Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

Is it the new coach and new city that changes things?

I don't necessarily think it does affect morale, but the handling of Baertschi, can that change the way players think of an organization? I think it's on Baertschi and the organization. But when you allow some players mistakes and still play in the NHL and don't have the same standard for others, it must be rough on the morale.

Although, one could say Monahan gained more from the NHL than playing in Jr's an extra year.

But it's like you said, others came into the NHL directly. Was Brodie a product of good development or has it been the makeup of the player?

Backs had pretty much the same development as Brodie. Sent back down multiple times for further training to work on parts of his game.

 

Problem with Baertschi was he was following the same type of development schedule while Feaster was calling him the next best thing and Bear resented the being sent back down.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem that you dislike my idea to address these problems.  I just want to hear your solution.

Sparky, how about these ideas:

1. Current Flames prospects, both RW (Poirier, Mangiapanne, Karnaukov) and G (Gillies, McDonald)

2. Free Agents this Summer (eg Okposo)

3. Targeted Trades: Drouin, Yakupov/Eberle, Rychel

Basically, not a lot new, but lots of things potentially. Basically BT needs to start moving out the guys that are not part of the solution and try some new ones. If trades don't work, let's get a bunch of draft picks and see what we can do at the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparky, how about these ideas:

1. Current Flames prospects, both RW (Poirier, Mangiapanne, Karnaukov) and G (Gillies, McDonald)

2. Free Agents this Summer (eg Okposo)

3. Targeted Trades: Drouin, Yakupov/Eberle, Rychel

Basically, not a lot new, but lots of things potentially. Basically BT needs to start moving out the guys that are not part of the solution and try some new ones. If trades don't work, let's get a bunch of draft picks and see what we can do at the draft.

It is so much easier said than done. The guys that aren't a solution are the contracts we can't move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Jones and Hudler can be moved. Wideman, we would need to take a bad contract back or retain salary but not cap, so he could be moved to a team who is financially in need but not too close to the cap.

Russell can be moved.

Engelland maybe for a playoff team looking to go deep and need depth guys.

Smid is probably a no, same as the Wideman issues.

Stajan is unmoveable. Maybe a summertime trade if possible. But Backlund has value in comparison the Stajan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I'm looking for some serious trade talk. At Flamesnation everyone is talking about trading Mony, here we're talking about Gaudreau. Why not add Brodie to the list?

Brodie to Colorado for Landeskog. Why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I'm looking for some serious trade talk. At Flamesnation everyone is talking about trading Mony, here we're talking about Gaudreau. Why not add Brodie to the list?

Brodie to Colorado for Landeskog. Why not?

I assume that's sarcasm.

 

I don't want to trade Mony or Johnny or Bennett. So with them and Brodie out, who is left that teams would want badly?

Gio (not likely)

...?

Hudler maybe but he's not done anything good to his trade value.

So prospects?

Granlund I could see

Porrier? Not likely to net a big enough return

We should not trade our goalies outside of Ortio but I don't know that there's a demand for him.

 

So when it comes down to it, we don't have a lot of good players that can bring back good value. It's hard to pitch a trade idea when we don't have a lot to get a lot. Find a player you want then ask yourself what their price is. I am curious as to who you'd like (within reason).

Our biggest addition outside of FA is Janko.

With how connected everything is, it's hard to fleece anyone now. It's value for value or risk for risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I'm looking for some serious trade talk. At Flamesnation everyone is talking about trading Mony, here we're talking about Gaudreau. Why not add Brodie to the list?

Brodie to Colorado for Landeskog. Why not?

 

Not to put down Flamesnation but I find them to go really overboard on analytics and make too many decisions based on that. Steinberg is ok but guys like Pike, Wilson a few others go way overboard with it. Monahan isn't loved by the analytics community and thats why people in that crowd are floating ideas of trading him rather than commmit a contract to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that's sarcasm.

 

I don't want to trade Mony or Johnny or Bennett. So with them and Brodie out, who is left that teams would want badly?

Gio (not likely)

...?

Hudler maybe but he's not done anything good to his trade value.

So prospects?

Granlund I could see

Porrier? Not likely to net a big enough return

We should not trade our goalies outside of Ortio but I don't know that there's a demand for him.

 

So when it comes down to it, we don't have a lot of good players that can bring back good value. It's hard to pitch a trade idea when we don't have a lot to get a lot. Find a player you want then ask yourself what their price is. I am curious as to who you'd like (within reason).

Our biggest addition outside of FA is Janko.

With how connected everything is, it's hard to fleece anyone now. It's value for value or risk for risk.

Undoubtedly some get goofy around this time leading up to the TDL. Anyone suggesting the trade of our core building pieces is not dealing with certain realities. Others that want to get rid of every player they hate is simply venting and hoping. When all is said and done with the TDL I think Hudler, Russell and Engelland will be gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your quick fix is shortsighted and unlikely to make us a better team long or short term.

 

The needs of the Flames are quality not quantity. Sure you fill holes but not with the right quality and in the process you take away our best player to do it. Teams have it tough enough with superstar players to be more successful in this league.

 

There is good reason why most teams won't touch "Core Players" and do everything in their power to keep them.

 

Everyone pretty much agrees that whoever gets the best player in a trade wins the trade. At least most say that every time a trade is made..

 

The only part of your post I liked and seemed accurate was the

 

:

Dirty Deeds done dirt cheap, sounds just like you!

 

Differing opinions & or points of view are what make any discussion interesting.  Insults & bullying just stifle participation. (you are not the only member I am talking about)  You are entitled to your opinion, too bad you don't offer much more than negativity.  You are obviously knowledgeable so why not disagree, say why you disagree & offer your opinion on what you think the answer is.  You can respond to this or not as I won't be on the site going forward.  Posting this only in the hope other members might benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the new coach and new city that changes things?

I don't necessarily think it does affect morale, but the handling of Baertschi, can that change the way players think of an organization? I think it's on Baertschi and the organization. But when you allow some players mistakes and still play in the NHL and don't have the same standard for others, it must be rough on the morale.

Although, one could say Monahan gained more from the NHL than playing in Jr's an extra year.

But it's like you said, others came into the NHL directly. Was Brodie a product of good development or has it been the makeup of the player?

 

I don't know what the answer is but if we had a better success rate at developing players, then trade talk would be more fun because we would have 2 or 3 kids ready to graduate onto the team every year.  Instead, there's hardly any challenge on the vets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Flames are getting better in the development area. Remember under Sutter they were very old fashioned. There was little consultation done with players and basically Sutter believed you drafted someone and then when he was ready then he would push for a spot. There was no development coach like there is no, there was no focus on nutrition, there was no check ins all throughout the year and there was no carrot dangeled to push them. Feaster really helped modernize the Flames development which i think is key. I also think the amount of movement of the farm team has really hurt. Abbotsford was great in terms of getting players to Calgary but it was horrible for develoment becuase it cut so much into practice time which I think is essentiall to good development. Playing alot of games is one thing but it you dont' have an avenue to practice and implement changes its going to be real tough to get better.

 

I think we are trending in the right direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dirty Deeds done dirt cheap, sounds just like you!

Edit: This name goes back to 1986 and was not about the AC/DC song. I first used it in a bulletin board game called Tradewars 2002. This was a text based ANSI space game. I was the guy who placed space mines all over the 1000 sector space to prevent my opposition from getting into various sectors that I wanted to claim and develop. Thus the name DirtyDeeds. I ran my own BBS at that time but played this game on multiple BBS's. It was a few years after that someone else made the reference to AC/DC but I made no such reference using it as my BBS/Game name.

 

Differing opinions & or points of view are what make any discussion interesting. 

Yes they do but it seems unless they criticise your ideas

 

Insults & bullying just stifle participation. (you are not the only member I am talking about) 

You said you expected pretty much this didn't you, so now you want to run ?

 

You are entitled to your opinion, too bad you don't offer much more than negativity.  You are obviously knowledgeable so why not disagree, say why you disagree & offer your opinion on what you think the answer is. 

I thought I was pretty clear that I disagree, and I thought I was pretty clear on why I disagreed and I even suggested a better way. Maybe I should restate it differently.

1. Our needs are quality not quantity. If you are going to trade your core (you shouldn't trade your core until they are a problem or not going to be a part of your core) at least get a core piece back. A bunch of lesser pieces is not a winning strategy. Think Phaneuf and the multiple lesser pieces we got back for him.

 

2. When you are rebuilding and we are just beginning, why are you trading away the foundation block that you just placed? Is he not good enough to be the foundation? Is he a problem? Just because you did not get enough bricks to build one wall does not mean you dig up one of the foundation blocks to get more bricks.

 

3. Just because I disagree with your suggestion does not mean it is negativity.

 

...offer your opinion on what you think the answer is.

I thought I was clear. 

If you are going to trade a core piece you better be damn sure to get a core piece back. Even if it is solid potential. That is pretty clear on what my answer is. Someone like Stamkos might be a fit for trade, similar age, but he is going to cost more than JH and you are just creating a LW hole to fill a RW hole(top line wingers)

 

 

You can respond to this or not as I won't be on the site going forward.  Posting this only in the hope other members might benefit.

Why you running? I thought you wanted people to discuss your trade proposal? You expected harsh critique but when you get it you don't want to stick around ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest Ek thread has us sending Wideman to Boston for Eriksson or Subban as part of a multiplayer swap. Seems a bit crazy, but would either of those deals make sense? Is having Eriksson as a potential resigning or tdl flip worth dumping wides contract? Is Subban still considered a good prospect and would the B's really give him up for an expensive contract like Wideman?

Probably just another made up Ek rumor...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to put down Flamesnation but I find them to go really overboard on analytics and make too many decisions based on that. Steinberg is ok but guys like Pike, Wilson a few others go way overboard with it. Monahan isn't loved by the analytics community and thats why people in that crowd are floating ideas of trading him rather than commmit a contract to him.

 

You always hear comparables to Toews and Bergeron when it comes to Monahan but this season, Monahan looks to be trending towards a blend of Jordan Staal and Tyler Bozak instead.  Decent-to-average second line Centers but you wouldn't want to lock up a Staal or Bozak to 7-years @ $6-5mil.  It would be a mistake.

 

As long as Monahan is a Flames then I hope I'm wrong of course.  But if someone is willing to offer us Toews trade value, then I would consider that blowing us out of the water and we need to take the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Flames need is another overpaid bottom pairing dman or bottom 6 forward. There is no reason to claim Prust. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Flames need is another overpaid bottom pairing dman or bottom 6 forward. There is no reason to claim Prust. 

Better than Bollig and there would be less opposition messing around with Gaudreau, plus Prust can actually play hockey. You might also want to consider that Bouma may never make back to 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few issues listed in the discussion that some people ignore, some bash and others seem to miss what is being discussed altogether. There have been good proposals, some parts of proposals are good while the rest is out of whack and some are simply bad throughout (maybe just my opinion).

People are asking the question in this thread on what trades will make this team better. It was started at a time when the Flames really had a strong opportunity to improve this year. If wwe pull the trigger right now, there MAY be time to jump up in the standings and make the playoffs, but will the player(s) we get be able to step right in or will they need time to acclimatize and learn the systems similar to Hamilton who even had pre-season with the team.

In all truth, it is unlikely the Flames can overcome 10+ points between now and the TDL. Unless they can be within 4 points of a playoff spot by the TDL, they will be sellers and should be. I think that the decision will be made sooner if they are still around the 10 point range in 2 weeks.

The issues being discussed with moving players, and the good reasoning to do so is lost on some individuals. This is not due, in most part, to stupidity but rather a personal focus on what they see. Those who look at the here and now do not see a reason to move certain players as they cannot give up hope for a playoff push. Others are looking much further ahead and see the lack of advancement right now so players become more moveable for future pieces.

I am personally in the middle. I want to see improvement now, if possible, without hurting the future. I also see what is happening in the summer and I try to look at everything that COULD happen and what is likely. I try to look at things from a hockey and business sense without being blinded by fan glasses. What works for me needs to fit the now, the future and not cause a big fallout.

Drouin, even with the off ice issues will be expensive, too expensive for my tastes. His acquisition would hinder the Flames future. His off ice issues remind me of a worse case than Baertschi (or his father) and I do not want that in the locker room. I honestly think that Baertschi being traded for a 2nd round pick when he was a top half first rounder taught him a little more humility and has actually helped him more this year.

As for trades, I took a suggested move which was not possible and tried to make it fit in a way that did not detract from the team short term but was actually a long term improvement. It also worked in a business sense by adding a similar caliber player to play a similar role who is signed for another year at a better contract. It also helped the other team with respect to potential cap space next season and help for a playoff push this season.

I think the acquisition of Bealieu out of Montreal is reasonable. He is playing sheltered, third line minutes (averaging in the 15 minutes per game range). He is young with growth still to come on a reasonable contract next season. While he will not, and should not be cheap. Montreal is having more cap issues than Calgary. I put Russell and Beaulieu as playing similar roles with similar abilities. Beaulieu has a slightly higher ceiling and so you need to add more than just Russell to make the move. The fact that Russell is UFA after the season and Montreal can negotiate with him helps there cap. The Habs need to beef up a little for the playoffs. Bollig would bring that for sure. retaining salary this season on Russell's contract makes it even more appealing for the Habs. Throw in a first round prospect in Klimchuk plus a conditional mid round pick and the deal on paper seems to swing more to the benefit of the Habs. Contract rounding out bringing Scott and Holloway who are both UFA and not in the Habs NHL plans simply is good business and needed for contract space.

Calgary gets another young but somewhat experienced Dman currently a 4/5 level with 3/4 potential that does not hurt the Flames in the now or in the future. Bollig does not play a big role with the Flames and is thus not a big loss. Klimchuk has future potential but is not an irreplaceable loss when you gain a D man like Beaulieu.

The thoughts of moving Hudler is that he has some potential for reasonable returns compared to his UFA status at the end of thee season. He may simply walk away for no return in the summer so you look at getting return for the future if possible. Having been dropped to the third line this season, he does not appear to be a significant future piece anymore. If he is not slated as a top line player, he can be moved.

Calgary needs to improve the goaltending situation. That does not mean they need to completely retool the tenders with 2 new guys in the organization to be on the big club. This means they need to decide, with 2 current or former starting tenders who are both UFA after the season, something needs to happen. Re-sign one, trade one, trade both, lose both to UFA with no return? These are basically the options for the Flames. Hiller would be the better opinion to trade but has the least likely return. Ramo could provide good return from the right team but leaves the biggest question going into the end of this season and next season.

Wideman still has value, is signed and I believe has an NTC. Guys like Engelland and Smid play similar roles and thus 1 or both are able to be moved. For a 7 man D corps, Brodie, Gio, Hamilton, Beaulieu, Wideman, 2 others, that is a rather solid group if you ask me. Especially if those 2 remaining spots can be filled with young guys able to perform a similar role to Engelland and Smid. Likely at least one will still be around next season. Engelland would be a good pickup by a team looking for depth into the playoffs. He may not provide a huge return, but he could bring something reasonable. Jones could also bring reasonable return and good cap space for the Flames to the right team.

The above moves get returns for players likely to bring some sort of return on upcomming UFAs this summer or moves guys who can bring returns without leaving tough to fill holes while providing more cap space to sign RFAs and possibly bring in more help for the future.

I don't know what other specifics will be done, but I am sure Treliving has some good sense to make good moves.

Players I would not move without overpayment would be Gaudreau, Giordano, Hamilton, Brodie, Bennett, Monahan, Backlund, Ferland. I may be missing someone but those are my Core guys currently.

Comments are welcome, but remember, look at all sides of the argument before blasting back in anger.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better than Bollig and there would be less opposition messing around with Gaudreau, plus Prust can actually play hockey. You might also want to consider that Bouma may never make back to 100%.

 

He is marginally better than Bolig and costs twice as much. I'll take Bolig.

 

Bouma at 75% is better than Prust at 100%. I use to be a big fan of Prust but the game is passing him by and at over 2 million cap hit no thanks. Not to mention he is a UFA this year and with the Flames unlikely to make the playoffs it makes no sense for Prust to take up a spot in the lineup. They need that spot to give opportunities to other players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest Ek thread has us sending Wideman to Boston for Eriksson or Subban as part of a multiplayer swap. Seems a bit crazy, but would either of those deals make sense? Is having Eriksson as a potential resigning or tdl flip worth dumping wides contract? Is Subban still considered a good prospect and would the B's really give him up for an expensive contract like Wideman?

Probably just another made up Ek rumor...

 

I would be a bit surprised if Wideman agreed to waive his NMC to go back to Boston. He was basically booed out of town when he played there. Every time he touched the puck the Boston fans would boo him, which is bad form by their fan base.

 

I would love to be able to trade Wideman, especially if we were getting back Eriksson or Subban. If the trade happened soon, we could turn around and flip Eriksson for a pretty good return. The rumor is he is asking for upwards of $6mill on his next contract so I doubt we could re-sign him. Subban is pretty close to being NHL ready, he probably would have to have veteran starter around to mentor him, but I think he could come up and play backup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is marginally better than Bolig and costs twice as much. I'll take Bolig.

 

Bouma at 75% is better than Prust at 100%. I use to be a big fan of Prust but the game is passing him by and at over 2 million cap hit no thanks. Not to mention he is a UFA this year and with the Flames unlikely to make the playoffs it makes no sense for Prust to take up a spot in the lineup. They need that spot to give opportunities to other players. 

 

I agree, Prust isn't the same player he used to be. I would pass on claiming him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few issues listed in the discussion that some people ignore, some bash and others seem to miss what is being discussed altogether. There have been good proposals, some parts of proposals are good while the rest is out of whack and some are simply bad throughout (maybe just my opinion).

People are asking the question in this thread on what trades will make this team better. It was started at a time when the Flames really had a strong opportunity to improve this year. If wwe pull the trigger right now, there MAY be time to jump up in the standings and make the playoffs, but will the player(s) we get be able to step right in or will they need time to acclimatize and learn the systems similar to Hamilton who even had pre-season with the team.

In all truth, it is unlikely the Flames can overcome 10+ points between now and the TDL. Unless they can be within 4 points of a playoff spot by the TDL, they will be sellers and should be. I think that the decision will be made sooner if they are still around the 10 point range in 2 weeks.

The issues being discussed with moving players, and the good reasoning to do so is lost on some individuals. This is not due, in most part, to stupidity but rather a personal focus on what they see. Those who look at the here and now do not see a reason to move certain players as they cannot give up hope for a playoff push. Others are looking much further ahead and see the lack of advancement right now so players become more moveable for future pieces.

I am personally in the middle. I want to see improvement now, if possible, without hurting the future. I also see what is happening in the summer and I try to look at everything that COULD happen and what is likely. I try to look at things from a hockey and business sense without being blinded by fan glasses. What works for me needs to fit the now, the future and not cause a big fallout.

Drouin, even with the off ice issues will be expensive, too expensive for my tastes. His acquisition would hinder the Flames future. His off ice issues remind me of a worse case than Baertschi (or his father) and I do not want that in the locker room. I honestly think that Baertschi being traded for a 2nd round pick when he was a top half first rounder taught him a little more humility and has actually helped him more this year.

As for trades, I took a suggested move which was not possible and tried to make it fit in a way that did not detract from the team short term but was actually a long term improvement. It also worked in a business sense by adding a similar caliber player to play a similar role who is signed for another year at a better contract. It also helped the other team with respect to potential cap space next season and help for a playoff push this season.

I think the acquisition of Bealieu out of Montreal is reasonable. He is playing sheltered, third line minutes (averaging in the 15 minutes per game range). He is young with growth still to come on a reasonable contract next season. While he will not, and should not be cheap. Montreal is having more cap issues than Calgary. I put Russell and Beaulieu as playing similar roles with similar abilities. Beaulieu has a slightly higher ceiling and so you need to add more than just Russell to make the move. The fact that Russell is UFA after the season and Montreal can negotiate with him helps there cap. The Habs need to beef up a little for the playoffs. Bollig would bring that for sure. retaining salary this season on Russell's contract makes it even more appealing for the Habs. Throw in a first round prospect in Klimchuk plus a conditional mid round pick and the deal on paper seems to swing more to the benefit of the Habs. Contract rounding out bringing Scott and Holloway who are both UFA and not in the Habs NHL plans simply is good business and needed for contract space.

Calgary gets another young but somewhat experienced Dman currently a 4/5 level with 3/4 potential that does not hurt the Flames in the now or in the future. Bollig does not play a big role with the Flames and is thus not a big loss. Klimchuk has future potential but is not an irreplaceable loss when you gain a D man like Beaulieu.

The thoughts of moving Hudler is that he has some potential for reasonable returns compared to his UFA status at the end of thee season. He may simply walk away for no return in the summer so you look at getting return for the future if possible. Having been dropped to the third line this season, he does not appear to be a significant future piece anymore. If he is not slated as a top line player, he can be moved.

Calgary needs to improve the goaltending situation. That does not mean they need to completely retool the tenders with 2 new guys in the organization to be on the big club. This means they need to decide, with 2 current or former starting tenders who are both UFA after the season, something needs to happen. Re-sign one, trade one, trade both, lose both to UFA with no return? These are basically the options for the Flames. Hiller would be the better opinion to trade but has the least likely return. Ramo could provide good return from the right team but leaves the biggest question going into the end of this season and next season.

Wideman still has value, is signed and I believe has an NTC. Guys like Engelland and Smid play similar roles and thus 1 or both are able to be moved. For a 7 man D corps, Brodie, Gio, Hamilton, Beaulieu, Wideman, 2 others, that is a rather solid group if you ask me. Especially if those 2 remaining spots can be filled with young guys able to perform a similar role to Engelland and Smid. Likely at least one will still be around next season. Engelland would be a good pickup by a team looking for depth into the playoffs. He may not provide a huge return, but he could bring something reasonable. Jones could also bring reasonable return and good cap space for the Flames to the right team.

The above moves get returns for players likely to bring some sort of return on upcomming UFAs this summer or moves guys who can bring returns without leaving tough to fill holes while providing more cap space to sign RFAs and possibly bring in more help for the future.

I don't know what other specifics will be done, but I am sure Treliving has some good sense to make good moves.

Players I would not move without overpayment would be Gaudreau, Giordano, Hamilton, Brodie, Bennett, Monahan, Backlund, Ferland. I may be missing someone but those are my Core guys currently.

Comments are welcome, but remember, look at all sides of the argument before blasting back in anger.

A welcome post! There are a lot of passionate fans all playing armchair GMs and that's where opinions clash. I wouldnt even call it anger, just a strong passion to see this team succeed. Some do want it now, others are more willing to see the rebuild process through. Last year was a blessing and a curse and it's obvious there's a lot of work to be done. I'm not for any knee jerk moves at this point, we can still find ways to improve this team now while not sacrificing its future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be a bit surprised if Wideman agreed to waive his NMC to go back to Boston. He was basically booed out of town when he played there. Every time he touched the puck the Boston fans would boo him, which is bad form by their fan base.

 

I would love to be able to trade Wideman, especially if we were getting back Eriksson or Subban. If the trade happened soon, we could turn around and flip Eriksson for a pretty good return. The rumor is he is asking for upwards of $6mill on his next contract so I doubt we could re-sign him. Subban is pretty close to being NHL ready, he probably would have to have veteran starter around to mentor him, but I think he could come up and play backup.

 

That was a long time ago.  BOS fans have little to cheer about these days.  Chara is slowing down. Krug is their big guy.  If Wideman could hit the net, the fans would love him.  For hitting the ref, they would probably cheer him when he stepped on the ice.   ;)

 

If we rid ourselves of Wideman, we would be able to pay a player of Eriksson's skillset the going rate.  Eliminate the need to get anything but picks for Hudler.  Try to sign him before the TDL if you think there is any issue.  Then we actually have a top line RW. No offense to Frolik, but he isn't that guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad you can't attach draft picks to guys you place on waivers. 

 

Like, "Mason Raymond + 4th round pick" placed on waivers.

 

Who in their right mind would claim Raymond without a sweetener?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad you can't attach draft picks to guys you place on waivers. 

 

Like, "Mason Raymond + 4th round pick" placed on waivers.

 

Who in their right mind would claim Raymond without a sweetener?

 

The realistic situation in a Raymond trade (barring a really really desperate GM) is you make a trade after he is assigned to the AHL.  You can do whatever deal you want then, and the receiving (sucker) GM can keep Raymond there until needed or can bring him up and down for waiver period at will.  It might help a GM manage his roster while in the middle of a trade.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...