[Rumour] Friedman: Ducks really like Sam Bennett

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

I'm not sure why Friedman thought trade (or why everyone in this thread jumped to trade speculation). If anything, if the Ducks like Bennett they're probably looking to offer sheet him. If the Ducks sign him for 5.8 million, they give up a 1st and 3rd round pick. Do the Flames walk away at that salary? It's not like an Anaheim's 1st rounder + 3rd rounder is remotely close to the value of a 3rd overall pick. But that's some stupid salary, unless your Anahiem who will likely lose a sweet asset to the expansion draft.

Friedman thought trade because there is a reason why offer sheets just don't happen much. You've offered up a dramatically less likely scenario under normal circumstances, but one that makes even less sense given the entire motivation for the Ducks is to move a defenceman they are virtually guaranteed to lose for nothing to Vegas otherwise. Also of significant importance, the Ducks don't really have enough cap space to justify badly overpaying a player like Bennett in the hope he breaks out.

[Flash Walken]

I would consider moving bennett for a top flight young puck moving defender.

I'm not sure that's necessarily where Calgary needs to be, but if the plan is to shuffle some of the defensive deck chairs and maybe move a defender out for offensive help, it might make sense to capitalise on Bennett's free agent status and value around the league.

The Flames are in the unenviable position of needing a lot of help, but without the necessary trade assets to get deals done. Bennett is a prime trade asset.

Move bennett, sign backlund... profit?

[Toonage]

Not sure why there is such bewilderment over the possibility. Nashville traded Seth Jones for example. If it helps the team, fills a hole etc then of course it will be looked at.

Rule for management applies to fans in this case as well. Don't fall in love with your own players, I guess.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I would consider moving bennett for a top flight young puck moving defender.

I'm not sure that's necessarily where Calgary needs to be, but if the plan is to shuffle some of the defensive deck chairs and maybe move a defender out for offensive help, it might make sense to capitalise on Bennett's free agent status and value around the league.

The Flames are in the unenviable position of needing a lot of help, but without the necessary trade assets to get deals done. Bennett is a prime trade asset.

Move bennett, sign backlund... profit?

Move the 20 year old to keep the 28 year old?

Bennett is too young to give up on at this stage. His value is not that of a 21 year old legit top 2 centre. He is a former top 4 pick that has had an up and down career so he is tradeable but not going to get the return we would want. When Tampa was shopping Drouin a year and a half ago the offers where underwhelming and I feel Bennett would be similar.

The discussion on the FAN today was Bennett for Vatanen and that trade would be a loss for Calgary imo. While Vatanen would be a great fit on the second pair Calgary loses a guy that was drafted to be the number 1 center with the organizations highest ever pick.

I know Backlund is everyone's favorite Flame but I trade him over Bennett every day. I think the Flames are 2-3 years away from really contending for a cup. I rather have a 23-24 year old Bennett than a 31-32 year old Backlund.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I would consider moving bennett for a top flight young puck moving defender.

I'm not sure that's necessarily where Calgary needs to be, but if the plan is to shuffle some of the defensive deck chairs and maybe move a defender out for offensive help, it might make sense to capitalise on Bennett's free agent status and value around the league.

The Flames are in the unenviable position of needing a lot of help, but without the necessary trade assets to get deals done. Bennett is a prime trade asset.

Move bennett, sign backlund... profit?

In general, sure. Specific to Anaheim, I don't see it. Not unless the Ducks can buy out Bieksa before the expansion draft. Because we sure as hell aren't going to trade Bennett for one of Anaheim's good defenders, only to have to expose them to Vegas. So no move of this type is even within the realm of possibility until the start of July.

[Par]

I don't why, some people are against trading Sam Bennett, if it helps the team, than he should not traded. Their are 5-6 players from that draft that have surpassed Sam Bennett(as of date.)

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by Par

I don't why, some people are against trading Sam Bennett, if it helps the team, than he should not traded. Their are 5-6 players from that draft that have surpassed Sam Bennett(as of date.)

It's almost like player progress differently and the Flames shouldn't be making trades based on re-drafts on HF boards. This team traded St.Louis, I would like to avoid that scenario.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by Beninho

It's almost like player progress differently and the Flames shouldn't be making trades based on re-drafts on HF boards. This team traded St.Louis, I would like to avoid that scenario.

Not to metion Brett Hull...

[Par]

Originally Posted by Beninho

It's almost like player progress differently and the Flames shouldn't be making trades on based on re-drafts on HF boards. This team traded St.Louis, I would like to avoid that scenario again.

Totally agree with you, I think Sam Bennett has a change of a life time, where he can tell the Flames, get me good line mates or I am going to Vegas because if he is not signed by June 15, he can do that. I don't he he will do that but he has a chance if he wants.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by Par

Totally agree with you, I think Sam Bennett has a change of a life time, where he can tell the Flames, get me good line mates or I am going to Vegas because if he is not signed by June 15, he can do that. I don't he he will do that but he has a chance if he wants.

?????????????????????

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by Par

Totally agree with you, I think Sam Bennett has a change of a life time, where he can tell the Flames, get me good line mates or I am going to Vegas because if he is not signed by June 15, he can do that. I don't he he will do that but he has a chance if he wants.

He's an RFA, unless I'm missing something he won't be able to do that. I think with the addition of Jankowski next season and Lazar I think Bennett will have more opportunity to play with some more skilled younger guys.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Par

I don't why, some people are against trading Sam Bennett, if it helps the team, than he should not traded. Their are 5-6 players from that draft that have surpassed Sam Bennett(as of date.)

Pretty simply why people don't want to trade him.

1. His value is low - coming off a disappointing season he is not returning a guy like Trouba straight up in a trade and that is the type of player I would want

2. He is extremely young - Bennett lost a season due to injury and was already one of the younger guys in his draft class. Giving up on him now has a better chance of the deal blowing up in Calgary's face than the other team

3. He embodies a style of play coveted by management - Bennett showed several times last year he is a pain in the ass to play against. If he can match the skill to the grit then we may have a franchise level forward on our hands but if he can't we could have a Kesler like second line centre for years to come.

The Flames traded Gilmour away and fans always regret that deal. Bennett was sold to hockey fans as a Gilmour type player and I would not want Calgary to give up on him 2 years into his career.

Boston ultimately decided thanks to Bergeron, Krecji they could move on from Seguin (various other reasons like the salary cap and partying lifestyle also contributed to this decision). I feel that gamble was one of the main reasons their window slammed shut and they missed the playoffs 2 of the last 3 years. I do not see Calgary in the same spot. Calgary is trying to pry their window open and I do not believe trading a 21 year old former top 4 pick is the right call. I could see it theoretically opening the window a little quicker but also closing it even faster.

To me the Flames core is Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Bennett, Giordano, Hamilton, Brodie. At this stage I am not ready for the Flames to move a core player. Add some pieces around that core and give it 2 years before you consider making changes to those 7 players

[northcrunk]

I wish Pinder would stop talking about trades. The guy shows he has no ####ing clue what he is talking about. I'm so glad he will never be our GM. We would be worse than the Oilers.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Par

Totally agree with you, I think Sam Bennett has a change of a life time, where he can tell the Flames, get me good line mates or I am going to Vegas because if he is not signed by June 15, he can do that. I don't he he will do that but he has a chance if he wants.

What are you talking about? The Flames protect Bennett and unless he signs an offer sheet he is going nowhere. If he signs an offer sheet the Flames likely match as well

[Love]

Originally Posted by Par

I don't why, some people are against trading Sam Bennett, if it helps the team, than he should not traded. Their are 5-6 players from that draft that have surpassed Sam Bennett(as of date.)

not impossible he passes them right back. he was put into probably the worst position of all of them to succeed. I think he'll be better than all of Ehlers, Reinhart and Draisaitl

[Par]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

?????????????????????

Originally Posted by Beninho

He's an RFA, unless I'm missing something he won't be able to do that. I think with the addition of Jankowski next season and Lazar I think Bennett will have more opportunity to play with some more skilled younger guys.

I read somewhere that if a team does not sign their UFA or RFA by a certain date, than Vegas can sign them. Will have to check up on that to be more clear.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Par

I read somewhere that if a team does not sign their UFA or RFA by a certain date, than Vegas can sign them. Will have to check u on that to be more clear.

That is incorrect when it comes to RFAs.
UFAs are UFAs so of course they can sign wherever they want.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

That is incorrect when it comes to RFAs.
UFAs are UFAs so of course they can sign wherever they want.

Vegas can sign unsigned unprotected RFA's. Unlike an offer sheet they can't be matched.

Counts as their selection.

Vegas will be granted a 48-hour window prior to the draft to sign any pending free agent (RFA or UFA, one per team) that was left unprotected. If a team loses a player to Vegas during this signing window they will not have a player selected from their roster during this draft.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Par

I read somewhere that if a team does not sign their UFA or RFA by a certain date, than Vegas can sign them. Will have to check up on that to be more clear.

So you figured that the rules about RFA changed only for Vegas?

What you read was that Vegas will get an early window to negotiate with UFA's, and if they end up signing a UFA from your team early that counts as their pick in the expansion draft.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So you figured that the rules about RFA changed only for Vegas?

What you read was that Vegas will get an early window to negotiate with UFA's, and if they end up signing a UFA from your team early that counts as their pick in the expansion draft.

They can also sign unsigned and unprotected RFA's during that time.