Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bosn111 said:

 

As I said, I don't necessarily suggest trading him. I do not consider it to be crazy to consider the option of trading him, just not the direction most people would go. If trading him for a player who is similar in level of play, while different stylistically would be a reasonable option. Trading him for a player of equal skill but different style who costs less, is signed long term and gets you an added draft pick would be a win and should not be shrugged off. I would happily trade Gaudreau for Mackinnon who is bigger, younger, more relentless on the puck, lower cap hit, 2 years younger and signed for an extra season. If the Avs would throw in a draft pick on top of that, you are looking at a no brainer trade.

 

If you consider that Johnny has a history of getting shut down offensively when teams take away his space, while Mackinnon drives the play and will play more physical (just look at our playoff series), he is a RH shot C, then you you cannot say that trading Johnny is crazy. While it is 99% unlikely that Colorado would consider this trade, You can't deny that while maybe not an upgrade himself, MacKinnon was better in goals, equal in points, better in playoffs, more physical, bigger, cheaper, younger and signed longer then he is a least equal and may actually be better suited for the Flames and how they want to play. Straight up I would make that trade, if Colorado xadd a prospect, another piece or a draft pick and you almost have to make that trade.

 

I don't know anyone who wouldn't take McDavid or Kucherov straight up for Johnny. 

 

Nobody is suggesting moving Johnny for picks, simply suggesting that Johnny COULD be moved for the right trade that helps the team now and in the future.

 

Again, just pointing out that trading Johnny may not be a popular notion, but it is not crazy either if you get the right return.

I see so you think COL would have to give us a pick on top of MacKinnon (hypothetically of course) LOL not a chance. I would give up Gaudreau in a heartbeat for C like McKinnon but I'm not sure I would for Hall.

Treliving isn't trading Gaudreau and the teams you picked as example aren't trading McDavid or Kucherov either.

The Flames and Treliving have been building tis young core for awhile now and I don't think you go trading away your best core piece now. As a GM you find ways to try and compliment your core. Gaudreau isn't the problem, having a powerful 2nd line, 3rd and 4th line is what's required. Give the opposition other challenges to consider during the course of a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Johnny for Hall would be a disaster, I really don't get why it keeps coming up.  I understand that Johnny and Hall have comparable skill sets, but Hall is on an expiring contract and will command 8 or 9m + in a year's time, plus he could just walk away at that point.  Oh, and he's only played more than 70 games 4 times out of 8 seasons (excluding the lockout), and is coming off an extremely shortened season as well.  50/50 chance he misses significant time during the season.  Johnny has 2 more years than Hall at a bargain price.  If we were looking to sign him today, his contract would start at 10M most likely.  So if we were to Trade Johnny, we better be getting:

 

a) An equal talent at comparable contract length and cost (not sure that exists at the moment, Barkov is probably closest)

b) A better or younger talent that we can control for longer but the contract price is higher (Marner for example)

c) A top level young player coming into his own soon + a high draft pick (Nico Hirschier + 1st)

 

I get that these trades are unlikely, but that's kind of the point.  If you can't get something like I have suggested here, then you hang on to him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said I had to have a pick added or that they would ask for one. I said I would trade the two straight across in a heartbeat. I did say IF the Avs were to offer a draft pick on top of Mackinnon to get Gaudreau (not that they would) then the trade would be an absolute no brainer and you do it in a heartbeat.

 

The whole point of the post was that Johnny is not untouchable if you get the correct return so suggesting trading him is not crazy. If you suggest trading Johnny for an over the hill grinder with a long history of injury at an excessive price point, then that is crazy.

 

If you are going to comment on my posts, please read them in full and don't misquote them. The specific line you seem to be looking at says and I am copying it word for word "If the Avs would throw in a draft pick on top of that, you are looking at a no brainer trade." Whereas the line immediately preceding that one states "I would happily trade Gaudreau for Mackinnon who is bigger, younger, more relentless on the puck, lower cap hit, 2 years younger and signed for an extra season." Obviously stating the straight across works for me. I repeated myself in the following paragraph saying the exact same thing "Straight up I would make that trade, if Colorado xadd a prospect, another piece or a draft pick and you almost have to make that trade." 

 

Why take offence with me suggesting Kucherov or McDavid. Off course neither team would trade them, nor did I say they would, nor did I suggest the Flames go asking about one or the other. Again the whole point comes down to the fact that IF the Oilers were were to offer McDavid for Gaudreau straight across, you jump on that trade in an instant even with his huge contract. I was simply stating that at the right price, Gaudreau could and would be traded NOT that he should be shopped around. 

Share this post


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

I never said I had to have a pick added or that they would ask for one. I said I would trade the two straight across in a heartbeat. I did say IF the Avs were to offer a draft pick on top of Mackinnon to get Gaudreau (not that they would) then the trade would be an absolute no brainer and you do it in a heartbeat.

 

The whole point of the post was that Johnny is not untouchable if you get the correct return so suggesting trading him is not crazy. If you suggest trading Johnny for an over the hill grinder with a long history of injury at an excessive price point, then that is crazy.

 

If you are going to comment on my posts, please read them in full and don't misquote them. The specific line you seem to be looking at says and I am copying it word for word "If the Avs would throw in a draft pick on top of that, you are looking at a no brainer trade." Whereas the line immediately preceding that one states "I would happily trade Gaudreau for Mackinnon who is bigger, younger, more relentless on the puck, lower cap hit, 2 years younger and signed for an extra season." Obviously stating the straight across works for me. I repeated myself in the following paragraph saying the exact same thing "Straight up I would make that trade, if Colorado xadd a prospect, another piece or a draft pick and you almost have to make that trade." 

 

Why take offence with me suggesting Kucherov or McDavid. Off course neither team would trade them, nor did I say they would, nor did I suggest the Flames go asking about one or the other. Again the whole point comes down to the fact that IF the Oilers were were to offer McDavid for Gaudreau straight across, you jump on that trade in an instant even with his huge contract. I was simply stating that at the right price, Gaudreau could and would be traded NOT that he should be shopped around. 

Nice thing about forums and pretend GMing we can propose anything we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I have with trading a key piece from the team is you rarely end up better.

BOS trades Jumbo Joe for lesser lights.

BOS trades Kessel for what turned into Sequin and Hamilton.

BOS trades Hamilton for picks.

Are they better becuase of it?

 

Jumbo Joe is probably as close to a franchise player as Gaudreau.

I doubt trading JH gets you anything that makes your team better.

The old saying goes, the team that gets the best player wins the trade.

The Kessel trade could have been a lot worse for BOS than Seguin and Hamilton.

 

Propose all the trades you want, but don't be shocked if some are shot down; that's what we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Roslovic would be a great pickup.

 

Not sure what he would cost.

 

Does Jankowski for Roslovic work or do we need to add?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GM_3300 said:

Nice thing about forums and pretend GMing we can propose anything we want.

 

Yes we can.  But don't be fooled, the reals GMs play pretend and "what if" scenarios like we do.  And, they should.

Share this post


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

 

Why take offence with me suggesting Kucherov or McDavid. Off course neither team would trade them, nor did I say they would, nor did I suggest the Flames go asking about one or the other. Again the whole point comes down to the fact that IF the Oilers were were to offer McDavid for Gaudreau straight across, you jump on that trade in an instant even with his huge contract. I was simply stating that at the right price, Gaudreau could and would be traded NOT that he should be shopped around. 

 

And I think we've done well to know, McDavid and Kucherov are untouchables.  

 

Hall -> basically said he won't sign long term with NJ.

Marner -> Leafs were in cap trouble.

Kessel -> reportedly being shopped.

 

Suggesting these returns is valid discussion.  Chance of it happening is less than 5% but the discussion needs to happen 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ABC923 said:

Trading Johnny for Hall would be a disaster, I really don't get why it keeps coming up.  I understand that Johnny and Hall have comparable skill sets, but Hall is on an expiring contract and will command 8 or 9m + in a year's time, plus he could just walk away at that point.  Oh, and he's only played more than 70 games 4 times out of 8 seasons (excluding the lockout), and is coming off an extremely shortened season as well.  50/50 chance he misses significant time during the season.  Johnny has 2 more years than Hall at a bargain price.  If we were looking to sign him today, his contract would start at 10M most likely.  So if we were to Trade Johnny, we better be getting:

 

a) An equal talent at comparable contract length and cost (not sure that exists at the moment, Barkov is probably closest)

b) A better or younger talent that we can control for longer but the contract price is higher (Marner for example)

c) A top level young player coming into his own soon + a high draft pick (Nico Hirschier + 1st)

 

I get that these trades are unlikely, but that's kind of the point.  If you can't get something like I have suggested here, then you hang on to him.

 

Completely agree. 

 

Marginal/debatable upgrade from Gaudreau to Hall at the risk Hall leaving via UFA next summer.  This isn't Derozan for Kawhi Leonard.  There's very little difference in production from Gaudreau to Hall.

 

And Hall's new contract is going to be $9-mil+ if he stays.  Gaudreau is still on a value contract for 3 years.  I'm all for trading Gaudreau but not for Hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t post the tweet as I’m on my phone, but Vancouver TSN reporters are saying the Canucks are pushing really hard for Zucker.

 

Hard to see BT landing him without the 1st moving

Share this post


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

Can’t post the tweet as I’m on my phone, but Vancouver TSN reporters are saying the Canucks are pushing really hard for Zucker.

 

Hard to see BT landing him without the 1st moving

 

It's nice that VAN is pushing to get him.

For one thing, who have they got even worth what Frolik is?

Pearson probably is closest.

For another, why would Zucker want to go there?

 

It could very well be Bennett by himself going for Zucker.

Frolik could be used in another deal.

Or maybe Roslovic for Bennett.

Frolik and Gillies for Zucker.

Lord knows we could use another RHS (Roslovic)

Share this post


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

 

Completely agree. 

 

Marginal/debatable upgrade from Gaudreau to Hall at the risk Hall leaving via UFA next summer.  This isn't Derozan for Kawhi Leonard.  There's very little difference in production from Gaudreau to Hall.

 

And Hall's new contract is going to be $9-mil+ if he stays.  Gaudreau is still on a value contract for 3 years.  I'm all for trading Gaudreau but not for Hall.

Totally get that , If  they were to make that trade, an extension would need to be a condition 

Share this post


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

 

It's nice that VAN is pushing to get him.

For one thing, who have they got even worth what Frolik is?

Pearson probably is closest.

For another, why would Zucker want to go there?

 

It could very well be Bennett by himself going for Zucker.

Frolik could be used in another deal.

Or maybe Roslovic for Bennett.

Frolik and Gillies for Zucker.

Lord knows we could use another RHS (Roslovic)

I'm still really curious what made ours fall through to the point BT was steamed .

Heard it never made it to the league, so I actually have a feeling Frolik didn't waive 

Share this post


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

 

Roslovic would be a great pickup.

 

Not sure what he would cost.

 

Does Jankowski for Roslovic work or do we need to add?

Roslovic would be a great pickup for C. Very good #'s with the Moose and never looked out of place with the big club in his limited role. Problem is now with Hayes gone, if the Jets don't acquire a replacement C this may be Raslovics chance at #2 C. For the most part he's been stuck on the right side but none of Little, Lowry or Copp are #2 material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

Roslovic would be a great pickup for C. Very good #'s with the Moose and never looked out of place with the big club in his limited role. Problem is now with Hayes gone, if the Jets don't acquire a replacement C this may be Raslovics chance at #2 C. For the most part he's been stuck on the right side but none of Little, Lowry or Copp are #2 material.

 

They have some cap issues there.

Laine should be getting close to what Marner gets.

Connor should be at least as much as Ehlers.

Trouba needs a big raise.

 

They have 7F, 5D and 2G signed with $25m or so in cap space.

Roslovic is on his last year of ELC, so still a deal.

Yet, he wants out.  Kinda the same as Drouin a few years ago.

Laine is going to get paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

I'm still really curious what made ours fall through to the point BT was steamed .

Heard it never made it to the league, so I actually have a feeling Frolik didn't waive 

By staying in Calgary and playing in the playoffs Frolik was guaranteed a minimum $15,000.

So ya I would have choose to not waive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

By staying in Calgary and playing in the playoffs Frolik was guaranteed a minimum $15,000.

So ya I would have choose to not waive.

A-Ha!  nice digging.. that would be my bet then .. and I can see it totally frosting BT as well 

Share this post


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

 

They have some cap issues there.

Laine should be getting close to what Marner gets.

Connor should be at least as much as Ehlers.

Trouba needs a big raise.

 

They have 7F, 5D and 2G signed with $25m or so in cap space.

Roslovic is on his last year of ELC, so still a deal.

Yet, he wants out.  Kinda the same as Drouin a few years ago.

Laine is going to get paid.

Going by what the local ideas and feelings seem to be.......

Laine - I think there would be alot of upset fans if he was signed for anything over 8.0 - 8.5. You'd be surprised how the fans/media turn on him when he's on a slump. The idea of a 3 year "prove it" term has made it's rounds quite a bit.

Connor -  should get Ehlers/Schiefle money.

Trouba - Don't let the door hit your a** on the way out.  He'll be traded.

 

Niku is ready to make the jump and Poolman could be ready for 3rd pairing.  Depending what comes back with a Trouba deal I could see Meyers gone too.

 

If there was room Tanev would be a good pick up, but the bottom 6 is getting crowded as is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumor is, the Canucks want to trade their 1st rounder for immediate help.  Should we be interested?  Canucks pick #10.

 

I would suggest Brodie + 26th overall.  Thoughts?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

By staying in Calgary and playing in the playoffs Frolik was guaranteed a minimum $15,000.

So ya I would have choose to not waive.

 

It sounded more process than person.

They have a queue that it has to hit by the cutoff.

There is certain things that have to be in the trade call.

Anything could have been the reason for the mixup.

 

Share this post


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

Can’t post the tweet as I’m on my phone, but Vancouver TSN reporters are saying the Canucks are pushing really hard for Zucker.

 

Hard to see BT landing him without the 1st moving

 

Forgot where i read the Wild offered Zucker for Boeser and the Canucks said 'no thanks.'  

 

But recently, it sounds like the Canucks have lost their patience.  First they fired Trevor Linden who was rebuilding the sane way.  Now, they are talking about trading Boeser for... maybe Trouba or something.  Anyways, i expect the Canucks to be open for business and a young piece like Boeser fits what we need.  RHS RW who can pop in 35 a season (if he ever stays healthy).  Whatever we are offering to get Zucker, we need to take a serious look at Boeser.

 

I know the whole Canucks stain but we have to look past it for the good players.  If we can steal Petterson for Monahan straight up, then we do it all day long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Forgot where i read the Wild offered Zucker for Boeser and the Canucks said 'no thanks.'  

 

But recently, it sounds like the Canucks have lost their patience.  First they fired Trevor Linden who was rebuilding the sane way.  Now, they are talking about trading Boeser for... maybe Trouba or something.  Anyways, i expect the Canucks to be open for business and a young piece like Boeser fits what we need.  RHS RW who can pop in 35 a season (if he ever stays healthy).  Whatever we are offering to get Zucker, we need to take a serious look at Boeser.

 

I know the whole Canucks stain but we have to look past it for the good players.  If we can steal Petterson for Monahan straight up, then we do it all day long.

 

I was suggesting that Boeser, Pettersen and Horvat are the cream of the crop there.

As a rebuilding organization, why do you consider trading those thre.

The answer is you don't.

 

That leaves guys like Granlund, Baertsci, Virtanen, and Sutter as being the key pieces.  

None of their current crop of young D are that impressive.

They might have some gems, but I haven't seen a lot of shine from them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF Vancouver is in fact looking to move their 10th pick overall for immediate help, then that is intriguing. The names available at 10th in the draft, regardless of who gets picked will likely have 1 or 2 players that would fit Flames near future needs as well as still be considered BPAesque since there really is no consensus on BPA after Hughes and Kakko. 

 

Players I would NOT consider using to trade with Van for 10th would be Bennett, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Hanifin, Giordano, Hamonic, Andersson Valimaki, Tkachuk. Monahan COULD be available but not straight up for the first as I believe he is worth more than that. (Proven NHL goal scorer, still young on reasonable contract vs no guarantee pick).

 

The likely future for the Nucks is that they are letting Dorsett walk, Eriksson has been reported for significant discontent with Green, Sutter is having trouble staying healthy and his stats are suffering as a result. This leaves them with Boeser (needs to be re-signed), Virtanen, Motte and Granlund both who need to be re-signed as players on the RW. They are more hard up on the right than the Flames are. Their RD is fairly set with Tanev, Stetcher and Biega though Brodie would be an upgrade on most, if not all of them. IF they lose Edler on the left side, that leaves a huge hole. They are looking at Hughes (Played in the NHL so can't go back to college), Sautner and Hutton (If he is re-signed). Pettersn, Horvat and Beagle are pretty set at C so not sure how you make a move in there to help get the first. LW is a more obvious need for the Nucks with Pearson, Baertschi and Roussel being their top 3. They do have 30+ mil in cap space and if they can eliminate Eriksson's contract, they can take a run at some bigger name UFAs. The only players I realistically see the Nucks being interested in that the Flames would consider trading them would be Brodie or Frolik and I would think their M-NTC clauses include Vancouver as no go due to competition, taxes, cost of living etc.

 

I just don't see us as good trading partners.   

Share this post


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

IF Vancouver is in fact looking to move their 10th pick overall for immediate help, then that is intriguing. The names available at 10th in the draft, regardless of who gets picked will likely have 1 or 2 players that would fit Flames near future needs as well as still be considered BPAesque since there really is no consensus on BPA after Hughes and Kakko. 

 

Players I would NOT consider using to trade with Van for 10th would be Bennett, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Hanifin, Giordano, Hamonic, Andersson Valimaki, Tkachuk. Monahan COULD be available but not straight up for the first as I believe he is worth more than that. (Proven NHL goal scorer, still young on reasonable contract vs no guarantee pick).

 

The likely future for the Nucks is that they are letting Dorsett walk, Eriksson has been reported for significant discontent with Green, Sutter is having trouble staying healthy and his stats are suffering as a result. This leaves them with Boeser (needs to be re-signed), Virtanen, Motte and Granlund both who need to be re-signed as players on the RW. They are more hard up on the right than the Flames are. Their RD is fairly set with Tanev, Stetcher and Biega though Brodie would be an upgrade on most, if not all of them. IF they lose Edler on the left side, that leaves a huge hole. They are looking at Hughes (Played in the NHL so can't go back to college), Sautner and Hutton (If he is re-signed). Pettersn, Horvat and Beagle are pretty set at C so not sure how you make a move in there to help get the first. LW is a more obvious need for the Nucks with Pearson, Baertschi and Roussel being their top 3. They do have 30+ mil in cap space and if they can eliminate Eriksson's contract, they can take a run at some bigger name UFAs. The only players I realistically see the Nucks being interested in that the Flames would consider trading them would be Brodie or Frolik and I would think their M-NTC clauses include Vancouver as no go due to competition, taxes, cost of living etc.

 

I just don't see us as good trading partners.   

 

 

A agree with all of this.   Except for the part where you're not wiling to trade anyone, because that is well, impossible lol.

 

I would trade any of those players for a first, but I do believe many of them are worth More than a One-to-One trade.

 

This is hard to do, but if I were to make a value table with Vancouver's picks:

 

Gaudreau:  3 first round picks.  Vancouver would need to give us their next 3 first rounders. 

                     And I would pull the trigger on it.     Because I expect them all to be high picks, and lottery eligible, from Vancouver...
                     https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/20/sports/alexis-lafreniere-quebec.html

 

Elias Lindholm:   2 first round picks.  and I would pull the trigger because I think last season will be hard for him to repeat.

 

Noah Hanifin:   1 first round pick.   Would pull trigger

 

Giordano:   1 first round pick.  Maybe a bit more.  Would pull trigger

 

Sean Monahan:   Would not trade.  He was not at his best but in other playoffs for us he has been our bright light.  He has post-season compete.

 

Andersson Valimaki, Tkachuk.:   Nobody's untouchable but I don't see  a deal here nor would I want to see them go.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just throwing this out there for giggles..  Friedman joked about this this morning.. the oilers would / should have interest in Neal

would you do a Neal/ Lucic swap if Edm ate 2M in salary ?

Me I wouldn't , but I can see the argument for it 

 

Not gonna lie tho , would love to peel PoolParty away from them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...