Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

True to form in their "unbiased" reporting, EDM Journal is suggesting there is a strong case that EDM trades for Keith.

That would put a smile on my face.

I'm sure he would waive his NMC to go there, but would they allow him to keep it upon arrival?

He won't go for nothing, so go ahead make the deal.

Make a trade and lose the player for nothing to Seattle?

I suppose it makes sense to protect that stud D Jones, but would the cost be a medically cleared Klefbom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone interested. The NHL just released the compensation tiers for offer sheets this offseason.

 

Can't get my link to work but I imagine its relatively easy to find 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox wins the Norris, yikes! Still a bad trade in my view. 
 

maybe next year, Benny wins the scoring race. Hart! I doubt it, but boy, we had a good one and didn’t get enough for it, in Fox… I get all of the other arguments, you all have your opinion, and are welcome to those ones. I just think we should have traded Fox in its own deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Food for though, for Fox the Canes received basically the exactly same compensation that Bennett returned the Flames. Not sure why that moves the needled especially considering that starting next season the Canes may only have those 2 2nd round picks to show for the trade and the Flames still have Lindholm and Hanifin both signed to very good contracts. 

 

Too each their own for sure but I do not understand why people think Fox would have returned something great to the Flames when we already know what his value was. It seems to me it's just frustration that he isn't a Flame, which is more than fair but also little the organization could do about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Food for though, for Fox the Canes received basically the exactly same compensation that Bennett returned the Flames. Not sure why that moves the needled especially considering that starting next season the Canes may only have those 2 2nd round picks to show for the trade and the Flames still have Lindholm and Hanifin both signed to very good contracts. 

 

Too each their own for sure but I do not understand why people think Fox would have returned something great to the Flames when we already know what his value was. It seems to me it's just frustration that he isn't a Flame, which is more than fair but also little the organization could do about it. 


that’s on the Canes to keep their players. That has nothing to do with the trade itself. Just because we were able to sign the players doesn’t make the deal better for us. 
 

we have nothing to show for Iginla but that was his value at the time and it’s the Flames fault for waiting too long and then drafting the wrong players. It’s on the team once the deal is made to either extend a player or trade then for value.

 

they got good value for fox when they dealt him to the Rangers. I still think it’s what the Flames should have done. I think even then it was common knowledge he wanted to go to NY, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


that’s on the Canes to keep their players. That has nothing to do with the trade itself. Just because we were able to sign the players doesn’t make the deal better for us. 
 

we have nothing to show for Iginla but that was his value at the time and it’s the Flames fault for waiting too long and then drafting the wrong players. It’s on the team once the deal is made to either extend a player or trade then for value.

 

they got good value for fox when they dealt him to the Rangers. I still think it’s what the Flames should have done. I think even then it was common knowledge he wanted to go to NY, no?

 

So seems to me you are assuming or believing that the Flames could have removed Fox from the deal, still completed it, and then dealt him to the Rangers for 2 seconds. 

 

That feels very unlikely to me. Why would Carolina give up all of that cost certainty (again they may have nothing to show for this deal next year) and why would the Flames give up a high end prospect for no reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

So seems to me you are assuming or believing that the Flames could have removed Fox from the deal, still completed it, and then dealt him to the Rangers for 2 seconds. 

 

That feels very unlikely to me. Why would Carolina give up all of that cost certainty (again they may have nothing to show for this deal next year) and why would the Flames give up a high end prospect for no reason?


i don’t get what you’re saying…

 

Hamilton was a true Top2 D RHS and Ferland was no slouch. That should have been equal to a crappy Hanifin who had a lot of negative reviews and only amount to a top4 D. Is a top 2? Debatable. On the Flames, yes. On a contender, no.

 

Lindholm had some pluses, but also someone at the time that was not living up to the projected player he was supposed to be…

 

yes, the Flames should have traded fox in a separate deal. I said at the time of the deal and I will say it again… 

 

the canes made the deal, and it should’ve been up to them to sign or keep both ferland and Hamilton.

 

if it were me, I don’t do the deal if Fox is in it, unless the Canes added more to the deal. I back out. Or the canes add. 
 

the word on  the street was Fox was the real deal at the time of the deal. Maybe they only add another 2nd or 3rd to the deal but in my view, the deal was even without fox in it. To say, “oh well, he wasn’t signing here anyway,” doesn’t cut it…

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


i don’t get what you’re saying…

 

Hamilton was a true Top2 D RHS and Ferland was no slouch. That should have been equal to a crappy Hanifin who had a lot of negative reviews and only amount to a top4 D. Is a top 2? Debatable. On the Flames, yes. On a contender, no.

 

Lindholm had some pluses, but also someone at the time that was not living up to the projected player he was supposed to be…

 

yes, the Flames should have traded fox in a separate deal. I said at the time of the deal and I will say it again… 

 

the canes made the deal, and it should’ve been up to them to sign or keep both ferland and Hamilton.

 

if it were me, I don’t do the deal if Fox is in it, unless the Canes added more to the deal. I back out. Or the canes add. 
 

the word on  the street was Fox was the real deal at the time of the deal. Maybe they only add another 2nd or 3rd to the deal but in my view, the deal was even without fox in it. To say, “oh well, he wasn’t signing here anyway,” doesn’t cut it…

No cause your not getting value for an asset…that’s the issue here, like Iggy, holding on to high value assets too long or dumping an asset in an add on is just plain foolish like the fox deal…this is what Cgy needs to stop in order to contend on a semi regular basis…

 

as for Hamilton vs Hanifin at the time yes Hanifin was he lesser D, but he’s much younger and just hitting his prime…hard to say for sure but it looks like he could end up being the better d over the course of a career.

 

all that being said, as of now Cgy needs to unload this year:

 

Lucic 

Gio

Backlund..

 

In two years:

 

Tanev 

 

After that in 3 years at most they should unload:

 

Minahan

Gaudreau

 

in 4 years:

 

lindholm

Manji

 

in 5 years:

 

Tkacuck 

Hanifin

 

based on current ages, theses should be right around the target ages to move guys for younger prospects and or picks…I doubt they will.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


i don’t get what you’re saying…

 

Hamilton was a true Top2 D RHS and Ferland was no slouch. That should have been equal to a crappy Hanifin who had a lot of negative reviews and only amount to a top4 D. Is a top 2? Debatable. On the Flames, yes. On a contender, no.

 

Lindholm had some pluses, but also someone at the time that was not living up to the projected player he was supposed to be…

 

yes, the Flames should have traded fox in a separate deal. I said at the time of the deal and I will say it again… 

 

the canes made the deal, and it should’ve been up to them to sign or keep both ferland and Hamilton.

 

if it were me, I don’t do the deal if Fox is in it, unless the Canes added more to the deal. I back out. Or the canes add. 
 

the word on  the street was Fox was the real deal at the time of the deal. Maybe they only add another 2nd or 3rd to the deal but in my view, the deal was even without fox in it. To say, “oh well, he wasn’t signing here anyway,” doesn’t cut it…

The guy was 21 years old at the time of the trade, from a pure production standpoint he wasn't far off what Hedman did in his first 3 years.  It seems odd with young players, when Bennett wasn't panning there are a million excuses, Hanifin develops slow in a position that generally develops slower and he's just crappy.  

 

Theres always the alternative of losing for nothing.  If the Flames went out shopping his rights teams are going to clue in that there are signing issues.  I believe Carolina made the deal knowing his intentions.  Maybe he gets hurt his junior year, the ball was really in the Rangers court the whole time do you take the gamble that the Rangers want him after his junior year, because if they were going to wait for his senior year the Flames aren't getting anything by that point.

 

I didn't love the trade at the time and was a big Dougie fan, but we did pretty good in that trade, as much as we think we could get a kings ransom for him the fact Dougie was being shopped around for the 2nd time at the age of 25 I do think that might've raised some red flags, maybe not in terms of teams interested, but in what they are willing to give up.  People need to get over this one. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thefourthperiod.com/summer-trade-watch-2021#.YN3cBNq-pXo.twitter

 

For those that don't want to read the entire article

 

They have the Flames linked to Eichel, they are one of 10 teams they mention.

 

They have the Flames as being in on Taranseko. That may just be them playing off the ridiculous O'Brien Tkachuk-Tarasenko deal though.

 

The Fourth Period also lists Philly and Boston as teams linked to Gaudreau.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, robrob74 said:


i don’t get what you’re saying…

 

Hamilton was a true Top2 D RHS and Ferland was no slouch. That should have been equal to a crappy Hanifin who had a lot of negative reviews and only amount to a top4 D. Is a top 2? Debatable. On the Flames, yes. On a contender, no.

 

Lindholm had some pluses, but also someone at the time that was not living up to the projected player he was supposed to be…

 

yes, the Flames should have traded fox in a separate deal. I said at the time of the deal and I will say it again… 

 

the canes made the deal, and it should’ve been up to them to sign or keep both ferland and Hamilton.

 

if it were me, I don’t do the deal if Fox is in it, unless the Canes added more to the deal. I back out. Or the canes add. 
 

the word on  the street was Fox was the real deal at the time of the deal. Maybe they only add another 2nd or 3rd to the deal but in my view, the deal was even without fox in it. To say, “oh well, he wasn’t signing here anyway,” doesn’t cut it…

 

Ferland was much like a Kassian or Chaisson playing well with top talent.

He wasn't even close to equivalent in value to Hanifin.

A top 4D for Ferland and Fox's rights is about right.

A top 2D for a top 6 RHC C/RW who was not just a offensive player.

 

Assuming Dougie doesn;t ask for a trade, we have to pay him 8-9 to stay.

 

I get the love for Fox, but he could have strung us along for years and said the right things, and we still have to trade him last minute.

And Dougie does what he does in CAR.

 

I think Lindholm is one of the most underrated players around.

He drives play, PK and PP, scores when he shoots, isn;t a flower. 

Dougie doesn;t get you an Eichel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to post in response to all the Flames trade rumors out there along with a few thoughts of my own.

 

I know alot of fans are against the idea of trading Tkachuk. I feel that if he planned on being here long term he would not have forced the deal he is currently on. If Tre can get a trade done for something that works I say get it done. I realize we are not in the best situation to get max value but I think personally that he will end up leaving and right now with one year and atleast one more at 9 mil the team can get some good pieces back. I would avoid trading him to St. Louis unless the offer is the best out there.

In regards to Johnny I think we could get a good return from Philly before the draft that could include there first round pick and maybe Sanhiem and others.

If we do trade away to left wingers without bringing roster players back it would free up cap space and roster spots to add 2 top line players. My suggestions would be Hall on the LW seeing as he had a bad year and will come a bit cheaper than most may expect. On the RW I would look at Palmeri. This would finally fill the RW hole that we have had for years.

Doing this would give Mange more playing time and change the face of the team.

Don't get me wrong I love both Mathew and Johnny but I am sick of hearing about players not wanting to be here. Of course they would not admit it and at this point true or not I personally want to move on.

 

Hall - Lindholm - Palmeri

Mange - Mony - Dube

Lucic - Backlund -  Ritchie

Gawdin - Rudzika - Zary/Pelletier

 

This would be a good start not including the other pieces we would get in the trades. Maybe target Schwartz in the Tkachuk trade.

I know there will be alot of people who disagree with me but at this point I am just sick of hearing the rumors and want to hear a new angle of topic from the media.

Hall at 6 years x 7 mil and Palmeri 5 years x 5.5 - 6 mil would help us down the road with the cap.

We could flip our 12th and 13th from philly to move up or sweeten another deal with one of them. There has been talk of Mony to CBJ Why not send Mony and one of the 12/13 picks for CbJs first rounder and that would move Backs up to second line center and allow Dube, Zary, or Pelletier third or fourth line center. Or make Philly throw in Nolan Patrick in a trade for Johnny.

I know my trades are not well balanced there is always more moving pieces but it is time for a shake up and if we could add the 2 player I suggested it would save money in the long run and open up room for others to progress.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the Flames will explore trading Giordano to a team like NJ that may not have protection issues on their blueline. There are other teams that could fit too, Gio can be dealt to 19 teams without waiving. 

 

I think the optics are better for the organization, you get something for your captain instead of losing him for nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I wonder if the Flames will explore trading Giordano to a team like NJ that may not have protection issues on their blueline. There are other teams that could fit too, Gio can be dealt to 19 teams without waiving. 

 

I think the optics are better for the organization, you get something for your captain instead of losing him for nothing. 

 

What do you think we can get though?

 

My feelings are Mercer, Holtz, Hischier, and Hughes are untouchable.  Likely, all of NJ's draft picks are untouchable as well.  They are still rebuilding next year.  So we are looking at Bratt or Zacha?  Can we get Mercer if we do Giordano + Gaudreau?  From our perspective, Giordano is a goner so he's just a throw in at this point.  Gaudreau without an extension and likely to go to NJ as UFA anyways... if we can get Mercer out of NJ for 1-more year of Gaudreau, then I think that's a win for us.

 

If I was NJ, then i'd rather stand pat for one more year and wait for Gaudreau to hit UFA and then sign him.

 

Gaudreau - Hughes - Holtz

LW - Hischier - Mercer

 

BT's job is to scare NJ into thinking Gaudreau will go to Philly, NYR, or NYI once he goes UFA.  Or even, Gaudreau stays in Calgary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

What do you think we can get though?

 

My feelings are Mercer, Holtz, Hischier, and Hughes are untouchable.  Likely, all of NJ's draft picks are untouchable as well.  They are still rebuilding next year.  So we are looking at Bratt or Zacha?  Can we get Mercer if we do Giordano + Gaudreau?  From our perspective, Giordano is a goner so he's just a throw in at this point.  Gaudreau without an extension and likely to go to NJ as UFA anyways... if we can get Mercer out of NJ for 1-more year of Gaudreau, then I think that's a win for us.

 

If I was NJ, then i'd rather stand pat for one more year and wait for Gaudreau to hit UFA and then sign him.

 

Gaudreau - Hughes - Holtz

LW - Hischier - Mercer

 

BT's job is to scare NJ into thinking Gaudreau will go to Philly, NYR, or NYI once he goes UFA.  Or even, Gaudreau stays in Calgary.

I don’t think the Flames would get much for Gio. They have no leverage as the entire league knows they may lose him for nothing. Maybe you can get a 2nd or 3rd

 

Im sure the Flames would love to get an asset for their captain instead of nothing. Take whatever asset you can. It limits the chance Seattle takes him and flips him, which I’m sure would annoy the Flames.

 

If SEA can’t pick Gio, the Flames aren’t losing much in expansion 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to say it but we would be lucky if Seattle took him. To free up the cap space and allow us to get that roster spot filled after the expansion draft with a younger player would be a win. I like Gio but we all new the last year of this deal would not be in our favor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Flames could do Giordano for Zacha straight up, I would do that trade, but I alike Zacha and think his stats would be better in Calgary. The issue would be that if Zacha is the return, do you protect him over someone else or lose him to Seattle?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

If the Flames could do Giordano for Zacha straight up, I would do that trade, but I alike Zacha and think his stats would be better in Calgary. The issue would be that if Zacha is the return, do you protect him over someone else or lose him to Seattle?

 

 

Color me confused if we trade for Zacha and you think we will probably have to give him up any way why bother does not make sense to me Now if we trade Gio for a ready player and perhaps a pick or a prospect then maybe but to trade just to give that player up any way just doesn't make sense to me? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw a trade suggestion on Bleacher Report:

 

Tkachuk 

for

Konecny, Sanhiem, and the 2021 1st rounder.

 

That gets my Spidy Senses tingling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn’t it be funny if we go for Konecny and Kappo? But then makes a new hole, unless you’re ok with 

 

Mangiapane, Lindholm, Konecny 

Dube, Backlund, Kappo

 

That’s Tkachuk or Gaudreau to Philly or the Rangers.

 

Who would Monahan go for? Another C or some depth? Or do we fill a depth C with a UFA and do Monahan for Reinhart?

 

that might then look like:

 

Mangiapane, Lindholm, Konecny

Dube, Reinhart, Kappo

Lucic, Backlund, Pelletier/Phillips

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

Just saw a trade suggestion on Bleacher Report:

 

Tkachuk 

for

Konecny, Sanhiem, and the 2021 1st rounder.

 

That gets my Spidy Senses tingling.

 

Okay, so that solves a couple of issues:

- future top pairing D, perhaps

- top 6 RW

- eliminates forcing Tkachuk to RW

- 2nd draft pick in this year's draft

- future salary negotiations with Tkachuk removed

 

Creates a few problem:

- salary cap issues dues to Sanheim and Konecny combined

- Gio becomes a blocker unless he plays with Valimaki.

- now we are less of a tough team to play against

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Okay, so that solves a couple of issues:

- future top pairing D, perhaps

- top 6 RW

- eliminates forcing Tkachuk to RW

- 2nd draft pick in this year's draft

- future salary negotiations with Tkachuk removed

 

Creates a few problem:

- salary cap issues dues to Sanheim and Konecny combined

- Gio becomes a blocker unless he plays with Valimaki.

- now we are less of a tough team to play against

 

 


I guess we hope that Gio is taken or traded? 
 

we are already pretty easy to play against. How much difference do those trades make. The reality is, Tkachuk was hard fo play against, but when he’s ineffective he is easy to play against, which seems to be this team’s MO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I don’t think the Flames would get much for Gio. They have no leverage as the entire league knows they may lose him for nothing. Maybe you can get a 2nd or 3rd

 

Im sure the Flames would love to get an asset for their captain instead of nothing. Take whatever asset you can. It limits the chance Seattle takes him and flips him, which I’m sure would annoy the Flames.

 

If SEA can’t pick Gio, the Flames aren’t losing much in expansion 

 

Take the 2nd.  I hope we don't make the mistake of spending a 2nd to have Seattle take Kylington instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bosn111 said:

If the Flames could do Giordano for Zacha straight up, I would do that trade, but I alike Zacha and think his stats would be better in Calgary. The issue would be that if Zacha is the return, do you protect him over someone else or lose him to Seattle?

 

I don't think we can get Zacha straight up but if so, then that's a huge win.

 

We will want to protect him like you said or else we lose him.  This is why I propose we do a 2-for-1 by adding Gaudreau into the mix.  Does that upgrade us to Mercer?  In that case we don't need to protect Mercer and we can protect Lucic or Phillips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

Wouldn’t it be funny if we go for Konecny and Kappo? But then makes a new hole, unless you’re ok with 

 

Mangiapane, Lindholm, Konecny 

Dube, Backlund, Kappo

 

That’s Tkachuk or Gaudreau to Philly or the Rangers.

 

Who would Monahan go for? Another C or some depth? Or do we fill a depth C with a UFA and do Monahan for Reinhart?

 

that might then look like:

 

Mangiapane, Lindholm, Konecny

Dube, Reinhart, Kappo

Lucic, Backlund, Pelletier/Phillips

 

 

No Center means everything is for not.  If we move one or both of Tkachuk and Gaudreau then we absolutely have to return Eichel or equivalent.  Bumping Backlund up to 2nd line Center when he should be bumped down to 3rd line Center is exactly the opposite thing we should do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...