[Trade] Flames acquire Mike Smith (25% retained) for Chad Johnson, Brandon Hickey, & cond 3rd

[Strange Brew]

Thinking about this some more today.

Jones cost SJ a first round pick, prospect and a 3 year deal at $3 million per.
Talbot costs Oilers 3 picks and ultimately a 3 year contract at $4 million per.

Andersen and Reimer were UFA's as I recall, signed for slightly longer term.

Elliott and then Smith have likely cost the Flames 2 seconds and a prospect, and 3 years total in contract.

Obviously we have yet to see how Smith will play for us, but given options that were out there a year ago, Treliving has given up quite a few assets and really has no more flexibility compared to some other options. This flexibility thing is a bit of a red herring if you're not able to get good goalie play.

Smith really needs to work out or else this is a rather dramatic failure.

[Galakanokis]

While not my most favourite of moves I am not completely disappointed with it. I think Smith is a proven #1 and is far more consistent goalie than Elliot. I loved the Elliot pickup and we all know how that worked out. He's a stop gap and as far as that option goes I don't see any better options. I wanted a younger backup but the Flames must have faith in the depth they have.

Let's see how it goes, should be fun at least. I can see him hitting Gaudreau with a few stretch passes throughout the season.

[calumniate]

That's true. Might be fun to have a puck moving goalie for a change

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

If Smith bombs the upcoming season, does Treliving get fired? Burke? Or GG?

When I say bombs I mean miss the playoffs.

If he drops the ball in the first half I see the Flames not hesitating to make a move to bring someone else in.

But considering the Flames made the playoffs on the quality of goaltending they received last season, (which was mediocre to terrible outside of two months) I honestly don't know how he could do worse / bad enough to cause them to miss.

Too many skaters had subpar years too, notably Gaudreau and Brodie. I just see the team in front of him playing better this time around too. It's unlikely that they would miss. They just need consistently average tending, which Smith has proven he is able to bring most nights behind and awful team.

[showtime]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Thinking about this some more today.

Jones cost SJ a first round pick, prospect and a 3 year deal at $3 million per.
Talbot costs Oilers 3 picks and ultimately a 3 year contract at $4 million per.

Andersen and Reimer were UFA's as I recall, signed for slightly longer term.

Elliott and then Smith have likely cost the Flames 2 seconds and a prospect, and 3 years total in contract.

Obviously, we have yet to see how Smith will play for us, but given options that were out there a year ago, Treliving has given up quite a few assets and really has no more flexibility compared to some other options. This flexibility thing is a bit of a red herring if you're not able to get good goalie play.

Smith really needs to work out or else this is a rather dramatic failure.

Andersen was traded for a 1st and 2nd round pick.

Elliot didnt work out, there was no way of knowing he would bomb like he did. You're using hindsight to make it seem worse then it is.

To deal the first rounder that got Andersen and Jones would have been our Tkachuk pick.

Talbot deal also probably prevents us from getting Hamilton

[Roof-Daddy]

Yeah, Elliott had 100% redeemed himself after his terrible start.

If he hadn't #### the bed in the playoffs it would have been a hugely successful move, and you can't hang his playoff failure on Treliving.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Locke

You realize that us making the playoffs last season was basically a miracle right?

Our goaltending was so bad that we were dead in the water. That winning streak is pretty much the only reason we made it.

We are, at the moment, far from a 'lock' for the playoffs.

Yeah, this is a fairly extreme take on the season. Another way to view it is that the Flames made the playoffs quite comfortably despite getting worse than league average goaltending, and suffering through a long adjustment period to start the year. Add to that the added handicap of having to play Wideman for most of the season, and I would say that the outlook for 2017–18 has to be dramatically improved even without a significant change in goal.

I guess the Flames are not reallly a "lock" for the playoffs, but they must be an odds-on favourite at minimum.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by showtime

Andersen was traded for a 1st and 2nd round pick.

Elliot didnt work out, there was no way of knowing he would bomb like he did. You're using hindsight to make it seem worse then it is.

To deal the first rounder that got Andersen and Jones would have been our Tkachuk pick.

Talbot deal also probably prevents us from getting Hamilton

Of course I'm using hindsight to assess the GM's moves. And my point is that Smith really needs to work out because Treliving has given up significant assets in his search for stopgap goalies.

I don't subscribe to the notion that there were no other choices. Treliving has chosen this approach and I'm sure he would agree he will be accountable for its success or failure.

And the Hamilton deal was good but I would take the Talbot deal over it if you want to play what if.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Of course I'm using hindsight to assess the GM's moves. And my point is that Smith really needs to work out because Treliving has given up significant assets in his search for stopgap goalies.

I don't subscribe to the notion that there were no other choices. Treliving has chosen this approach and I'm sure he would agree he will be accountable for its success or failure.

And the Hamilton deal was good but I would take the Talbot deal over it if you want to play what if.

I wonder how that would have looked for this past season? The Flames defence would have been extremely thin in Hamilton's absence, and even with excellent individual play from Talbot I don't believe they would have been any further ahead than where they finished this spring. Talbot was excellent in his first year in Edmonton, and they still finished in the bottom-three of the NHL. For the Flames to then shore up their defence would likely cost them an impact roster player—Edmonton traded Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson, whom I do not believe to be as good a player as Dougie Hamilton.

I think the Flames are in a better position today than they would have been with Talbot but sans Hamilton. Filling a hole on the top defence pairing is a mighty tall order compared to finding a starting goalie, it would seem.

[Sylvanfan]

It's hardly an exciting move to be sure. But if Hickey wasn't likely to sign, it is a case of recovering value out of the asset while they could.

Its not that long ago when everyone was wondering why the Kigs were too stupid to go and get a goaltender. Eventually they proved the answer was inside the organization. I hope it's the same case with the Flames.

If Smith is solid and Parsons, Rittich, or Gilles emerge than it could be a case of the best deal you make is the one didn't.

[EldrickOnIce]

Not sure how big a fan on Smith I am, but a way bigger fan of this than 6 or 7 years of Bishop.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Not sure how big a fan on Smith I am, but a way bigger fan of this than 6 or 7 years of Bishop.

Yeah, this scares me way less than the prospect of 7 years of Bishop at a huge price tag. Dallas is going to seriously regret that signing if everything doesn't go right.

2 seasons of Smith @ 4.25 is pretty low risk in comparison.. People shouldn't be too upset.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I wonder how that would have looked for this past season? The Flames defence would have been extremely thin in Hamilton's absence, and even with excellent individual play from Talbot I don't believe they would have been any further ahead than where they finished this spring. Talbot was excellent in his first year in Edmonton, and they still finished in the bottom-three of the NHL. For the Flames to then shore up their defence would likely cost them an impact roster player—Edmonton traded Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson, whom I do not believe to be as good a player as Dougie Hamilton.

I think the Flames are in a better position today than they would have been with Talbot but sans Hamilton. Filling a hole on the top defence pairing is a mighty tall order compared to finding a starting goalie, it would seem.

Whether at the time or in hindsight, the deal for Talbot is better than the deal for Hamilton. And really the only defense for the Flames spinning their tires for three seasons of sub-par stop-gap goaltending and counting is that if we had swung deals for the other clearly superior goaltending solutions found by other teams is that we wouldn't have Hamilton and Tkachuk. Not sure. We have used up Brandon Hickey, a first, two seconds, a conditional second, and a third for Hamilton plus Elliott plus Smith. Hoping for the best with Smith, and even more so, hoping for Gillies, Parsons and/or Rittich to emerge but there's no way any GM would look at Treliving's goaltending moves (plus Hamilton acquisition) as an optimal use of those assets.

[oldschoolcalgary]

the funny thing about the Elliott trade, was it was actually looking as a very good move...

the start was terrible, but at the time, there seemed to be reasonable mitigating circumstances: new city, new team mates, new coach/terminology... not to mention all the things outside the rink. Friends, family, new schools for the kid...

So Elliott too longer to adjust, but the same could be said for the entire team.

What it boils down to, imo, was Elliott's meltdown in the playoffs... after that, it was very tough to bring him back (and I don't even know if Elliott wanted to come back after that tbh)...

the Smith move is a lateral one probably, and a stop gap... however, under the circumstances, i think it was probably ok... but we'll see....

i don't know if guys like Raanta or Grubauer had the same run that guys like Jones, Talbott and Andersson had, so the level of certainty for them to become starters would be less than the latter three...

BT chose to roll with a guy who has been a starter for years (who he knows personally) over a guy that hasn't had that kind of sustained run, not to mention those options would have cost more than Smith did.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

His point still stands. He's never been nominated for the Vezina.

He just showed that he HAS been nominated.

[heep223]

I don't really see how anyone could be really critical of this trade. Very short contract, manageable money, will be motivated, clearly a stopgap but gives the team a chance to win now.

It's better than the alternatives: signing a 7 year deal for Bishop, giving up a core player for Raanta, or bringing back a 1B goalie who completely let the team down when they needed him most.

IMO this is a pretty good deal considering said alternatives, Smith will give the team a chance to win now while allowing our goalie prospects to develop properly and it doesn't handcuff the team in any way going forward.

[TheIronMaiden]

I will have a better perspective on this deal once I know who the backup is. I have a feeling that whoever the second goalie is will be important to the teams success for the next two years.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Whether at the time or in hindsight, the deal for Talbot is better than the deal for Hamilton. And really the only defense for the Flames spinning their tires for three seasons of sub-par stop-gap goaltending and counting is that if we had swung deals for the other clearly superior goaltending solutions found by other teams is that we wouldn't have Hamilton and Tkachuk. Not sure. We have used up Brandon Hickey, a first, two seconds, a conditional second, and a third for Hamilton plus Elliott plus Smith. Hoping for the best with Smith, and even more so, hoping for Gillies, Parsons and/or Rittich to emerge but there's no way any GM would look at Treliving's goaltending moves (plus Hamilton acquisition) as an optimal use of those assets.

Wow, I strongly disagree with the bolded part of your post. Actually, now that I reread it, I strongly disagree with the whole thing. You're incredibly underrating the Hamilton acquisition.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I will have a better perspective on this deal once I know who the backup is. I have a feeling that whoever the second goalie is will be important to the teams success for the next two years.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Rittich is the backup and Gilles gets a huge workload in Stockton.

You can't bury the kids forever, if you want one of them to take over in two years.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

And the Hamilton deal was good but I would take the Talbot deal over it if you want to play what if.

Not I. We have Parsons, Gillies, Rittich, McDonald and Schneider for goaltending depth. Several of those could be a Talbot.

We have nobody in our system who could be a Hamilton IMO. And defensemen are worth more than goalies in trade and value.

Hamilton worth way more than Talbot IMO.