[Trade] Andersson (50% retained) to Vegas for 27 1st, cond 28 2nd, Whitecloud, Wiebe

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Roko

Im still hoping Vegas crumbles this year in this weird year and misses the playoffs or gets booted round 1. I’d rather an impact player now even if it sacrifices a first in 2 years.

This is the part that people should be paying attention to. We traded Hanifin in 2023-24 for a player that will not be drafted until 2026 and most likely not see the Flames lineup full time until 2030. We just traded away Andersson for draft picks we will not see until 2027 and 2028 and those players not see the Calgary roster until probably 2032 or later, if they make it at all. Vegas is playing with and gaining benefit from our future, and we received no benefit from allowing them to do so. Trade for immediate picks. Period. Sports is a game about immediate results. This trying to play 4D chess stuff is stupid. If a team doesn't have the picks you want (next draft), move the hell on to a team that does. I mean, Conroy got played so badly on Hanifin that the pick they should have received was used in a later deal to grab Hertl, which made the pick we received less valuable. Just brutal management and vision.

[IamNotKenKing]

We all know you cannot tie conditions on a pick to the player re-signing.

BUT would the following conditions be permissible?

2028 2nd becomes a 1st if Vegas makes the playoffs in 2028 AND Rasmus plays at least 5 playoff games with Vegas in 2028?

Essentially ties it to re-signing, without tying it to re-signing...

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

We all know you cannot tie conditions on a pick to the player re-signing.

BUT would the following conditions be permissible?

2028 2nd becomes a 1st if Vegas makes the playoffs in 2028 AND Rasmus plays at least 5 playoff games with Vegas in 2028?

Essentially ties it to re-signing, without tying it to re-signing...

I've been wondering this too, since there are GP conditions that are allowed, just not re-signing conditions.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

What doesn't sit well is the idea that we let another roster player hold us hostage with signing demands and ultimately cost the team a TON of trade value, AGAIN. This after saying "we cannot let another Hannifin situation happen".
That's the one part that doesn't sit right with me personally, CGY acted in good faith and in the best interest as Rasmus as a person and not a contract and ultimately got burned again to some extent.

I hope we've learned that lesson, don't hold onto these guys just because they're "good people" because at the end of the day you have a business to run and a team to make better.

I really don’t think the Flames were held hostage here. If you take a step back and apply the same logic to Andersson that you’re hoping Conroy applies to all players and treating him like a contract, then you have to acknowledge that it’s silly to have even negotiated trades dependent on an extension. Negotiating based on hopes and dreams is fine, but they playing the victim and saying “I was held hostage!” or whatever because the expiring contract needs to be traded as an expiring contract doesn’t make a lick of sense.

If you look at what Carlo got last year, without the benefit of hindsight, the value isn’t a whole lot different than what the Flames got this year.

But I don’t know. You have a line on Conroy and I don’t. Are you saying he doesn’t actually understand any of this? That’s troubling.

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I will add that I'm never mad at acquiring 1st and 2nd round picks, I trust the scouting staff more than ever the last few years and giving them more bullets is never a bad thing.

But for the #1 target on the trade bait board, and arguably the best defenseman available... meh.

Yes, his reluctance to sign an extension is what burned us in the trade, I understand that completely.
But that's Calgary's fault, not Anderssons.

100%, I share the exact same opinion.
What I would like to know is was there an indication from Rasmus' camp that he would be willing to sign an extension with Boston (or whomever)?

If so, then why didn't it get done? I can't imagine Boston wasn't willing to pay market rate after all of this.

If not, then why did Craig even attempt it and waste everyone's time?

I would love some insight from those 'in the know'

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

100%, I share the exact same opinion.
What I would like to know is was there an indication from Rasmus' camp that he would be willing to sign an extension with Boston (or whomever)?

If so, then why didn't it get done? I can't imagine Boston wasn't willing to pay market rate after all of this.

If not, then why did Craig even attempt it and waste everyone's time?

I would love some insight from those 'in the know'

Rasmus and his agent have a number in mind to forego free agency, and no one is offering near it.

They want to test free agency.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

A solid middle pairing can fetch at least a 2nd, maybe 1st.

Bottom pairing , a mid round pick or nothing

We’ll see

7th defensemen often get a late pick, so "nothing" seems a bit odd...

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

100%, I share the exact same opinion.
What I would like to know is was there an indication from Rasmus' camp that he would be willing to sign an extension with Boston (or whomever)?

If so, then why didn't it get done? I can't imagine Boston wasn't willing to pay market rate after all of this.

If not, then why did Craig even attempt it and waste everyone's time?

I would love some insight from those 'in the know'

https://twitter.com/user/status/2013108942247989739

There were also reports he changed his ask price and wanted more to sacrifice testing free agency.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

We all know you cannot tie conditions on a pick to the player re-signing.

BUT would the following conditions be permissible?

2028 2nd becomes a 1st if Vegas makes the playoffs in 2028 AND Rasmus plays at least 5 playoff games with Vegas in 2028?

Essentially ties it to re-signing, without tying it to re-signing...

I was wondering the same earlier. A condition like:

If Andersson plays at least 50 regular season games for the Knights at any point the pick becomes a first round pick

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

We don't need more players who aren't great but who will keep us out of the basement.

I would have rather the trade without him included. Unless we are flipping him but I highly doubt it.

This is the sort of thing that gets you called out.

You would rather the Flames receive the 1st, conditional 2nd, and Wiebe, as opposed to the 1st, conditional 2nd, Wiebe, and Whitecloud?

With all due respect, that is nonsense.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Well, if you believe Francis, he wouldn’t give Conroy a number to re-sign here. It’s clear that he either wanted to test free agency, or was pissed about being traded.

Oh that part is accurate, he was never re-signing here.
I mean more so giving permission to teams like BOS and LA to negotiate a contract because he was debating signing there.

I don't buy for a second that he hasn't had Vegas circled as his UFA destination going back all the way to the summer time. Rasmus made it seem like he was ready to come to the table and talk extension with Calgary, but he'd already made up his mind.

We'll see that when he signs in Vegas here.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

What do you think a bottom 4 defenceman who has never cracked 20 points, doesn’t play PP, is a 2nd unit PKer and has poor advanced stats on a strong team will return? My guess would be around a 4th.

https://puckpedia.com/player/zach-whitecloud

That player got a 1st and Fraser Minten

This is Whitecloud



There is a perfect recent comparable for Whitecloud right in front of us. Big physical RH defensive dmen always have more value than you'd expect.

[liamenator]

I agree that the Flames need to be more mercenary, even though I understand the logic that they need to emphasize player relations given the market, lack of facilities, tax situation, etc. Hopefully this issue begins to diminish as we get closer to the new building. But at the end of the day, the players don't hesitate to put themselves first, no matter their history with the club, and the team needs to be disciplined in doing the same thing.


The trade itself is good value for a rental. He may re-sign with Vegas, but that's not something the Flames can control. Once he red-lined extension talks, you have to take the best offer on the table.


Conroy is doing the best he can under less than ideal circumstances. But the nice-guy thing, which we were all worried about when he was hired, is probably his biggest flaw from a pure asset management perspective.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That player got a 1st and Fraser Minten

This is Whitecloud



There is a perfect recent comparable for Whitecloud right in front of us. Big physical RH defensive dmen always have more value than you'd expect.

Why that Carlo card from 2 years ago? He is 29 today not 27

[442scotty]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I will add that I'm never mad at acquiring 1st and 2nd round picks, I trust the scouting staff more than ever the last few years and giving them more bullets is never a bad thing.

But for the #1 target on the trade bait board, and arguably the best defenseman available... meh.

Yes, his reluctance to sign an extension is what burned us in the trade, I understand that completely.
But that's Calgary's fault, not Anderssons.

Im not sure what else Conroy could have done. Trade him last year would have been a good idea except he played like #ss and he probably doesn’t get a great return. To Anderssons credit he played great this year but also where was this guy in previous years?

Also, despite Andersson saying he was willing to extend with a number of teams I call absolute BS. He was just playing the say the right things game.
I suspect a lot of people sensed that he was only going to play for Vegas but hoped otherwise. I’m happy that Conroy was able to squeeze what he did out of Vegas. So hats off to Conroy for being a great guy and great manager.

Andersson can go pound sand. Enjoy living in that cesspool of a country while you can and pray that the insanity going on down there doesn’t ruin your kids.
Calgary is one of the best places in the world to live and bring up a family. Not sure I’d venture too far out of your new gated. Community down south.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by liamenator

I agree that the Flames need to be more mercenary, even though I understand the logic that they need to emphasize player relations given the market, lack of facilities, tax situation, etc. Hopefully this issue begins to diminish as we get closer to the new building. But at the end of the day, the players don't hesitate to put themselves first, no matter their history with the club, and the team needs to be disciplined in doing the same thing.


The trade itself is good value for a rental. He may re-sign with Vegas, but that's not something the Flames can control. Once he red-lined extension talks, you have to take the best offer on the table.


Conroy is doing the best he can under less than ideal circumstances. But the nice-guy thing, which we were all worried about when he was hired, is probably his biggest flaw from a pure asset management perspective.

Craig Conroy is like the friendliest guy on the planet and I suppose this comes with pluses and minuses

[Jason14h]

Deal Weegar and Coleman at this years deadline and keep Whitecloud

If you can move Kadri even a bigger bonus

Sign a C and veteran D to short term higher AAV UFA contracts . Suck the next 2 years and come out of the gates in 2029 guns a blazing

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Why that Carlo card from 2 years ago? He is 29 today not 27

That's the Carlo card from the day of his trade to the Leafs.

And the Whitecloud card from the day of his trade to the Flames

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Oh that part is accurate, he was never re-signing here.
I mean more so giving permission to teams like BOS and LA to negotiate a contract because he was debating signing there.

I don't buy for a second that he hasn't had Vegas circled as his UFA destination going back all the way to the summer time. Rasmus made it seem like he was ready to come to the table and talk extension with Calgary, but he'd already made up his mind.

We'll see that when he signs in Vegas here.

It bothered me that he came out and said it takes two to tango. When all the reports sounded like he was moving on from the Flames regardless after this season.

I dont blame Conroy for the return - it seems like Ras and his agent torpedoed the plans over the weekend when leaks started coming out and gave some teams cold feet on the deals.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

This is the part that people should be paying attention to. We traded Hanifin in 2023-24 for a player that will not be drafted until 2026 and most likely not see the Flames lineup full time until 2030. We just traded away Andersson for draft picks we will not see until 2027 and 2028 and those players not see the Calgary roster until probably 2032 or later, if they make it at all. Vegas is playing with and gaining benefit from our future, and we received no benefit from allowing them to do so. Trade for immediate picks. Period. Sports is a game about immediate results. This trying to play 4D chess stuff is stupid. If a team doesn't have the picks you want (next draft), move the hell on to a team that does. I mean, Conroy got played so badly on Hanifin that the pick they should have received was used in a later deal to grab Hertl, which made the pick we received less valuable. Just brutal management and vision.

Don't confuse bad management with bad ownership. It's on the directive from Maloney and ownership who refuse to allow the team to make progressive, shrewd moves when it makes the most sense, at the expense of short term idiotic 'competitive' play. There isn't a GM out there that wouldn't have seen the value in moving Andersson at the draft last year, and Conroy certainly was rumored to be trying to do so. You can guess why it didn't happen - the suits upstairs said it would affect the drive to finish 8-10 this season too much - rebiggle.

The Flames are 100% doomed to toil in the mushy middle for eternity unless we absolutely luck out on a few guys like Gridin and late round gems like Wyttenbach repeatedly moving forward. I have no faith at all Kadri and Coleman will actually be moved when they still have term on their deals this year or in the offseason either so adding actual drafted pro ready prospects is unlikely to happen. We will ride our vets until the value is diminished either physically or contractually as we do with everyone.

The only saving grace here is that Conroy did well on the trade as a pure rental IMO. I don't see how anyone can be overly upset with the trade from this standpoint. If the goal was to maximize Andersson's value the team rightly should have moved him 1-1.5 seasons ago. At least the team will now be worse off this year and likely draft higher because of it and we may hit a home run with a top 3-4 pick that is desperately needed.