Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

I am thinking it is going to cost a lot to move Neal's contract.

 

I like that we are at least looking at what it would take to move Neal.

 

If Neal is on the Flames opening roster come September, then we can rest assured BT has done his due diligence and there's truly zero to negative market value to Neal.  If we are stuck with him for another season then we are stuck with him for another season.

Share this post


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

 

Has Puljujarvi become a flight risk to the KHL?  If so, then i feel the Oilers are willing to trade him.

 

Bob Nicholson said they want prospects to over ripen before they play in the NHL and promptly sent Puljujarvi to the minors to finish the season.  That's the new philosophy.  So in hearing that, i'm sure Puljujarvi is contemplating the KHL.

it was stated recently , but I think it had 0 credibility .. that being said , him wanting out of Edmonton is Not a secret .. so could give some leverage 

Share this post


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

I agree with what you say about Virtanen though I wouldn't go out and say he is a bust for certain. I would consider him to be in a similar spot as Bennett where he is doing some things well but not always firing on all cylinders and not seeing the results that we would hope for. He did put up 15 goals in 70 games last season on RW. Hathaway had 11 in 76,  Czarnik 6 in 54, Neal 7 in 63 and Bennett 13 in 71. 

 

I would not go out and move significant pieces to bring in Virtanen, but I also would not be against trying to get him. He is only 1.25 mil cap hit and is 6'1, 226 lbs on RW. I wonder what I line with Bennett and Virtanen would bring. Speed, Energy, Hitting and still have offensive upside. Who would be the complimentary player and what position would they play?

 

Just thinking out loud now, hadn't actually thought of it before.

 

Ya fair.

 

He's serviceable and still young.  He could top out as a 2nd line RHS RW who pops in 20-goals per year and brings a heavy game.  That looks like the peak for him.  He's not smart enough or creative enough to be any better.  He's more suited to play a grinder's game on the 3rd/4th line.  Park himself in front of nets to pick up the garbage type of player.

Share this post


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

it was stated recently , but I think it had 0 credibility .. that being said , him wanting out of Edmonton is Not a secret .. so could give some leverage 

 

Ya agree.  It's just difficult to gauge his trade value which has fallen since his draft.  But a 2nd rounder seems too cheap.  So is his true value a 26th pick overall?  

 

Or maybe Brodie straight up?

Share this post


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

 

Ya fair.

 

He's serviceable and still young.  He could top out as a 2nd line RHS RW who pops in 20-goals per year and brings a heavy game.  That looks like the peak for him.  He's not smart enough or creative enough to be any better.  He's more suited to play a grinder's game on the 3rd/4th line.  Park himself in front of nets to pick up the garbage type of player.

 

I would take a flyer on him, but other than maybe a Frolik or Brodie I am not sure what they would want, that we would be willing to give up.

 

Virtanen has size, is a very good skater and can play with an edge. He fits what we are looking for.

Share this post


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

 

Ya agree.  It's just difficult to gauge his trade value which has fallen since his draft.  But a 2nd rounder seems too cheap.  So is his true value a 26th pick overall?  

 

Or maybe Brodie straight up?

Id say TJ is a big overpay .. he's a RFA like Bennett..depending in how you feel you can adapt him , could always threaten to offer sheet him and just trade him for the 2nd rounder

 

That's where my idea about Neal / lucic came in ..   i don't hate Lucic , i just hate him at 3x6 remaining .. 3x3? 3x4?  maybe ..pay him like the bottom 6 that he is 

 something like Neal and a 2nd for Lucic @3M and Puljujarvi

Share this post


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

Id say TJ is a big overpay .. he's a RFA like Bennett..depending in how you feel you can adapt him , could always threaten to offer sheet him and just trade him for the 2nd rounder

 

That's where my idea about Neal / lucic came in ..   i don't hate Lucic , i just hate him at 3x6 remaining .. 3x3? 3x4?  maybe ..pay him like the bottom 6 that he is 

 something like Neal and a 2nd for Lucic @3M and Puljujarvi

 

Lucic has a full NMC though.  I think the only team he'll waive to go to is his hometown Vancouver.  He openly says it would be nice to play there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Team to really keep an eye on is Vegas . They are already projecting over the current $83M cap.. with some pretty recognizable names to sign

They need to shed salary .. good reason why even Engellands $1M is likely to be dropped ..   we may get Reaves yet , could also be a possible place to dangle Neal .. see if they'll work something out for Marchessault and his $5M

Share this post


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

 

Ya unfortunately, the guys who want from VAN are likely off limits.  BUT it's interesting Canucks GM spoke openly about Joulevi and Virtanen as two players "they'd love to keep but would trade if the right deal came along."  So he's pretty much telling the league to make them an offer.

 

I think Virtanen has been a big bust.  He hits but has tunnel vision when he's got the puck.  And he doesn't hit every game.  Very invisible player most nights.

 

Joulevi had major knee surgery recently so, i would approach with caution.

I don't know that Virtanen has been a bust or he is just their Bennett. I like Virtanen but as a 3rd line RW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Lucic has a full NMC though.  I think the only team he'll waive to go to is his hometown Vancouver.  He openly says it would be nice to play there.

there is definitely that , he controls it so it could very well be Vancouver or nothing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players I would like to target if I was BT

Kreider

JT Miller

Kadri

 

I BT could add one of those 3, it would be huge IMO. All 3 can effectively play top 6 roles and produce. They also bring a physical game which we don’t really have.

 

Not saying we need to add a Reaves but we need another (or few more) guys that can play with an edge and yet have skill. Looking at the Cup final, you still need to be able to play physical in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to stay away from trading underperforming players for underperforming players.

It rarely works out for us.

 

Lucic, Eriksson, Virtanen.

Puljujarvi is a strange case, since I think he is better than what he is in EDM.

It's not so much that he's playing with crap players as much as he's been incorrectly developed.

They didn't know how to develop him in the minors, so they tried it in the NHL.

I think they are stuck with him in the NHL because of waivers, but he will never get it.

Tippett will not work, nor will Gully.

 

Many players that we could be concentrating on, but we are talking about a lot of garbage players too.

 

If we have to bridge-deal Tkachuk for 4 years to keep the team cap lower so we can take on better pieces, then so be it.

Marner is going to get paid, so that sets up Tkachuk for a similar payday long term.

And it screws us in the short term.

Would rather have Tkachuk locked up, but not have to sell brodie for picks just to afford it.

We want the team to be better next season, not just what we were or less because of cap.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Another Team to really keep an eye on is Vegas . They are already projecting over the current $83M cap.. with some pretty recognizable names to sign

They need to shed salary .. good reason why even Engellands $1M is likely to be dropped ..   we may get Reaves yet , could also be a possible place to dangle Neal .. see if they'll work something out for Marchessault and his $5M

I would offer VEGAS Stone at 1.75M and 2nd for Miller RD and Haula C/LW. Trade Brodie elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Frolik would be the player that the Canucks would want the most. He would help them out in the now, they can afford his cap hit and offensively last season, he might actually be a slight upgrade on Virtanen but also an upgrade defensively. The question is, do we want to give Vancouver the benefit of Frolik and us needing to face him regularly? 

 

I would have no issues having Virtanen topping out on the third line. I think that would be a decent expectation and as long as his cap stays under 3 mil for a while, then I am happy. That said, if he could become a 2nd line RW, all the better. 

 

Thinking logically, both Virtanen and Frolik have 1 season left under contract. Frolik has a 10 team no-trade list with a cap of 4.3 mil. Virtanen has a cap hit of 1.25 mil. Frolik has leadership, experience, better defence, but Virtanen likely has more potential and will be RFA after next season with Frolik UFA. Based on the differences, would the trade be straight up or would there need to be alterations? Trying not to take a fan of either player into account, simply looking at the positions of both teams. Frolik would be the better all around player, but the Flames would get more term guarantee and cap savings.

 

I don't know.

 

 

On the note of looking at Vegas, why would they look at Neal for 5.75 mil instead of Marchessault at 5 mil if they are already in cap issues? Even with retained salary Neal still would not save Vegas much. Also without other moves, retaining salary to trade Neal does not help Calgary with their own cap issues they would need to deal with. The Flames only have 14.5 million (can gain a little if you don't count Dube and Gilles but then up the spots to fill), and they need to sign 3 forwards including Tkachuk and Bennett plus at least 1 goalie including Rittich, 2 if you want someone other than Gilles as backup. 

 

Yes Vegas needs to move at least one of their talented, high priced forwards, likely more than 1 as they still need 1 f, 1 D and 1 G to be signed, but they need to move those players without bringing back significant salary meaning picks or high prospects.I wouldn't be surprised if Vancouver trades for some combination, not all, of Marchessault, Tuch,  Reaves and Haula. Patches could also be a trade target by Vancouver. They have the cap space to take on the salary, a top 10 pick at the draft and some good goalie prospects.

Share this post


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

there is definitely that , he controls it so it could very well be Vancouver or nothing 

I hate both Teams but a Lucic for Ericksson deal actually makes sense in some ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GM_3300 said:

I would offer VEGAS Stone at 1.75M and 2nd for Miller RD and Haula C/LW

Why would Vegas do this? They save less than 5 mil in cap space, create another hole to sign someone at forward when they already need to sign 1 (Karlsson possibly as RFA, plus they need a #7 D and a goalie when they are already over the cap. We also do not have a 2nd round pick this draft.

Share this post


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

I think Frolik would be the player that the Canucks would want the most. He would help them out in the now, they can afford his cap hit and offensively last season, he might actually be a slight upgrade on Virtanen but also an upgrade defensively. The question is, do we want to give Vancouver the benefit of Frolik and us needing to face him regularly? 

 

I would have no issues having Virtanen topping out on the third line. I think that would be a decent expectation and as long as his cap stays under 3 mil for a while, then I am happy. That said, if he could become a 2nd line RW, all the better. 

 

Thinking logically, both Virtanen and Frolik have 1 season left under contract. Frolik has a 10 team no-trade list with a cap of 4.3 mil. Virtanen has a cap hit of 1.25 mil. Frolik has leadership, experience, better defence, but Virtanen likely has more potential and will be RFA after next season with Frolik UFA. Based on the differences, would the trade be straight up or would there need to be alterations? Trying not to take a fan of either player into account, simply looking at the positions of both teams. Frolik would be the better all around player, but the Flames would get more term guarantee and cap savings.

 

I don't know.

 

 

On the note of looking at Vegas, why would they look at Neal for 5.75 mil instead of Marchessault at 5 mil if they are already in cap issues? Even with retained salary Neal still would not save Vegas much. Also without other moves, retaining salary to trade Neal does not help Calgary with their own cap issues they would need to deal with. The Flames only have 14.5 million (can gain a little if you don't count Dube and Gilles but then up the spots to fill), and they need to sign 3 forwards including Tkachuk and Bennett plus at least 1 goalie including Rittich, 2 if you want someone other than Gilles as backup. 

 

Yes Vegas needs to move at least one of their talented, high priced forwards, likely more than 1 as they still need 1 f, 1 D and 1 G to be signed, but they need to move those players without bringing back significant salary meaning picks or high prospects.I wouldn't be surprised if Vancouver trades for some combination, not all, of Marchessault, Tuch,  Reaves and Haula. Patches could also be a trade target by Vancouver. They have the cap space to take on the salary, a top 10 pick at the draft and some good goalie prospects.

If VAN would take Frolik for Virtanen we should do it. I don't think we should worry to much about how he plays against us later.

Share this post


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

Why would Vegas do this? They save less than 5 mil in cap space, create another hole to sign someone at forward when they already need to sign 1 (Karlsson possibly as RFA, plus they need a #7 D and a goalie when they are already over the cap. We also do not have a 2nd round pick this draft.

They need to save wherever they can at a sacrifice if necessary. There only big money consideration is Karlsson and that should land between 6M no more than 7M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GM_3300 said:

They need to save wherever they can at a sacrifice if necessary. There only big money consideration is Karlsson and that should land between 6M no more than 7M

So they are already over the cap, they need to add 3 players already. If Karlsson takes 6-7 mil, the D takes around a mil and the G takes around a mil, then you are adding 8-9 mil in salary. They are already over so saving less than 5 mil still puts them 3-4 mil over the cap even with this move, plus now they have to sign another forward on top of that which puts them even more over the cap. Financially that move does not make sense for Vegas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bosn111 said:

So they are already over the cap, they need to add 3 players already. If Karlsson takes 6-7 mil, the D takes around a mil and the G takes around a mil, then you are adding 8-9 mil in salary. They are already over so saving less than 5 mil still puts them 3-4 mil over the cap even with this move, plus now they have to sign another forward on top of that which puts them even more over the cap. Financially that move does not make sense for Vegas.

They also have good prospects to graduate  which could be taken into account. If they have to trade one or 2 more roster players I guess that is what they have to do. We can't solve all of the situation but maybe part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is, Miller is better than Stone, on a reasonable contract for what he brings, is signed longer and has far more value than Stone. Even adding a 2nd round pick, which we don't have, with Stone at retained salary does not hold the value for Miller alone, let alone Miller and Haula.

 

Stone, having been injured most of the season has less value than Haula who was also injured most of the season. Haula has a lower cap hit, is a year younger and is only 1 year removed from a 29 goal season. Don't forget that serious blood clot is considered more devastating to a career that an ankle or broken bone. Even by retaining salary and adding a pick we don't have, does not get us anywhere on the page of what Vegas would consider in a trade.

 

We don't need to solve all of Vegas' issues, but we do have to consider what is actually close to being an option for both teams, not just what extra piece we have that we want to unload for pieces that have more value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would Trouba for Hamonic be a good trade I know Trouba is due for a new contract but he is RFA and Hammy would be closer to Family ? Would a swap would even get it done.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, zima said:

Would Trouba for Hamonic be a good trade I know Trouba is due for a new contract but he is RFA and Hammy would be closer to Family ? Would a swap would even get it done.

 

I would personally keep Hammer, and Troubs is gonna be looking for 8m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, zima said:

Would Trouba for Hamonic be a good trade I know Trouba is due for a new contract but he is RFA and Hammy would be closer to Family ? Would a swap would even get it done.

 

 

We would have to add. On top of that Trouba is going to need a big contract and I have my doubts that he would sign here long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://bluelinestation.com/2019/06/05/new-york-rangers-travis-hamonic-t-j-brodie-flames-block/3/

 

This isn't a rumour as it's posted by a blogger. The Ranger blogger throws out the idea of Pionk and Kreider for Hamonic and Frolik. That's a no brainer for me. He then mentions he'd rather have Mangiapane than Frolik. I'd still think long and hard about it.

 

The more I think about it and now that the steam has worn off from the trade rumours of last week, I could see why a Hamonic trade would make sense. An extension for him is risky, the game is getting faster and for someone who's not an elite skater and plays as hard as he does, when the decline comes it could come very fast.

 

I recently read an article about how teams want to acquire Zucker because of what he means in a locker room, Hamonic is no different. I think more teams will value his style of game and his renowned off ice rep a bit more than Brodie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...