I wasn't looking for this thread to become a discussion about the merits of the Athletic. Regardless of your opinions on that (or other) publication, the reality is that Conroy's moves haven't been viewed positively outside of Calgary.
Perhaps we are biased, but I would rank his trades differently.
Lindholm: A+
I don't think you could ask for more than what Craig acquired.
Toffoli: A
At the time of the trade, it looked poor. After one year, it looks like a steal. Sharongovich is critically underrated and will contribute to the Flames for 7 seasons, as opposed to 1 season of Toffoli. Suniev looks like he could have NHL upside.
Mangiapane: B
Trading a middle six winger, who is overpaid, in a capped out market was a win on its own. A second was fair value, but we were lucky to find someone able to swing it.
Markstrom: B
Trading a 30+ goalie for a first was a win. Getting a serviceable, young D man was a good move as well. If Bahl becomes more than a bottom pairing D, then it is a bonus. The goalie market is wierd...they don't ever bring much via trade. I think we did good, but I would have preferred getting a top prospect.
Tanev: B-
I'm still surprised we couldn't get a first for Tanev on his own. Conroy did well to get Grush, who looks like he has NHL upside. We will see if Battaglia becomes anything, but the first few months in our system look promising.
Hanifin: C-
Despite the fact his agent was working behind the scenes, Hanifin as a rental was still worth more than what we received IMO. The fact that he extended there made this a loss. I think Miromanov has the potential to be a contributor for a few years, and may even net us some additional assets down the road, but I expected a top prospect in addition to a first.
Zadorov: D
Conroy should have waited for this deal. I agree with other posters saying he could have gotten better picks. We didn't pay much for him so it was a wash in the end, but still - his only pure loss IMO
|