getting the 10th overall pick this year. Even if we had acquired the 2024 pick at the deadline it would have had the same stipulations (top 10 protected).
Also we were never getting the 10th overall pick this year. Even if we had acquired the 2024 pick at the deadline it would have had the same stipulations (top 10 protected).
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,811
I saw an interesting comment about a NJD fan saying that he heard Bahl was intentionally targeted. It makes me think Conroy and co. did intentionally target Bahl. Miromanov's name shows up a lot because he played similar role in Calgary to what Bahl was playing for the Devils. But he's not a good indicator of this pattern of targeting specific styles IMO.
A good example is the Tanev trade. At that time, I think a few Flames fans were disappointed in the return, but Conroy commented they had intentionally targeted Grushnikov for his style of play. I think they somehow even hinted they felt Grushnikov was worth around a late first round pick value? If I am not mistaken, Grushnikov should have a play style similar to Bahl. He's defensive minded with some sandpaper.
We've identified that in our system, we have other dmen like this in Hurtig and Kuznetsov. There's lots of tape on the Zadorov-Gudbrason pairing that might be useful in helping these guys develop into decent bottom pairing shut down guys that a team can feel confident in. It's tape full of "dos and don'ts at the NHL level". It'll be interesting for us to see and monitor what happens with Bahl and that entire group of prospects in general.
Huska was known for churning out dmen in the WHL. I don't think it's a coincidence that management has decided to start to build what looks like a dman factory. It's fine that many will be bottom pairing types. Many teams are always looking for those. As long as the graduation success goes up, we are either developing our own depth or we can swap this depth for positional need. It's not much in terms of assets in the short run, but in the long run, accumulating the equivalent of a few extra 2nd and 3rd round picks would be huge towards using those assets for shoring up a team aiming at contention.
It reminds me of Nashville for the last decade seemingly always having excess defensive talent at the right time to swap for positional need. However, we're unlikely to have the elite level excess those guys enjoyed.
I just realized that this pairing is very...
Bahl - Ky
A good example is the Tanev trade. At that time, I think a few Flames fans were disappointed in the return, but Conroy commented they had intentionally targeted Grushnikov for his style of play. I think they somehow even hinted they felt Grushnikov was worth around a late first round pick value? If I am not mistaken, Grushnikov should have a play style similar to Bahl. He's defensive minded with some sandpaper.
We've identified that in our system, we have other dmen like this in Hurtig and Kuznetsov. There's lots of tape on the Zadorov-Gudbrason pairing that might be useful in helping these guys develop into decent bottom pairing shut down guys that a team can feel confident in. It's tape full of "dos and don'ts at the NHL level". It'll be interesting for us to see and monitor what happens with Bahl and that entire group of prospects in general.
Huska was known for churning out dmen in the WHL. I don't think it's a coincidence that management has decided to start to build what looks like a dman factory. It's fine that many will be bottom pairing types. Many teams are always looking for those. As long as the graduation success goes up, we are either developing our own depth or we can swap this depth for positional need. It's not much in terms of assets in the short run, but in the long run, accumulating the equivalent of a few extra 2nd and 3rd round picks would be huge towards using those assets for shoring up a team aiming at contention.
It reminds me of Nashville for the last decade seemingly always having excess defensive talent at the right time to swap for positional need. However, we're unlikely to have the elite level excess those guys enjoyed.
I just realized that this pairing is very...
Bahl - Ky
Last edited:
Ya that’s about where I thought his value was, and it would’ve been fair given the comparables.
Connie did very good with this trade. Seriously, I’m impressed
Qubax
Registered User
You know if the pick is say 7th overall next year that might be good news.
Because it means NJ isn't that great and the following draft the pick wouldn't be protected.
In that scenario ...We'll have Vegas unprotected 1st, Devils unprotected first and our own pick.
We may not get Tij, but dang it we will get Joe Iginla
Because it means NJ isn't that great and the following draft the pick wouldn't be protected.
In that scenario ...We'll have Vegas unprotected 1st, Devils unprotected first and our own pick.
We may not get Tij, but dang it we will get Joe Iginla
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,891
- 8,981
Solo isn't waiver exempt any more, and I don't think he'll clear waivers. We'll likely have 8 defensemen on the roster, I suspect Pachal and Hanley will be the 7-8 guys.
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,891
- 8,981
This seems extremely unlikely. If a 1st and Holtz were offered at the deadline Conroy would have accepted. As Friedman points out, before the Devils upped their offer to a 1st, the offer was a 3rd that could be a conditional 2nd. And like him or not, he's infinitely more reliable than the guys on CP who "reported" Holtz & a 1st.
I can guarantee on this one specifically that the CP posters were correct. I know someone with a source who was saying the same thing
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,891
- 8,981
And I'm laying in bed with Kate Upton, Margot Robbie and the Wendy's girl as we speak
I'm not revealing a source to substantiate an event long past, so you'll have to take it as you will
but that is what was on the table
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,891
- 8,981
If you say so, which I don't believe for a second. I believe that's what the Flames asked for, but there is zero chance NJ offered that. If they did both Conroy and Fitzgerald should be fired on the spot.I'm not revealing a source to substantiate an event long past, so you'll have to take it as you will
Edwards blocked it, nothing to do with Conroy
Edit: Scrolled back through my convo and this was the message received:
---
On Markstrom trade Murray refused to eat any salary on a Holtz trade, apparently.
---
Thus, I was wrong in not remembering the retention. Offer would have been Markstrom retained for 1st and holtz
I believe NJ likely would have put in protections for the 2024 1st at the deadline so likely we would have still ended up with the 2025 pick. Then it’s Holtz vs Bahl analysis now. Aside from that I thought Conroy should have got a future 2nd or 3rd from NJ to account for the retention. I see it as a 1st and young player for Markstrom. Then for me it’s like Fitzy the retention is going to cost you a pick, ask for 2nd settle for 3rd.
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,892
- 7,164
I prefer Bahl to Holtz.
I still think he’s got a chance to be a really valuable piece on the PK and 5 on 5. We’ve got lots of guys like Holtz, the blue line is looking pretty sad right now, although I do like Solo, Brewski and Morin as middle pair guys. Kuz can be a third pair guy too I think.
I still think he’s got a chance to be a really valuable piece on the PK and 5 on 5. We’ve got lots of guys like Holtz, the blue line is looking pretty sad right now, although I do like Solo, Brewski and Morin as middle pair guys. Kuz can be a third pair guy too I think.
Last edited:
Qubax
Registered User
I also prefer Bahl over Holtz.
At the end of the day you only need 6 top 6 defenceman for the end goal of building a championship team.
Just saying both Edmonton and Florida will dress 6 dmen tonight. Ofcourse you need depth beyond that....
...but while I prefer Bahl I'm not sure if we build a championship team that he'd be in the mix on that team. Maybe he would maybe he wouldn't.
But if he developed nicely with a good opportunity maybe we could flip him like we did Zadorov. Potentially recoup a 2nd round pick for Bahl if he has a couple of strong seasons with us.
A 1st and a 2nd for Markstrom is great value imo
