Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Of that list i'd be interested in: Corey Perry, Silfverberg, Coyle,  and Neidereiter (basically the RH shots). I had exploratory interest in Pk Subban, Karlsson, Burakovsky and Galchenyuk but not interested in giving up a ton or giving up Bennett. I personally don't see the value in moving Bennett for another project, i'd rather give Bennett a better opportunity here. 

 

But I do have a lot of interest in all of Perry, Silfverberg, Coyle and Nino. Nino probably the preferred player of this list, unless Perry's contract allows you to get him cheaper. 

 

 

 

I just can't see trading for Perry as a worth while venture, 3 more years at $8.625 is hard to swallow to being with, but then you look at the fact that he is 33 years old and has slowed down a lot the last few years and he was never a good skater to begin with, then you look at the numbers, he has gone from 34 goals 62 points to 19 goals and 53points to 17 goals and 49 points. The hardest thing in acquiring him for me is the NMC, that could really come back to haunt us in the next expansion draft.

 

I keep going back and forth on needing a RHS RW or just needing more scoring regardless of handedness, ideally we get a scoring winger who shoots RH, but I don't think we can limit ourselves based on handedness and go after the best talent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

I just can't see trading for Perry as a worth while venture, 3 more years at $8.625 is hard to swallow to being with, but then you look at the fact that he is 33 years old and has slowed down a lot the last few years and he was never a good skater to begin with, then you look at the numbers, he has gone from 34 goals 62 points to 19 goals and 53points to 17 goals and 49 points. The hardest thing in acquiring him for me is the NMC, that could really come back to haunt us in the next expansion draft.

 

I keep going back and forth on needing a RHS RW or just needing more scoring regardless of handedness, ideally we get a scoring winger who shoots RH, but I don't think we can limit ourselves based on handedness and go after the best talent.

 

I'd only be interest in Perry if salary was covered or Brouwer as involved and the cost reflected the contract risk. I did a look but Perry's 5 on 5 numbers are actually still pretty good, top 6 forward level, and it's the PP that has resulted in the decline in his raw stats. Anaheim is pretty stacked at RS forwrads for their PP, and have started to run things through Rakell/Getzlaf, so I think there is opportunity here to get Perry back to being a 50-60 point player with increased PP production.  Not my first choice but one I think is worth exploring but the cost has to be minimal or salaries traded off. The expansion draft is of small concern, but it sounds like the earliest the expansion draft is expected is 2020 and Perry will only have 1 more year left on the deal so I think that risk is minimized to a certain degree. 

 

See and for me i'm firmly in the need more RH shots. I think the flexibility it gives you in terms of PP, O zone set up and puck movement is necessary in today's game. While I understand the let's just get more talent argument my fear is what your' going to end up doing is giving up a lot of assets and still never reaching the potential they should. I'm just past that idea, I think this team is more in the specific upgrade camp and not the general one when it comes to top 6 forwards and let's move out of the mindset of having to give up so many assets all the time. 

 

 

Share this post


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

 

I'd only be interest in Perry if salary was covered or Brouwer as involved and the cost reflected the contract risk. I did a look but Perry's 5 on 5 numbers are actually still pretty good, top 6 forward level, and it's the PP that has resulted in the decline in his raw stats. Anaheim is pretty stacked at RS forwrads for their PP, and have started to run things through Rakell/Getzlaf, so I think there is opportunity here to get Perry back to being a 50-60 point player with increased PP production.  Not my first choice but one I think is worth exploring but the cost has to be minimal or salaries traded off. The expansion draft is of small concern, but it sounds like the earliest the expansion draft is expected is 2020 and Perry will only have 1 more year left on the deal so I think that risk is minimized to a certain degree. 

 

See and for me i'm firmly in the need more RH shots. I think the flexibility it gives you in terms of PP, O zone set up and puck movement is necessary in today's game. While I understand the let's just get more talent argument my fear is what your' going to end up doing is giving up a lot of assets and still never reaching the potential they should. I'm just past that idea, I think this team is more in the specific upgrade camp and not the general one when it comes to top 6 forwards and let's move out of the mindset of having to give up so many assets all the time. 

 

 

 

I think that NMC could mean that we lose a player we don't want to lose, or that we would need to buy out Perry on the final year of his contract, which could be an expensive proposition in a time where we would need our cap space. I also think this team lacks speed in its forward group and adding Perry slows the forward group down.

 

I think the fact that there is a lack of top end RHS talent available will mean that it will cost more to acquire a top 6 RHS forward.

Share this post


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

 

I think the fact that there is a lack of top end RHS talent available will mean that it will cost more to acquire a top 6 RHS forward.

 

Probably.

 

But i'm willing to pay more to fill a direct need that I think has a greater chance of payoff. I'd rather chase and fill direct needs than to keep rolling the dice on "options". I think the Flames have moved past that as an organization personally, and should get more picky as I think the payoff is greater. 

 

I get the risk on the NMC with Perry and you are not wrong I just think it's very likely you could get an arraignment where he waives. With 1 year on his deal I would suspect he would not be of interest to an expansion club anyway so I'ts not just a massive worry, but one that should be discussed.

 

Not that I think perry has any chance of becoming a Flame because I doubt the Ducks are going to lower their price and allow him to stay in the division. I'd just explore because IMO the contract should mean you get him for cheaper. 

Share this post


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

 

I think that NMC could mean that we lose a player we don't want to lose, or that we would need to buy out Perry on the final year of his contract, which could be an expensive proposition in a time where we would need our cap space. I also think this team lacks speed in its forward group and adding Perry slows the forward group down.

 

I think the fact that there is a lack of top end RHS talent available will mean that it will cost more to acquire a top 6 RHS forward.

 

You would need ANA to retain salary (think Cross suggested that), in which case his salae remaining in the final year would be less than the 7m actual.

Probably somewhere around 4m.  The buyout over 2 years would be more reasonable, assuming we have top talent at that point.  Or you could ask him to waive.

 

Anyway, he's not the first player that should come to mind.  Lots of other choices that may cost more but be a better fit.

Do we have enough depth on D to trade Brodie AND Stone?  I believe so.

At the worst, Brodie should bring back a top 6 winger.  Stone should get something, whether it be a pick or prospect.

 

As far as Bennett goes, Has there been enough positive signs from him to warrant keeping him over trading him?

Even with his struggles, I am loathe to trade him for a reclamation project.  Keep him, if that's the only return.

Share this post


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

 

You would need ANA to retain salary (think Cross suggested that), in which case his salae remaining in the final year would be less than the 7m actual.

Probably somewhere around 4m.  The buyout over 2 years would be more reasonable, assuming we have top talent at that point.  Or you could ask him to waive.

 

Anyway, he's not the first player that should come to mind.  Lots of other choices that may cost more but be a better fit.

Do we have enough depth on D to trade Brodie AND Stone?  I believe so.

At the worst, Brodie should bring back a top 6 winger.  Stone should get something, whether it be a pick or prospect.

 

As far as Bennett goes, Has there been enough positive signs from him to warrant keeping him over trading him?

Even with his struggles, I am loathe to trade him for a reclamation project.  Keep him, if that's the only return.

 

As far as I know retained salary doesn't effect buyouts, buying out Perry before the 2020 season would give us a buyout cap hit of $5.958m for the 2020 season and a cap hit of $1.3m for the season after.

Share this post


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

 

Probably.

 

But i'm willing to pay more to fill a direct need that I think has a greater chance of payoff. I'd rather chase and fill direct needs than to keep rolling the dice on "options". I think the Flames have moved past that as an organization personally, and should get more picky as I think the payoff is greater. 

 

I get the risk on the NMC with Perry and you are not wrong I just think it's very likely you could get an arraignment where he waives. With 1 year on his deal I would suspect he would not be of interest to an expansion club anyway so I'ts not just a massive worry, but one that should be discussed.

 

Not that I think perry has any chance of becoming a Flame because I doubt the Ducks are going to lower their price and allow him to stay in the division. I'd just explore because IMO the contract should mean you get him for cheaper. 

 

I get what you are saying, and to a degree it makes sense, I just see Perry as a player that is going to continue to slow down and I can see his stats continue to drop off a cliff.

Share this post


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

 

As far as I know retained salary doesn't effect buyouts, buying out Perry before the 2020 season would give us a buyout cap hit of $5.958m for the 2020 season and a cap hit of $1.3m for the season after.

actually it does.. the % of retained = the % cap hit of the buyout 

 

Lets use Kessel as an example..(just the 1st that came to mind).. if Pitts were to buy him out , 15% of the cap hit of the buyout would be charged against Toronto

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

As far as I know retained salary doesn't effect buyouts, buying out Perry before the 2020 season would give us a buyout cap hit of $5.958m for the 2020 season and a cap hit of $1.3m for the season after.

 

Interesting, since I can;t find any comps.  I tried using the calculator on Kessel (retained salary), and it showed the original salary as the base.

It said that 15% was Leafs and 85% Pitts, but that doesn't make sense.

 

EDIT - looks like Phoenix beat me to it.  It would be strange to have the retained salary create a buyout cap hit to TO in the case of Kessel.

Share this post


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

 

Interesting, since I can;t find any comps.  I tried using the calculator on Kessel (retained salary), and it showed the original salary as the base.

It said that 15% was Leafs and 85% Pitts, but that doesn't make sense.

right .. so for easy Math.. $1m cap hit, =  $850K to Pittsburgh.. $150K to Toronto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

actually it does.. the % of retained = the % cap hit of the buyout 

 

Lets use Kessel as an example..(just the 1st that came to mind).. if Pitts were to buy him out , 15% of the cap hit of the buyout would be charged against Toronto

 

I stand corrected, thank you.

Share this post


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

 

I stand corrected, thank you.

np!.. so if you really wanna shaft over a team.. trade for a bad contract , make them retain half. then buy him out ..LOL

 

 

speaking of Kessel.. in looking him up as an example , hes got a couple poison pill bonus years in there ...makes him a $8m buyout hit in 20/21 and 21/22.. he just became a lot less desirable in a trade to me  

Share this post


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

 

I get what you are saying, and to a degree it makes sense, I just see Perry as a player that is going to continue to slow down and I can see his stats continue to drop off a cliff.

 

Fair assessment.  We really need to be careful with aging players.  

Gio will be a concern at some point.

Smith is an injury concern.

 

I would look first and foremost at Silfverberg from the Ducks,  His age fits.  He scores goals.  Reasonable deal for another year.

  

Share this post


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

 

Fair assessment.  We really need to be careful with aging players.  

Gio will be a concern at some point.

Smith is an injury concern.

 

I would look first and foremost at Silfverberg from the Ducks,  His age fits.  He scores goals.  Reasonable deal for another year.

  

 

I like Silverberg too, though IMO he is another Frolik, probably not a top 6 player but he would add top 9 depth.

Share this post


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

 

I get what you are saying, and to a degree it makes sense, I just see Perry as a player that is going to continue to slow down and I can see his stats continue to drop off a cliff.

Me too.. i just read recently one of the coaches, may have been Carlyle, saying " he needs to play faster "

that was a flag to me since "playing faster" is apparently our team goal as well..

Until then , I rather liked the idea (with a bunch of retained salary of course )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m more in the camp of get the best player you can regardless of handedness.

 

I think we could get a 20-30 goal LH wing for Brodie straight up, not so sure we could get a 20-30 goal RH for Brodie straight up, but maybe.

 

It takes me back to last summer when we brought in Hamonic. I was more interested in Hjalmarsson or Methot as partners for Brodie that would allow him to play the right side. However with GG being dead set on L/R pairings, BT overlaid for Hamonic 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I like Silverberg too, though IMO he is another Frolik, probably not a top 6 player but he would add top 9 depth.

I've been harbouring that one a couple yrs now. Would never have traded him if I were the Sens.

Needless to say, I like him, a lot.

If Anaheim doesn't quite have the room for him, I'd be all over it.

Buy low potential, for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I've been harbouring that one a couple yrs now. Would never have traded him if I were the Sens.

Needless to say, I like him, a lot.

If Anaheim doesn't quite have the room for him, I'd be all over it.

Buy low potential, for sure.

Like Silfverberg too. Only thing is will ANA move him to us? I know they asked an arm and a leg from us for Andersen when BT inquired 

Share this post


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

Like Silfverberg too. Only thing is will ANA move him to us? I know they asked an arm and a leg from us for Andersen when BT inquired 

Funny you make that comparison. Anderson needed to leave and has been world class.

Silfverberg looks hidden to me, same idea. Buried beneath "stars".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Like Silfverberg too. Only thing is will ANA move him to us? I know they asked an arm and a leg from us for Andersen when BT inquired 

I believe any trade between CGY and ANA will require a 3rd team unknown to the other(as in "you go get this guy and we will give you X" ) .. or limbs will definitely be involved 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I believe any trade between CGY and ANA will require a 3rd team unknown to the other(as in "you go get this guy and we will give you X" ) .. or limbs will definitely be involved 

I only assume Anaheim is hot and heavy on JT, Kesler is questionable for next year. Even if you're James Neil. Does Anaheim get you a Cup? Dallas?

Or Calgary?

Maybe there are better, lesser deals out there?

Pick some pockets.

No more Veys, Gadzics, etc.

Share this post


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

Like Silfverberg too. Only thing is will ANA move him to us? I know they asked an arm and a leg from us for Andersen when BT inquired 

 

A goalie is a cornerstone for a team.  

As sometimes is the case, there is another team ready to pay.  TO got away with a 30th overall in 2016 (Sam Steele) and a 2nd.

Had there been no other team, there would have been the chance of an offer sheet.

 

ANA will make any deal that they feel improves the team, so if they want a player from CGY it will happen.

Assuming of course that both teams want to make a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In spite of Bennett's woes his first three years in the league, and the resultant call to trade him by many, even me.... I've changed my mind if the team moves appreciably towards a more aggressive attacking style similar to what Vegas is playing.  Bennett's style seems like a natural fit for that type of play, and his speed and occasional offensive genius SHOULD really elevate his worth on the team in that scenario.  Therefore I'm taking him off my potential trade chip list.

 

It'll be interesting to see the new style direction, and unfortunate BP will not have a chance to meet with most of the players except the prospects and draft picks at Development Camp.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

In spite of Bennett's woes his first three years in the league, and the resultant call to trade him by many, even me.... I've changed my mind if the team moves appreciably towards a more aggressive attacking style similar to what Vegas is playing.  Bennett's style seems like a natural fit for that type of play, and his speed and occasional offensive genius SHOULD really elevate his worth on the team in that scenario.  Therefore I'm taking him off my potential trade chip list.

 

It'll be interesting to see the new style direction, and unfortunate BP will not have a chance to meet with most of the players except the prospects and draft picks at Development Camp.  

 

He will see the most promising ones (not Fox) at main camp.  He will need to be in tune with Huska's view of the AHL kids.

 

Bennett is a conumdrum.  Can't really tell if he has vision or hockey smarts some nights.  He's been ruined mostly by poor development.  He's on his 3rd coach.  My concern is that whatever he is doesn't fit what the Flames are now nor what they want to become.  If that's the case, then he has to completely change his game.  Maybe a good thing or maybe he just doesn't fit.

Share this post


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

 

He will see the most promising ones (not Fox) at main camp.  He will need to be in tune with Huska's view of the AHL kids.

 

Bennett is a conumdrum.  Can't really tell if he has vision or hockey smarts some nights.  He's been ruined mostly by poor development.  He's on his 3rd coach.  My concern is that whatever he is doesn't fit what the Flames are now nor what they want to become.  If that's the case, then he has to completely change his game.  Maybe a good thing or maybe he just doesn't fit.

the most baffling thing to me about him , and what still keeps me hoping .. is his best games have been when we needed it most .. playoffs 

Peters even mentioned that directly in his initial presser.. that a guy who plays his best in the playoffs is a guy that can be better than hes shown in regular season . i have a good feeling Peters will make him a priority project 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...