[Trade] Weegar to Utah for Maatta, Castagna, 3 x 2026 2nd rounders

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Nelson

Another reason I like this trade: Jason Bukala says on SN960, that the value of the prospect you're going to get at 40, is very similar to the value of the prospect you're going to get at 25 in this particular draft.

That is my interpretation of this draft too. I actually hope they do not trade any of their second round picks.

[Two Fivenagame]

I'd just like to point out that keeping Weegar and adding Weibe could have resulted in a pairing named Wee-Wee.

I'm not sure a Wee-Wee D is a good thing.

[Jiri Hrdina]

On browna's thoughts from a few pages ago. I think there have been a couple surprises for management with this team.
- I think they felt they would worse last year. The run to a playoff spot was a surprise but kept the team motivated and competing.
- In contrast i don't think they thought they would be THIS bad this season. And that, similarly, has changed the POV of some of the veteran players.

I don't think any of this is a failure of Conroy's. You need to pivot. And if this season has caused them to lean HARDER into a larger re-build, all the better.

[aaronkarlpatton]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Ruck Twins, Chrenko, Elofsson, Klepov, Valentini, Hextall are the most interesting names in that 25-50 range IMO.

Hopefully they can come away with a couple of those guys.

I was having similar thoughts, especially pertaining to the Ruck twins. They already have natural chemistry.

Sent from my SM-G990W2 using Tapatalk

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by aaronkarlpatton

I was having similar thoughts, especially pertaining to the Ruck twins. They already have natural chemistry.

Sent from my SM-G990W2 using Tapatalk

Plus they already have their Center in Basha,

[aaronkarlpatton]

Originally Posted by HitterD

Plus they already have their Center in Basha,

Good call, I didnt recall that.

Sent from my SM-G990W2 using Tapatalk

[mile]

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029566502878462354

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

On browna's thoughts from a few pages ago. I think there have been a couple surprises for management with this team.
- I think they felt they would worse last year. The run to a playoff spot was a surprise but kept the team motivated and competing.
- In contrast i don't think they thought they would be THIS bad this season. And that, similarly, has changed the POV of some of the veteran players.

I don't think any of this is a failure of Conroy's. You need to pivot. And if this season has caused them to lean HARDER into a larger re-build, all the better.

Even on last year, Conroy wanted to have a stable quiet year. So even if he thought they'd be worse, he had a goal to calm things down. I'd say he accomplished that.

This year just seems to have brought confirmation that these veterans just don't have what it takes to act as a bridge to the next wave.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Was also interested in that question and this is what I found:



Montreal in 74 picked 5, 7, 10, 12, 15 in the first round.

Not sure where that came from - but Arizona didn't make 5 picks in 2022 2nd round.

They just picked 36 and 43 (and 32 was a 1st round pick). Maybe they moved the rest of them?

Looking it up - could be a template for the Flames this year - Coyotes traded up to 11 (Conor Geekie) moving #27 (acquire for Christian Dvorak), #34 (their own pick) and #45 (for taking on Andrew Ladd's contract)

[calf]

While I like this trade, with how bad Weegar has been, I'm almost wondering if this hurts the tanking efforts for the rest of the season.

All the more reason to trade away Kadri and Coleman

[CFO]

So Matthew k trade is now. Cullen Potter, 3 2nds, Huberdeau, maata and the other prospect.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by browna

2nd most shot blocks.

That’s not always a positive stat. Why so many shots when he is on the ice?

While blocking a shot is fundamentally better than allowing a goal, in modern NHL analytics, high shot-block totals are often considered a neutral or negative indicator of team performance rather than a positive one. This is because a high volume of blocked shots is generally a symptom of poor puck possession and a team spending too much time defending.

Studies have shown little to no correlation between high total team shot blocks and fewer goals allowed, with top-blocking teams not necessarily performing better in the standings

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

That is my interpretation of this draft too. I actually hope they do not trade any of their second round picks.

If it helps the Flames move say the Vegas pick up from maybe 21 to 15 or something in order to get someone that has maybe fallen further than expected I would say this is the time to do it.

If one of the picks helps with return when moving Kadri or Coleman, you absolutely do that as well. There is nothing wrong with using the picks either, but there are so many options here and I'm sure Conroy is looking at all them.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by troutman

That’s not always a positive stat. Why so many shots when he is on the ice?

While blocking a shot is fundamentally better than allowing a goal, in modern NHL analytics, high shot-block totals are often considered a neutral or negative indicator of team performance rather than a positive one. This is because a high volume of blocked shots is generally a symptom of poor puck possession and a team spending too much time defending.

Studies have shown little to no correlation between high total team shot blocks and fewer goals allowed, with top-blocking teams not necessarily performing better in the standings

As bad as Kris Russell was, I don't think he was ever remotely close to being a -35.

[Robbob]

Looking at Hockey DB they only drafted twice in the second (36 and 43). A couple picks (34 and 45) were used to move up to 11 (with the 27th pick).

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Not sure where that came from - but Arizona didn't make 5 picks in 2022 2nd round.

They just picked 36 and 43 (and 32 was a 1st round pick). Maybe they moved the rest of them?

Looking it up - could be a template for the Flames this year - Coyotes traded up to 11 (Conor Geekie) moving #27 (acquire for Christian Dvorak), #34 (their own pick) and #45 (for taking on Andrew Ladd's contract)

Just looked and saw the same.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Was also interested in that question and this is what I found:



Montreal in 74 picked 5, 7, 10, 12, 15 in the first round.

the 74 draft ended up being not a strong one, although they did garner Riser and Tremblay, 2 very useful middle 6ers for them . The 2nd round of that draft (yes rounds were shorter but also teams weren't picking much beyond Canadian jr at this point) likely had more high end talent- certainly Trottier and Howe, but even Gare, Chouinard etc


Many of the expansion teams (and a few of the established teams) somehow didn't understand the draft back then as a building exercise so Sam Pollock just basically kept trading his Kadri and Weegars for true lottery picks


at one point I looked at it and it seemed like really only a handful of teams- Habs, Isles, Sabres, Bruins, Flyers, possibly Leafs- (to be fair probably trader Cliff and the Flames too but they hadn't hit their stride) were even trying in the draft from about 70 through 74


little doubt that is the reason those first five teams listed above always finished 1-5 in some order in every year from about 75 through 81 or so and won all the cups for a decade

[Caged Great]

This particular draft is heavy on defenseman. In some ways, it reminds me of the 2008 draft for the amount of quality blueliners.

Just an FYI, here's the list from that year.

2nd Doughty
3rd Bogosian
4th Pietrangelo
5th Luke Schenn
12th Tyler Myers
13th Colten Teubert
15th Erik Karlsson
17th Jake Gardiner
19th Luca Sbisa
20th Michael Del Zotto
23rd Tyler Cuma
27th John Carlson
32nd Slava Voynov
37th Cody Goloubef
38th Roman Josi
40th Arron Ness
41st Yann Sauve
42nd Patrick Wiercoch
43rd Justin Schultz


It's entirely possible that the Flames, if they target some D-men with those picks could get some of guys of the calibre that some of the bold are, which would be huge.

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

On browna's thoughts from a few pages ago. I think there have been a couple surprises for management with this team.
- I think they felt they would worse last year. The run to a playoff spot was a surprise but kept the team motivated and competing.
- In contrast i don't think they thought they would be THIS bad this season. And that, similarly, has changed the POV of some of the veteran players.

I don't think any of this is a failure of Conroy's. You need to pivot. And if this season has caused them to lean HARDER into a larger re-build, all the better.

This is a good read on it and makes sense to me. It's hard for me and probably others that there has been pretty clear and sound strategy from management, but a cohesive plan has not been as clear. Rather, it seems the plans have shifted, reacting to the team's short term play that consistently lacked high-end potential. Even though that may come across as critical, I think there is some merit to that approach, or at least it adds up to the consistently stated goal of making the playoffs and retooling on the fly. Of course the goal many have is actually to be a high-end competitive team, and its inverse relationship with remaining competitive in the short term.

I like the work of management team in many respects, but I think it has come across as more reactionary than necessary, perhaps at the expense of long-term competitiveness. Just my vantage point on this, though I still watch the games and hope the team wins, and it's hard for me to want anything else. But I expect a more sound long-term plan from those in charge.

[Roko]

Originally Posted by mile

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029566502878462354

This guy and potter on a line and we are scary fast