Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

The problem I’m having with trading for Laine outside of not willing to part with the assets required. Is next year we would have Laine, Bennett, Dube, and Valimaki, along with a backup goalie. That’s a lot of money to sign with no real money coming off the books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pikey7883 said:

The problem I’m having with trading for Laine outside of not willing to part with the assets required. Is next year we would have Laine, Bennett, Dube, and Valimaki, along with a backup goalie. That’s a lot of money to sign with no real money coming off the books. 


this is true but keep in mind, there would have be a significant piece or two moved in the trade so lest just say Backlund goes. His salary is out plus as it would take a bit more than Backlund and WPG would be wanting another roster player and probably a low draft pick...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently in the 2nd intermission of the French telecast tonight Renaud Lavoie said they Flames are actively shopping Gaudreau, and he will be traded by October 9th. My French is a bit rusty but here is the video.

 

 

Share this post


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

Apparently in the 2nd intermission of the French telecast tonight Renaud Lavoie said they Flames are actively shopping Gaudreau, and he will be traded by October 9th. My French is a bit rusty but here is the video.

 

 


maybe they’re searching for a player, plus a first rounder that could be used to get the goalie (Kuemper)?  I am not sure what else they’d get but I am thinking a bit more, depending on the player. I am hoping he’s used to cover a more glaring need though.
 

 

I feel in terms of asset management you’d want to get a player that can fill in RD/RW as a need instead of goalie where we can go UFA or sign Talbot. I’d still rather they keep a pick if they get one for Johnny and use it for futures, although if it can be used to fill a current need and long term it’s a good hockey trade. I still want to sign a goalie rather than use assets for one since it’s a year where there are some available. 
 

plus you’d think if the Flames can add to D, sign Hall, and shore up the right wing, it’s a good chance for success for a goalie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still a fan of the trade Gaudreau to sign Hall plan but at the same time trading a player the caliber of Gaudreau is a career defining move. You simply have to get this right no questions, no excuses. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that if they are, it is for more than just pieces to use in another trade. As I stated earlier, there are business reasons that he should be traded. Others mentioned that the expansion draft next year also affects what teams will do. 
 

In 2 years, Gaudreau and Giordano are going UFA with Tkachuk going RFA. Not including contracts Flames are working on this year and next, that will be a lot of work to do. I would guarantee they keep Tkachuk at high cap hit and need to replace top pair D which will leave little cap to pay Gaudreau what he is due. 
 

While Johnny’s value may be a little down from last season, 2 years on a team friendly contract is still valuable to lots of teams. Regardless of what he did next season, he will only have one season left and a NMC which decreases his trade value and the expansion draft would also factor in.

 

So really if you are looking to build with the future in mind, moving the likes of Gaudreau now makes sense from a business / asset management viewpoint as long as you get a decent if not good return. I see this as a Niewendyk for Iginla type situation.

 

Not taking just draft picks, not taking multiple middling to low NHL players.

Share this post


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

I would say that if they are, it is for more than just pieces to use in another trade. As I stated earlier, there are business reasons that he should be traded. Others mentioned that the expansion draft next year also affects what teams will do. 
 

In 2 years, Gaudreau and Giordano are going UFA with Tkachuk going RFA. Not including contracts Flames are working on this year and next, that will be a lot of work to do. I would guarantee they keep Tkachuk at high cap hit and need to replace top pair D which will leave little cap to pay Gaudreau what he is due. 
 

While Johnny’s value may be a little down from last season, 2 years on a team friendly contract is still valuable to lots of teams. Regardless of what he did next season, he will only have one season left and a NMC which decreases his trade value and the expansion draft would also factor in.

 

So really if you are looking to build with the future in mind, moving the likes of Gaudreau now makes sense from a business / asset management viewpoint as long as you get a decent if not good return. I see this as a Niewendyk for Iginla type situation.

 

Not taking just draft picks, not taking multiple middling to low NHL players.

This is the scary part.  The last time we traded a good young asset like this was probably Phaneuf. At the time he was probably considered a top 15 dman in the league who was still getting better.  A justification for the trade could definitely be made, but what did we get? A 20 goal scorer in Hagman (who was only getting 20 goals because the rest of the team was garbage), a okay but not stellar prospect in Stajan, a decent number 4 defense in Ian White, and a plug in Jamal Mayers. Most of these assets were traded off or lost to free agency within 2 seasons, leaving us Stajan and Babcock to show for what was one of our most promising and talented players at the time. So yes, let’s trade Gaudreau, but for the love of hockey we better get some high quality assets in return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I am still a fan of the trade Gaudreau to sign Hall plan but at the same time trading a player the caliber of Gaudreau is a career defining move. You simply have to get this right no questions, no excuses. 

 

That's so true.

A decent 1st rounder, a top prospect and a good prospect or younger roster player is what they should get.

In fact, teams should be "fighting" to get the best offer.

 

Share this post


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

I am still a fan of the trade Gaudreau to sign Hall plan but at the same time trading a player the caliber of Gaudreau is a career defining move. You simply have to get this right no questions, no excuses. 

 

I am not sure how accurate Lavoie's report from last night was, but if it is true, it makes me think that there may have been a trade request. I know that Gaudreau said he lives it Calgary and wants to stay, but what else is he going to say in that situation. It just feels like there may be mutual interest in parting ways.

 

I agree that there is a lot of pressure to get it right. 

 

The problem is that the fan base has different views on what getting it right looks like. 

Share this post


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

 

The problem is that the fan base has different views on what getting it right looks like. 

 

For sures.  I personally want "retool" or youth movement.  A prospect as mentioned above like Neiuwy/Iginla... Maybe Gaudreau for someone's prospect who is yet to play in the NHL.  Preferably a Center.  If not then RHS RW/RD.

 

But I know we going for the Cup so... 

Share this post


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

Apparently in the 2nd intermission of the French telecast tonight Renaud Lavoie said they Flames are actively shopping Gaudreau, and he will be traded by October 9th. My French is a bit rusty but here is the video.

 

 

 

I wonder if it's from the French broadcast that someone from the Habs leaked a BT/Gaudreau offer to the Habs?  

Share this post


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

 

For sures.  I personally want "retool" or youth movement.  A prospect as mentioned above like Neiuwy/Iginla... Maybe Gaudreau for someone's prospect who is yet to play in the NHL.  Preferably a Center.  If not then RHS RW/RD.

 

But I know we going for the Cup so... 

 

 

Ya, like I don't want a Theo Fleury trade. Reggie was a good player for us, but all-in-all, is that an equal return for the player Fleury was at the time? I get there were other pieces, but at the same time, they were all bottom 6 players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

Ya, like I don't want a Theo Fleury trade. Reggie was a good player for us, but all-in-all, is that an equal return for the player Fleury was at the time? I get there were other pieces, but at the same time, they were all bottom 6 players.

 

Yes it was a great trade for us.  Regehr was our #1 D for a few years and one of the leagues best shut down guys... And it's not too fair to Regehr because the NHL banned clutching and grabbing early into his career.  Those big slow heavy water skiers were so effective pre-2004.

Share this post


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

 

I am not sure how accurate Lavoie's report from last night was, but if it is true, it makes me think that there may have been a trade request. I know that Gaudreau said he lives it Calgary and wants to stay, but what else is he going to say in that situation. It just feels like there may be mutual interest in parting ways.

 

I agree that there is a lot of pressure to get it right. 

 

The problem is that the fan base has different views on what getting it right looks like. 


I feel the same way. It’s not common for a player to be so public in wanting to stay but behind the scenes wanting out but I’ve felt all year to be honest that there was something up. 
 

but even if he did make the request you still have to get it right and for me that means you can’t move Gaudreau just for depth. You need to get an asset or two that can be as good now or as good down the road and anything less is a fail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Missin' Curfew podcast Jimmy Hayes, Kevin Hayes of the Flyers's brother, said that the rumour he is hearing is that Johnny Gaudreau and something else (he wasn't sure what) was headed to Philly for Vorachek and Gostisbehere. He did say that since Calgary was taking on a lot of money that Philly would be sending a juicy prospect in the deal.

 

He later said that his source was someone who is in contact with a lot of GM's.

 

Not sure what to make of this, I don't mind Vorachek but hate his contract. Ghost had a really bad year, but if he bounces back he is a good offensive defenseman.

 

We better be getting Frost, plus one of Patrick, Brink, Rubtsov, or Farabee.

 

That is a lot of cap to take on, it's hard to see them taking on that cap and adding Hall and a goalie.

Share this post


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


I feel the same way. It’s not common for a player to be so public in wanting to stay but behind the scenes wanting out but I’ve felt all year to be honest that there was something up. 
 

but even if he did make the request you still have to get it right and for me that means you can’t move Gaudreau just for depth. You need to get an asset or two that can be as good now or as good down the road and anything less is a fail. 

 

 

I think that's where the Oilers went wrong in the Hall trade. They got a needed player, but they didn't wait to make sure they got the max value they possibly could. 

Share this post


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

On the Missin' Curfew podcast Jimmy Hayes, Kevin Hayes of the Flyers's brother, said that the rumour he is hearing is that Johnny Gaudreau and something else (he wasn't sure what) was headed to Philly for Vorachek and Gostisbehere. He did say that since Calgary was taking on a lot of money that Philly would be sending a juicy prospect in the deal.

 

He later said that his source was someone who is in contact with a lot of GM's.

 

Not sure what to make of this, I don't mind Vorachek but hate his contract. Ghost had a really bad year, but if he bounces back he is a good offensive defenseman.

 

We better be getting Frost, plus one of Patrick, Brink, Rubtsov, or Farabee.

 

That is a lot of cap to take on, it's hard to see them taking on that cap and adding Hall and a goalie.

I'm thinking that with the writers various trade lists that came out and the draft/FA market coming soon anyone on any of those lists is going to have multiple rumors around them. Some make more sense than others but as we seen some are just way out there too.

Share this post


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

On the Missin' Curfew podcast Jimmy Hayes, Kevin Hayes of the Flyers's brother, said that the rumour he is hearing is that Johnny Gaudreau and something else (he wasn't sure what) was headed to Philly for Vorachek and Gostisbehere. He did say that since Calgary was taking on a lot of money that Philly would be sending a juicy prospect in the deal.

 

He later said that his source was someone who is in contact with a lot of GM's.

 

Not sure what to make of this, I don't mind Vorachek but hate his contract. Ghost had a really bad year, but if he bounces back he is a good offensive defenseman.

 

We better be getting Frost, plus one of Patrick, Brink, Rubtsov, or Farabee.

 

That is a lot of cap to take on, it's hard to see them taking on that cap and adding Hall and a goalie.

 

Don't like the sounds of that.

 

Voracek, 31, is a lot of money at what is 65-70 points.   Lately, barely a 20-goal guy.  LHS but plays both wings.    We are going to wish we just signed Hall instead.  At least Hall is elite at driving play.

 

Ghostibehere is exactly what we don't need.  LHS LD who would be 4th on LD depth chart at $4.5-mil for 3 more.  I mean we've heard Hanifin trade rumours so maybe Hanifin is out but that's a wrong move to go from Hanifin to Ghostibehere.  In my opinion, Gustafson is a similar player and we have familiarity with Gustafson so why not bring him back and don't do this trade?    How much is Gustafson asking?  I feel more inclined to target Ristolainen instead of Ghostibehere because of RHS RD with size and willing to hit.

 

As for the prospect, this is to absorb Ghostibehere's cap hit?  If it's Frost, we essentially pay $900k + $4.5-mil for Frost.  Is Frost a $5.5-mil player?

 

It should be Voracek + Frost alone. And even then I question if that's what we want.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly the more I've thought about that deal the more I think it's a good deal for the Flames provided 2 things are true.

 

1 - The prospect is Morgan Frost. Frost is very good and normally is not a level of prospect you see teams willing to trade so acquiring him covers off many of the other questions/dislikes I would have with the trade. While I don't think he necessarily has the top 50-75 player upside that Gaudreau does, when you fact in that he could get close and do it at the center ice position he fits in the category of getting a piece that can be as good or better than Gaudreau down the road. 

2- Ward is not going to continue the conservative, dump and chase system and place a more aggressive transition based system. Ghost is a borderline elite puck moving dman who I think has struggled, based on what I read, with the coaching change in Philly to a more conservative system. However I also think his a bit underrated defensively, this also shows up in his analytics, so if you put him in the right system I think he can bounce back and if he does his contract is suddenly pretty good value. He is a LS but plays the right side and I could see him fitting in the Brodie role for the Flames which could put him in a real position to succeed. He also really helps on the PP where the Flames don't really have that PP QB, but again it all depends on how Ward wants to play. If the plan is to continue what we say in the playoffs than the Flames should avoid Ghost and i would agree that Gustafsson would be a more logical target. 

 

But if both of those things are true than I would actually argue this is a very good trade for the Flames as it strikes a really good balance between being good now but also getting a future core piece. They take on some money to do it yes, but the contract lengths also still align well with the what they have on he books so that risk is somewhat mitigated and if Ghost bounces back your actually likely laughing as your D is going to be super affordable for the next several years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2020 at 12:46 PM, cross16 said:

I am still a fan of the trade Gaudreau to sign Hall plan but at the same time trading a player the caliber of Gaudreau is a career defining move. You simply have to get this right no questions, no excuses. 


 

100% agree, trade Gaudreau to afford to sign Hall...

 

100% agree, has to be done right, no gambling on who/what you trade for and also, you don’t make that move unless you are 100% sure your signing Hall, heck they have the room, sign Hall First then trade him, you can’t not afford to trade Gaudreau without having the Hall upgrade in place...they can carry Hall and Gaudreau if need be and be ok with the cap so they don’t get into a pressure trade like Iginla.

 

Share this post


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

Honestly the more I've thought about that deal the more I think it's a good deal for the Flames provided 2 things are true.

 

1 - The prospect is Morgan Frost. Frost is very good and normally is not a level of prospect you see teams willing to trade so acquiring him covers off many of the other questions/dislikes I would have with the trade. While I don't think he necessarily has the top 50-75 player upside that Gaudreau does, when you fact in that he could get close and do it at the center ice position he fits in the category of getting a piece that can be as good or better than Gaudreau down the road. 

2- Ward is not going to continue the conservative, dump and chase system and place a more aggressive transition based system. Ghost is a borderline elite puck moving dman who I think has struggled, based on what I read, with the coaching change in Philly to a more conservative system. However I also think his a bit underrated defensively, this also shows up in his analytics, so if you put him in the right system I think he can bounce back and if he does his contract is suddenly pretty good value. He is a LS but plays the right side and I could see him fitting in the Brodie role for the Flames which could put him in a real position to succeed. He also really helps on the PP where the Flames don't really have that PP QB, but again it all depends on how Ward wants to play. If the plan is to continue what we say in the playoffs than the Flames should avoid Ghost and i would agree that Gustafsson would be a more logical target. 

 

But if both of those things are true than I would actually argue this is a very good trade for the Flames as it strikes a really good balance between being good now but also getting a future core piece. They take on some money to do it yes, but the contract lengths also still align well with the what they have on he books so that risk is somewhat mitigated and if Ghost bounces back your actually likely laughing as your D is going to be super affordable for the next several years. 

 

If the idea is to "gamble" on Ghostibehere if Ward plays more offensively... Then it's better to gamble on Gaudreau returning to 99-point form with Ward's changes.  We could get much more for Gaudreau after that.

 

Furthermore, Ghostibehere is not the only gamble.  Frost may not pan out and Voracek doesn't have a Giroux or Couturier here to bump is stats.  Voracek at $8.25-mil x 4-years... For what could be a 60-point guy here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get both sides, there is reason to be concerned with a Gaudreau for Vorachek+Ghost trade. I also think that if we end up with Frost or more in the deal, I am fine with the trade.

 

I think Vorachek is a solid player and his 5vs5 assist totals are very close to Gaudreau's over the last 3 years, so I don't think he slips too much playing with Monahan and Lindholm. I do wonder if we would be able to get Philly to eat $2m of cap hit, as that would make it much more palatable.

 

I think there is a solid chance Ghost rebounds, and a true PP QB is one of our biggest needs going into this offseason. Reports are that Gustafsson is looking for a raise, and that he is going to test free agency.

 

I do wonder if Frost is enough, can we get their 1st as well?

Share this post


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

 

If the idea is to "gamble" on Ghostibehere if Ward plays more offensively... Then it's better to gamble on Gaudreau returning to 99-point form with Ward's changes.  We could get much more for Gaudreau after that.

 

Furthermore, Ghostibehere is not the only gamble.  Frost may not pan out and Voracek doesn't have a Giroux or Couturier here to bump is stats.  Voracek at $8.25-mil x 4-years... For what could be a 60-point guy here...

 

Well the big difference there is there is really no reason, other than simply wishful thinking or hoping, to think that Gaudreau can return to that form. The sample size of him being a more of a PPG player is significantly greater than him being a 90 plus point player. With Ghost there are reason to suggest, mostly the numbers around that he is very good at creating entries, exits and stopping entries, that it could work. I would also counter that you are not going to get more for Gaudreau when he is 1 year away from UFA. 

 

I'm certainly not going to be jumping up and down with joy if that trade where actually to go through but judging it on merit it is good and pretty close to what I think is reasonable to expect in a Gaudreau trade, but I am pretty high on Frost and i don't see a scenario where he isn't at least a very good top 6 center. Are there gambles in the trade yes but any good trade requires you to make said gambles and if the game plan is avoid that then i would suggest it's better to just hold on to Gaudreau. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob Mckenzie will a long post about Eichel and possible Eichel trade rumors. The long and short of it, as of now there is chatter but no indications that Eichel has asked for a trade or that the Sabres are contemplating moving him. 

 

but an admission that Eichel is frustrated with losing. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Bob Mckenzie will a long post about Eichel and possible Eichel trade rumors. The long and short of it, as of now there is chatter but no indications that Eichel has asked for a trade or that the Sabres are contemplating moving him. 

 

but an admission that Eichel is frustrated with losing. 

 

 

 

Where there's no smoke there's no fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...