View Single Post
Old 02-01-2024, 11:35 AM   #1253
Flames Fan, Ph.D.
#1 Goaltender
 
Flames Fan, Ph.D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Underground
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
So I would argue that VAN benefitted more by moving Kuzmenko than by CGY retaining, and CGY benefitted more by NOT retaining, than they would have gotten for the retention.
There's also diminishing returns to retention in this case. The plausible upside to retention here would presumably have been to get one of Vancouver's top 2 prospects. However it appears they were basically off the table*, so there's no meaningful upside to the Flames retaining. Getting a guaranteed 3rd rather than a 4th and/or even a conditional 2nd wouldn't really move the needle imo.

* I'm guessing they were off the table but it's a reasonable assumption. If the Tanev involvement angle was true, it probably related to getting one of those two. But even then, you get a diminished return on Tanev because it would only be the prospect. Vancouver had already given away their 2024 1st and I would think giving away the 2025 1st as well would have been off the table. Gotta go elsewhere for Tanev since the Vancouver well is effectively dry.
Flames Fan, Ph.D. is offline   Reply With Quote