Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
And what would that BIG return look like? That is the question. Historically, goaltenders have been traded for very little. Even when some of the best goaltenders in the game have been moved the returns have been underwhelming. Most have been packaged to hedge against the "goaltenders are voodoo" aspect. Goaltenders rarely garner a big return, so if you go in with that expectation a big return is much different than what is being discussed. We're seeing the names from some of the best young talent in the game being bounced around, which has never happened at the trade deadline let alone in a trade for a goaltender. That wouldn't be a big return, that would be an astronomical return. To me, a 1st rounder is probably a stretch considering the cap hit. That would be a big return as we would get a good pick and $6M of cap space. That's a BIG return. Based on history, a realistic good return is a "B" level prospect, a salary dump, and a pick commiserate to the salary we have to eat. A BIG return would be getting that deal done without eating a bad salary in return IMO.
|
That is assuming that the Flames are interested in moving Markstrom. Which they're not. Conroy's position will be that he will only move Markstrom (or any other player not on an expiring contract) if the offer is too good to refuse. Your "realistic" offer is not too good to refuse, so it will be refused, and no trade will happen if this is the best offer. So yes, it probably won't happen, but if it does happen, it will be big. I can see the Flames taking on a cap dump on an expiring contract to make the salary work (and there will have to be compensation for this), but you are right that they will not retain on Markstrom.