2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by getbak

He doesn't hold all the cards because he has to submit a list of 18 teams he can be traded to. Even if he includes teams that aren't likely interested (like Montreal or Washington), that still gives Rutherford plenty of options.

Not really, if MAF wanted to be a dick about it the task of trading him would be very difficult.

1. Boston (Rask)
2. Toronto (Andersen)
3. Washington (Holtby)
4. Columbus (Bob)
5. New Jersey (Schneider)
6. Montreal (Price)
7. Florida (Luongo/Reimer)
8. Tampa Bay (Vasi)
9. Rangers (Lundqvist)
10. Chicago (Crawford)
11. Dallas (Bishop)
12. San Jose (Jones)
13. Colorado (Varlamov)
14. Nashville (Rinne)
15. St. Louis (Allen)
16. Minny (Dubnyk)
17. LAK (Quick)
18. Edmonton (Talbot)
19. Anaheim (Gibson)

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I find it funny how a lot of people look at a goalie with terrible stats that plays on bad team and give that player the benefit of the doubt. But a goalie with decent personal stats on a good team is written off as a product of the good team.

Quite often, a team is exactly the product of its goaltending, or at least a big factor of their record is due to goaltending.

.

We just had Elliott here for a season. He is the definition of a goalie being the product of the system. Mediocre before he went to the Blues, had some excellent numbers, and mediocre when he comes to the Flames.

I can see why people are not sold on a good backup playing for a top team being the answer. I also am more inclined to give a guy like Bishop or Fleury (both who had poor statistical regular seasons) the benefit of the doubt because they have proven they can play as a number 1 in the past and do well.


If Elliott had 5 seasons of 55-60+ games per season in St. Louis I would be more inclined to have him return. He was never been a legit number one and it makes sense why

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Not really, if MAF wanted to be a dick about it the task of trading him would be very difficult.

1. Boston (Rask)
2. Toronto (Andersen)
3. Washington (Holtby)
4. Columbus (Bob)
5. New Jersey (Schneider)
6. Montreal (Price)
7. Florida (Luongo/Reimer)
8. Tampa Bay (Vasi)
9. Rangers (Lundqvist)
10. Chicago (Crawford)
11. Dallas (Bishop)
12. San Jose (Jones)
13. Colorado (Varlamov)
14. Nashville (Rinne)
15. St. Louis (Allen)
16. Minny (Dubnyk)
17. LAK (Quick)
18. Edmonton (Talbot)
19. Anaheim (Gibson)

It would be funny for him to submit that list and have the Avs or Devils trade for him when they flip Varlomov/Schneider to the Flames

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

We just had Elliott here for a season. He is the definition of a goalie being the product of the system. Mediocre before he went to the Blues, had some excellent numbers, and mediocre when he comes to the Flames.

I can see why people are not sold on a good backup playing for a top team being the answer. I also am more inclined to give a guy like Bishop or Fleury (both who had poor statistical regular seasons) the benefit of the doubt because they have proven they can play as a number 1 in the past and do well.


If Elliott had 5 seasons of 55-60+ games per season in St. Louis I would be more inclined to have him return. He was never been a legit number one and it makes sense why

Bishop was the one I kind of wanted.

I don't really want Elliott. In fact, I was one of the only people disappointed when we acquired him and got roasted for saying he was overrated.

But the list of realistically available goalies at this point is a whole lot of unknowns and a whole lot of terrible. I would prefer an unknown with a veteran goalie back-up or 1B, and Elliott might be the best one that fits the bill when you consider price.

The rumours about Fleury to Vegas seem pretty strong, so I am going under the assumption that he won't be going to the Flames.

[dammage79]

They're going to need another 1b like Mason or Smith if they bring Elliott back. I don't mind bringing Elliott back, but he really needs to be a 2a goalie for the team. I don't know, the off season goalie drama needs to die, fast. Flames won't be going anywhere without a surefire 65+ game starter.

[Vinny01]

Pure speculation but makes sense. Elliott a fit for the Jets?

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2017/05/15/...-for-winnipeg/

[SofaProfessor]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Pure speculation but makes sense. Elliott a fit for the Jets?

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2017/05/15/...-for-winnipeg/

Considering their inconsistent goaltending was their downfall this season I can't see why the Jets would want to bring in one of last season's most inconsistent goalies. The price is probably the only attractive thing about Elliott right now after the entire league watched him blow a playoff series in spectacular fashion.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Pure speculation but makes sense. Elliott a fit for the Jets?

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2017/05/15/...-for-winnipeg/

Started reading, then realized it cites an Eric Francis article.

[activeStick]

After calming down after the playoff performance by Elliott, I don't mind seeing him back looking at the options. He didn't have a good start to the season, but he had an almost elite second half of the season, which is a much bigger sample size than the 3 bad games he had in the playoffs. Rolling the dice with some of the available guys is a gamble compared to Elliott and could blow up in Treliving's face.

I'd stick with Elliott and replace Johnson with someone stronger. Bernier is a guy I like but I think he's also quite pricey?

[The Fonz]

He was pulled after 4 mins and 1 goal against, in the most important game of our season. That tells you all you need to know about how much faith this team has in Brian Elliott.

I'd bet my left nut we don't re-sign him.

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

He was pulled after 4 mins and 1 goal against, in the most important game of our season. That tells you all you need to know about how much faith this team has in Brian Elliott.

I'd bet my left nut we don't re-sign him.

Quoted just in case we do sign him, we can donate it to a less fortunate one-balled man.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

He was pulled after 4 mins and 1 goal against, in the most important game of our season. That tells you all you need to know about how much faith this team has in Brian Elliott.

I'd bet my left nut we don't re-sign him.

The problem is, that pull was beyond stupid. Not even giving Moose a chance to battle back and putting in Johnson who had less than 5 starts over the last third of the season, didn't make any sense. I get that the goal was weak, but Johnson had been awful since his magical 10 game streak which was before Christmas.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

The problem is, that pull was beyond stupid. Not even giving Moose a chance to battle back and putting in Johnson who had less than 5 starts over the last third of the season, didn't make any sense. I get that the goal was weak, but Johnson had been awful since his magical 10 game streak which was before Christmas.

It made perfect sense. The coach didn't believe Elliott was capable of battling back. He believed the chances of Elliott battling back were so grim, that he put in a cold Chad Johnson after we went down by 1 goal, with 55 mins to play, in the biggest game of our season.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

The problem is, that pull was beyond stupid. Not even giving Moose a chance to battle back and putting in Johnson who had less than 5 starts over the last third of the season, didn't make any sense. I get that the goal was weak, but Johnson had been awful since his magical 10 game streak which was before Christmas.

I'd maybe agree with this if I hadn't seen Elliot's dismal performance in game 3.

Dude was mentally broken.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

The problem is, that pull was beyond stupid. Not even giving Moose a chance to battle back and putting in Johnson who had less than 5 starts over the last third of the season, didn't make any sense. I get that the goal was weak, but Johnson had been awful since his magical 10 game streak which was before Christmas.

Starting Elliott was stupid IMO. But the series was over by then anyway.

[Iniggywetrust]

Goaltending in the playoffs is always a crap shoot. Not sure many people would have wanted to pick up Anderson last year, but right now he's a world beater. It's about being hot at the right time.

I would not be opposed to bringing Elliot back. Some consistency at the position may be what we need.

[Roof-Daddy]

Maybe Elliott got burnt out in the 2nd half.

He was so terrible in the first half he hardly played, so when he got hot he ended up getting the bulk of his 49 games (which BTW is the 2nd most he's ever appeared in in one season) in the 2nd half.

Maybe....maaaaaaybe if he comes back and maaaaaybe he and the team aren't a 5 alarm tire fire for the first 2-3 months, GG would be able to spread out his work load and hopefully have him peaking just as the playoffs hit instead of just starting to peter out.

I dunno. I'm grasping at straws here I guess, because more and more it starts to look like he may be back.

[Anduril]

There was no good choice in that scenario given how weak Elliot was playing. Johnson hasn't been great towards the 2nd half of the season and barely played.

I'm sure the coach talked to Elliot and empathized the need to have a strong bounceback game. Unfortunately given the freak/weak goal and Gulutzan's assessment of the team's mental state from before the game, trying to snap the team with a goalie change was the most realistic choice.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

The problem is, that pull was beyond stupid. Not even giving Moose a chance to battle back and putting in Johnson who had less than 5 starts over the last third of the season, didn't make any sense. I get that the goal was weak, but Johnson had been awful since his magical 10 game streak which was before Christmas.

Come on man. He had played like absolute garbage the previous 2 games and let's in a complete laugher at the beginning of game 4 that buried the team. I was an advocate of starting Johnson and the biggest mistake GG made that game was starting Elliott in the first place

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Come on man. He had played like absolute garbage the previous 2 games and let's in a complete laugher at the beginning of game 4 that buried the team. I was an advocate of starting Johnson and the biggest mistake GG made that game was starting Elliott in the first place

I agree that he was broken after game 3, but Johnson was a pile of hot garbage for months​ prior. To me, the only options were dance with the one that brung ya in Elliott, or throw in Gillies and see what he's got. I don't think anyone in that building trusted Johnson.

Edit... Sorry to derail the thread.