Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

I don't disagree.

I hold out more hope for Villimaki to be a Flame after a year or 2 as coming out of the "Dub" @ least he's used to longer seasons.

Fox I still am iffy on. Unless he signs @ least a tryout contract for the AHL (proves he wants to be in the Calgary organization) after Harvard's season ends I'm afraid he might go the Justin Schutz route. Being short on trade assets I wouldn't be @ all upset if BT used him as 1 of the rare trade chips availabe.

 

Fox is a Flame for now.  He's indicated that he's understands the depth in CGY and wouldn't mind playing in the AHL to learn the pro game.  Maybe just talk, but he is saying the right things.  I'm not sure what the Jultz situation is with him if he leaves college after 2 years.  I may be mistaken, but he could sign with the Flames upon leaving college or wait till August 15th to be UFA.  I think.  He could also sign an ATO with the Heat.  Depends when and if they want to burn a year like with Gaudreau.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Schultz route isn't an option for Fox. Fox has to play his 4 full years of College until he qualifies as a UFA, Schultz qualified after 3 years. 

 

For a guy who is already one of the top dman in college hockey, certainly in terms of production, I have a hard time seeing him sticking it out for 2 more years and passing on an NHL contract, which will essentially be the same everywhere, in a league that he is already basically dominating. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I have to agree that the whole left side-right side think with Brodie is just plain wrong. When Gio went down with injury Brodie played LS with Engelland and probably played the best hockey of his career. Kent Wilson also just did a piece for the Athletic that showed Brodie's decline does not directly correlate with the move to the left side and in fact even started when he played with Gio.

 

The reality is Brodie is he tries to do too much. I think the advantage he had played with Gio is he got away with that and never learned to play within himself and within the system. Gio is one of the best dman i've seen in understanding where he and his partner is on the ice and is so aware that if you go offscript he can react. I think Brodie never really learned to played within himself and then it didn't help that Gulutzan asks for more of a structure played from his Dman that Hartley did, and then it really didn't help that he went from playing with Gio to playing with Wideman, Engelland, Stone and then Hamonic. It's literally been a perfect storm of bad situations that I think has just reinforced bad habits and actually caused him to try and do more, which at the level of pro sports will basically always sink you. 

 

That being said and while I totally understand yesterday was a frustrating mistake I still don't think you are in give away mode with Brodie. I think since the start of this calendar year Brodie-Hamonic have become a solid pairing. Not quite the pair you thought but I also think the Hamonic acquisition was overrated and he's been a poor fit too so that is not all on Brodie. But they've settled in and still playing solid IMO. Then you have the issue of your LH depth behind Brodie. I don't think you want Kulak taking those minutes and I personally don't thikn you ever well. Kylington sure doesn't sound ready so does it come down to playing Valamaki in those minutes as a rookie? I sure like Valamaki but that's a tall ask. 

 

I'm fine discussing a hockey trade with Brodie but the return better be a goal scoring top 6 winger or someone who can repalce his minutes. I know Flames fans have soured on him but the talent is there to still figure this out so you need to be very careful how you move forward with him. 

 

I agree that I wouldn't just give away Brodie, because at the end of the day he is still a top 4 defenseman and those carry value, look at the return for guys like Shattenkirk and Yandle, guys who can move the puck but aren't great in their own end.

 

I just wish we had someone who could handle 20+mins but be a little more safe with the puck. 

 

If you could turn Brodie into Gallagher and a Benn, Morrow or Schlemko I think we would be a better team up front and one of the defensemen you get can play 18 mins and you can bump Kulak up a couple minutes to spell the time lost from Brodie. I also think Hamilton could probably handle a bit more minutes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The Schultz route isn't an option for Fox. Fox has to play his 4 full years of College until he qualifies as a UFA, Schultz qualified after 3 years. 

 

For a guy who is already one of the top dman in college hockey, certainly in terms of production, I have a hard time seeing him sticking it out for 2 more years and passing on an NHL contract, which will essentially be the same everywhere, in a league that he is already basically dominating. 

 

Thanks for that.  I wasn't sure if he had to go through the full cycle or not.  

SInce you pointed it out, then I can't see him doing anything but signing in CGY.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I agree that I wouldn't just give away Brodie, because at the end of the day he is still a top 4 defenseman and those carry value, look at the return for guys like Shattenkirk and Yandle, guys who can move the puck but aren't great in their own end.

 

I just wish we had someone who could handle 20+mins but be a little more safe with the puck. 

 

If you could turn Brodie into Gallagher and a Benn, Morrow or Schlemko I think we would be a better team up front and one of the defensemen you get can play 18 mins and you can bump Kulak up a couple minutes to spell the time lost from Brodie. I also think Hamilton could probably handle a bit more minutes.

 

I could get behind it as well just depending on the return. I'm not saying you can't do it, I just think the trend (not necessarily on here) sometimes is that the Flames need to get rid of Brodie at all costs and I don't agree with that at all. You need to make a smart hockey trade if you want to move. 

 

personally I think the focus should be on moving Stone and getting Andersson up here but that is me. 

Share this post


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

 

Thanks for that.  I wasn't sure if he had to go through the full cycle or not.  

SInce you pointed it out, then I can't see him doing anything but signing in CGY.  

 

It gets a ton of press but it doesn't happen too often as it doesn't make alot of sense. The only way it makes sense is if you really don't want to play for the organization that drafted you and I would think the flames would likely know that by now. 

 

I know Vesey did it, but look how well that's worked out for him.... Fox's best route is with the Flames. 

Share this post


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

 

I could get behind it as well just depending on the return. I'm not saying you can't do it, I just think the trend (not necessarily on here) sometimes is that the Flames need to get rid of Brodie at all costs and I don't agree with that at all. You need to make a smart hockey trade if you want to move. 

 

personally I think the focus should be on moving Stone and getting Andersson up here but that is me. 

 

See and I think Stone has been just fine in his role, I think he provides a physical edge that I was expecting from Hamonic but that we don't have anywhere else on the back end. 

 

I also am not sold on Andersson myself and I wouldn't have a problem using him in a trade to improve the current roster, but I realize that I am in the minority on that line of thought.

 

I wouldn't be against moving Stone and bringing up Andersson, I just don't think it improves the roster that much I don't think you will get much in return for Stone. Probably something like a 3rd round pick at most or another similar contract like Zack Smith from Ottawa, and I don't think that is a very good deal for Calgary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JTech780 said:

 

See and I think Stone has been just fine in his role, I think he provides a physical edge that I was expecting from Hamonic but that we don't have anywhere else on the back end. 

 

I also am not sold on Andersson myself and I wouldn't have a problem using him in a trade to improve the current roster, but I realize that I am in the minority on that line of thought.

 

I wouldn't be against moving Stone and bringing up Andersson, I just don't think it improves the roster that much I don't think you will get much in return for Stone. Probably something like a 3rd round pick at most or another similar contract like Zack Smith from Ottawa, and I don't think that is a very good deal for Calgary.

 

And I do respect you aren't as high on Andersson as I am.

 

Stone has brought a physical presence but for me I don't like his foot speed and I think he just makes sooo many poor reads in his own zone that I'm just not at all a fan of his. I'd gladly give up the physical play to get a smarter player back there but you are right Stone is going to be a tough move which is pretty unfortunate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some rumors today that teams inquiring about Erik Karlsson are being asked to take Bobby Ryan's contract too.

 

There is a lot of risk there, but I wonder if trading a package for Karlsson and sending Brouwer for Ryan is worth the risk. I also wonder if we are seriously looking at Karlsson if Hamilton has to be the main piece going back the other way. 

 

Karlsson would be an upgrade on Hamilton in just about every way except contract, the risk of losing Karlsson to UFA or having to pay him 8x$10m after that is kind of scary, plus having Ryan's $7.25m on the books for 4 more years would make that trade pretty difficult. Add to that that we are going to have to re-up Tkachuk at North of $6m soon. 

 

But man Karlsson is so dynamic and such a difference maker that it would be worth contemplating.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No thanks for me. 

 

Flames already went the aging former superstar route at RW. Don't bother with a 2nd one and I actually think Jagr was a better fit than Iginla. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

And I do respect you aren't as high on Andersson as I am.

 

Stone has brought a physical presence but for me I don't like his foot speed and I think he just makes sooo many poor reads in his own zone that I'm just not at all a fan of his. I'd gladly give up the physical play to get a smarter player back there but you are right Stone is going to be a tough move which is pretty unfortunate. 

Do you think Stone and Bennett would get you Hoffman ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

Thoughts?

 

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

No thanks for me. 

Flames already went the aging former superstar route at RW. Don't bother with a 2nd one and I actually think Jagr was a better fit than Iginla. 

NO #2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Do you think Stone and Bennett would get you Hoffman ?

 

Seems like it should be in the ballpark. I struggle to see Hoffman going for more but also don't see where Stone fits for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I'm not sure which players you mean but I foresee Stajan finishing the season here and Brouwer will have to be dealt with in the offseason. I will be surprised to see Versteeg make it back.

I would like to see a simple shake up from within by moving Tkachuk with Gaudreau and Monahan, Bennett with Backlund and Frolik and Ferland with Jankowski and Lazar.

Versteeg is set to see his doctor end of March. He won't get any "marching orders" (bad pun I know) until then.

Share this post


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

 

Seems like it should be in the ballpark. I struggle to see Hoffman going for more but also don't see where Stone fits for them. 

 

The latest rumors have the Sens maybe pulling Hoffman off the market as they like the chemistry between him and Duchene. That could just be a ploy to drive up prices though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Versteeg is set to see his doctor end of March. He won't get any "marching orders" (bad pun I know) until then.

 

He is seeing the surgeon at the end of this month, and then he will go from there. He was skating today before the optional skate this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

The latest rumors have the Sens maybe pulling Hoffman off the market as they like the chemistry between him and Duchene. That could just be a ploy to drive up prices though.

 

With two years left that is smart. I had read they wanted prospects so I got hopefully but the smart move on Hoffman is to set the price high and wait for a team to come up. No need to rush. 

Share this post


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

 

Seems like it should be in the ballpark. I struggle to see Hoffman going for more but also don't see where Stone fits for them. 

I thought I saw where they might move Ceci or if they pull the big move of trading Karlsson Then Stone could work. Just spitballing.

Share this post


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

 

With two years left that is smart. I had read they wanted prospects so I got hopefully but the smart move on Hoffman is to set the price high and wait for a team to come up. No need to rush. 

 

I think moving Dion, really relieved some salary pressure for Dorion, so now there isn't as much pressure to move a guy like Hoffman. 

 

I think they are trying to find ways to creatively move Ryan at this point. I have no idea how you move that contract. He has regressed so much in such a short period of time. Ryan from 3 or 4 years would have been exactly what we needed, now I'm not so sure, though he does have 20 points in 39 games, which isn't terrible. If you could rid yourself of Brouwer it might be something to look at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think moving Dion, really relieved some salary pressure for Dorion, so now there isn't as much pressure to move a guy like Hoffman. 

 

I think they are trying to find ways to creatively move Ryan at this point. I have no idea how you move that contract. He has regressed so much in such a short period of time. Ryan from 3 or 4 years would have been exactly what we needed, now I'm not so sure, though he does have 20 points in 39 games, which isn't terrible. If you could rid yourself of Brouwer it might be something to look at.

 

The bigger scare with my and Ryan is the NMC and the pending Seattle expansion draft. Would cost the Flames likely a good young player at that point.

 

I think you have to pass. He looked good in the playoffs and still does at time and his skill set fits, but that is just such a bad contract...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a sure fire improvement, but Anton Slepyshev has looked really good in recent games.

 

Doubt EDM would even trade him to us, or if they would be willing the price would likely be high.

 

Anyway, he doesn't have a ton of value, so I'm not too sure Edmonton can be too picky where they send him. His career numbers are very similar to Soshnikov's and he went for a 4th. 

 

Slepyshev 17 points in 80 career games, Soshnikov 14 points in 70 career games.

 

Again, not a sure fire improvement or maybe not even an improvement at all. I've just noticed him in a positive way in recent Oiler games I've watched, he has good size, decent hands and a fairly good shot. If we could get him for a 4th it may be worth it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JTech780 said:

There have been some rumors today that teams inquiring about Erik Karlsson are being asked to take Bobby Ryan's contract too.

 

There is a lot of risk there, but I wonder if trading a package for Karlsson and sending Brouwer for Ryan is worth the risk. I also wonder if we are seriously looking at Karlsson if Hamilton has to be the main piece going back the other way. 

 

Karlsson would be an upgrade on Hamilton in just about every way except contract, the risk of losing Karlsson to UFA or having to pay him 8x$10m after that is kind of scary, plus having Ryan's $7.25m on the books for 4 more years would make that trade pretty difficult. Add to that that we are going to have to re-up Tkachuk at North of $6m soon. 

 

But man Karlsson is so dynamic and such a difference maker that it would be worth contemplating.

I think your dreaming and scheming are getting the best of you. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

And I do respect you aren't as high on Andersson as I am.

 

Stone has brought a physical presence but for me I don't like his foot speed and I think he just makes sooo many poor reads in his own zone that I'm just not at all a fan of his. I'd gladly give up the physical play to get a smarter player back there but you are right Stone is going to be a tough move which is pretty unfortunate. 

 

I think that Stone has dragged down Kulak a bit.  I like Kulak and find him making smart decisions with the puck under pressure.  He makes the odd wrong choice, which is understandable.  Stone looks too slow at times.  He doesn't get beat physically as much as Brodie does, but he also can't skate out of trouble.  I would just as soon get Andersson into games now and you always can put Stone back in every couple of games.  Really Stone is there in case Hamonic or Hammy goes down, in which case I am none too confident.

 

A RHS RD should get you something more than a 3rd.  We have depth there, so losing Stone isn't going to hurt that much.If you go by fancy stats, I believe he is the worst D-man of the bunch.  Even when he played with Brodie last year, they were worse than Wideman's.  What does tha prove?  Not much, but the eye test isn;t positive to me either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not big on moving Brodie and definitely not big on obtaining Karlsson.

I see Brodie and Karlsson equal defensively.

Both are known for give aways.

Karlsson twice the offensive output of Brodie but twice the cap.

I don't see either thriving under GG.

Under a different system and coach I could see Brodie improving offensively making him an absolute bargain in comparison to Karlsson.

 

  • Like 1

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...