2017/2018 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Backlund has a no move for the first 3 yrs of his contract. He ain't gonna go to Buffalo.

NMC doesn't kick in until July 1

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Backlund has a full-NTC for the first 3 years, not a full-NMC. Also, it kicks in on July 1st 2018 - so he can be traded anytime before then without his consent.

Plus, count the non-waivers of NMC/NTCs in the last five years. I bet you can do it on one hand.

Frankly, Buffalo has a chance to get good pretty quickly. Eichel, Middelstadt, Dahlin (probably), Risto is a pretty good starting point.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Backlund has a full-NTC for the first 3 years, not a full-NMC. Also, it kicks in on July 1st 2018 - so he can be traded anytime before then without his consent.

Trading Backlund after signing his contract would kill any UFA attraction that the Flames have. Would also make contract negotiations much more difficult.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Otto-matic

Trading Backlund after signing his contract would kill any UFA attraction that the Flames have. Would also make contract negotiations much more difficult.

Generally I would agree. The out for this though is the change in direction Treliving has mentioned. And let's not forget that even now Backlunds contract can be viewed as favorable to a lot of teams.

If the Flames had signed a UFA then dealt him before the contract kicked in then you could say that would kill any attraction. But Backlund has been a part of a Flames team thats struggled to gain traction for many years. Don't think this take will hold true if (very small chance) Backlund were moved this offseason.

[Torch]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Brodie and Backlund for ROR and Reinhart

Gaudreau Monahan Ferland
Tkachuk ROR Reinhart
Bennett Jankowski Frolik
Lazar Shore Dube/Brouwer
Hathaway

Gio Hamilton
Kulak Hamonic
Andersson Stone
Valimaki?
I'd give Valimaki

I think Ferland gets traded. Where's Foo fit in? Still need a top RW.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Who's KT? Getting Matthew confused with his dad or am I forgetting someone obvious?

Yes, thanks. Of course its Matthew Tkatchuk on my list of ones you keep.

[bax]

Originally Posted by wretched34

The vast majority of Rookies provide spurts where they shine, and others where they are invisible. I give Jankowski the benefit of the doubt because he is a rookie, playing at center, and driving the play. Bennett had multiple opportunities on the top lines, and you're right, they finished with nearly identical stats.

There is a long list of players who continue to develop beyond age 23, and put up career highs much later in their careers. It's uncommon for stud players to enter the league at older ages, not uncommon to develop into a stud player as they age.

William Karlsson comes to mind.
Rookie season age 23, 9 goals, 11 assists.
This season, age 25, 43 goals, 35 assists.

I don't think "Untouchable" should be placed on a name, it should be placed on the value of the player in the role.

Can we replace what Gaudreau or Tkachuk bring to the team vis FA or trade? likely not, so they are untouchable.
Can you easliy replace a big strong rookie center, who's proven he can play a solid 2 way game? You could with a veteran, but is it wise to replace young, cheap players with more potential, for older more expensive players who will decline sooner?
Jankowski is exactly the type of player the Flames need over the next 5-10 seasons.

It is uncommon for a player to make the NHL at age 23 and then develop into a first line player in the next few years. William Karlsson is an aberration under extremely unusual circumstances. You would be hard pressed to find another situation like his, and even then he was playing NHL games when he was 20.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Generally I would agree. The out for this though is the change in direction Treliving has mentioned. And let's not forget that even now Backlunds contract can be viewed as favorable to a lot of teams.

If the Flames had signed a UFA then dealt him before the contract kicked in then you could say that would kill any attraction. But Backlund has been a part of a Flames team thats struggled to gain traction for many years. Don't think this take will hold true if (very small chance) Backlund were moved this offseason.

The only problem is, if Backlund wasn't part of Tre's vision for the team. Why even bother keeping him around and signing a 5 year deal.

I would see this in a negative light if I was a player wanting to re-sign or sign with the Flames. Would make me really second guess the loyalty a team has for the player if they are dealt 3 months after signing a long term.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Otto-matic

The only problem is, if Backlund wasn't part of Tre's vision for the team. Why even bother keeping him around and signing a 5 year deal.

I would see this in a negative light if I was a player wanting to re-sign or sign with the Flames. Would make me really second guess the loyalty a team has for the player if they are dealt 3 months after signing a long term.

Backlund himself openly admitted after he signed the contract that he may not be here for the entirety. I think he knows full well the business side.

And again, right now there's a shift in Flames philosophy happening and it's not just coaching but as Treliving has said himself but the make up of the team as well. It's no slight on Backs if he is moved after he signed that deal, nor do I see anyone really taking a negative stance on the idea that a culture shift makes Backs available.

Carter was Moved IIRC before his NTC kicked in as well. Its not like it hasnt happened before. It's business and things change in the hockey world, even as early as a couple of months.

Either way, things will happen or they won't, just don't think there'll be a level of disdain held against the Flames if certain things did happen.

[Mattman]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Last decade we used to constantly discuss the lack of top shelf center for Iginla but guys like Conroy and Langkow weren't exactly chopped liver. RW has been a total graveyard in comparison.

Managment did shore up our lack of centers for sure. Monahan, Jankowski, Backlund, Dube, Bennett, Granlund. I would consider all of these guys prospects with positive potential at the time of drafting them.

But again taking a look at the last 10 years of drafting for the Flames, only 8/69 picks have been used on RW prospects. And in 2007, 2011, 2012, and 2015 no right wingers were picked at all.

So drafting them hasn't worked. Doesn't look like that's improving any time soon..
The only notable RW that Treliving has managed to picked up in his time here is Michael Frolik who is great for a 2nd/3rd line role.

The time to trade for a legit top 6 and 1st line winger is now. Use roster players, use the wealth of LW, C, D and G prospects you have, (use what ever draft picks we have left) Treliving you're not going to save this hockey team by providing them with bottom 6 talent on the top lines.

[sureLoss]

It is possible that Backlund's NTC has already kicked in.

CBA section 11.8 b

(b) A no-Trade clause or a no-move clause that is negotiated as part of an extension of an SPC entered into pursuant to Section 50.5(f) may become effective immediately upon registration of, but prior to the effective date of, such SPC extension, provided: (i) the Player would otherwise have been eligible as of the immediately preceding July 1 prior to signing the SPC extension to have a no-Trade or no-move clause pursuant to Section 11.8; and (ii) the Club and the Player, who are parties to such SPC extension, agree that the no-Trade or no-move clause is effective immediately upon execution of the SPC extension (or at some later date agreed to by the Club and the Player) and evidence such agreement in writing in the SPC.

believe this was introduced after the Jeff Carter and Mike Richards trade IIRC

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

NMC doesn't kick in until July 1

I just can't see Treliving doing a sign and trade like that seeing Backlund would have likely preferred to choose his next team in free agency if he wasn't going to be a Flame. It's kind of a crummy thing to do IMO.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

It is possible that Backlund's NTC has already kicked in.

CBA section 11.8 b



believe this was introduced after the Jeff Carter and Mike Richards trade IIRC

I don't believe either Carter or Richards would have been eligible for a NMC under Section 11.8 B. They hadn't met the 7/27 rule.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by bax

It is uncommon for a player to make the NHL at age 23 and then develop into a first line player in the next few years. William Karlsson is an aberration under extremely unusual circumstances.

So is Jankowski.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Torch

I think Ferland gets traded. Where's Foo fit in? Still need a top RW.

Yeah our RW is abysmal so trade the only one that scored at all?

Where’s the logic there?

[Demetric]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Yeah our RW is abysmal so trade the only one that scored at all?

Where’s the logic there?

Oh, don't be bringing logic into this, then things will really get out of control

[FlamesAddiction]

I thought maybe he was implying that Ferland would get traded in part of a package for an upgrade on RW.

[wretched34]

Originally Posted by bax

It is uncommon for a player to make the NHL at age 23 and then develop into a first line player in the next few years. William Karlsson is an aberration under extremely unusual circumstances. You would be hard pressed to find another situation like his, and even then he was playing NHL games when he was 20.

Okay, you pressed me hard:

Blake Wheeler made his debut at age 22, was always a solid player but the last 5 years have been his best.

Duncan Keith made his debut at 22.

Patrick Sharp didn't earn a starting role til he was 22.

Martin St. Louis played his first game at 23, didn't earn a spot til he was 24.

Brett Hull had played 5 NHL games prior to his 23rd birthday....

Johnny Gaudreau didn't become an every day player til he was 21.

It's not as uncommon as you think for good players to get an education before becoming NHLers.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by wretched34

6'4" 200+lb Center. Tied for 5th in team goals, top 10 in NHL rookie goals.
And why compare seasons by age?
Bennett's 23 year old season will be his 6th full NHL season, where as Jankowski's was his 1st.

Jankowski proved to be a reliable 2 way player, who can play in all situations, and provide offense, all while playing with bottom 6 players who struggled greatly to provide offense, Bennett included.

Will Jankowski grow to be a ppg 1st line center? I don't believe so. Can he be a 60 point 2 way center, who plays in the top 6. I believe so. Depending on the style of game played by the team, that could make him your number 1 (ala Patrice Bergeron, who has never put up a ppg season in the NHL in fact averages just under 60pts/season), or your number 2.

Considering it was his rookie season, I'd say he's close to untouchable, as it's way, way, way to early to move this player just because he entered the league later than a CHL drafted player.

I am not moving Janko either, but you cannot ignore the age thing between him and Bennett. It's why it would be foolish to move Bennett as a bust when he's so young. It was much easier for Janko to break into the NHL at age 23 than it was for Bennett at age 18. Comparing their rookie seasons without accounting for their age difference is crazy. Janko time line to start producing and hitting his prime needs to come a lot quicker than Bennett's.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Yeah our RW is abysmal so trade the only one that scored at all?

Where’s the logic there?

I think anyone who's suggested trading Ferland has suggested it happens to make a package strong enough to land a top line RW.