[Rumour] Buffalo's and Florida's 1st round picks are in play

[The Boy Wonder]

Kessel dion and 8th for 4th?

I just got here after work and already think I may have to take a break.

[saXon]

Originally Posted by New Era

You don't seem like a realist at all. You seem like you want the team to go full Oiler while they rebuild, and you never go full Oiler. You need leaders and veterans around to take the pressure off the kids. That means you can't just dump guys like Hudler and Glencross and think you are not going to set the rebuild back. Plus, it is unlikely you are going to get back quality youth for either of those players. The NHL has evolved to where deals are made for players with similar potential or upside. If you want a young stud you need to deal a young stud. That's just the way the league has gone the last few years.

I would also say that your view of Baertschi and his place in our system a little off. I think if you talked to the management of the team they will tell you that several players took substantial steps forward last season and surpassed Sven on the depth chart. I would say that Gaudreau and Granlund both stepped past him and, even with his injury, Ferland is right there as well. Baertschi didn't help his cause much this past season and the performance of other prospects certainly clouds his future with the Flames. He's still a good prospect, but in an organization that just saw an influx of young talent he picked a very bad time to have a poor season. Based on management's comments I'm not so certain he is a player the team is so sure about being part of the future of the team, especially if they can move him for a piece at another position that is part could be part of the future in a bigger way.

That's a lot of perception. Trading Hudler, a single vet, is going full Oiler. I guess we'll never trade a single one...they're too precious...

Here's the other side to your argument. If you refuse to trade your vets, you enter into a repetitive carousel of the past with the Flames' history; playing their vets longer than they are needed. You also enter into Canuck territory where they are terrified to trade away any of their vets for future progression. Kesler, the Sedins, Edler, etc all have had chances to be moved, yet they've opted to keep them and are losing value. Instead they traded their future in Schneider, and have a projected 3rd line C going forward. Smart business...

Eventually this team is going to have to move forward with their assets, and this would include Baertschi. You don't give up the 2nd best LW'er in your system for a little upgrade on D. You have Ferland pegged as better and more developed than Baertschi, and my perception is off? That's rich. He's is nowhere near better, and Granlund is a center.

If you aren't high on the kid, and he's the first guy you go to in a trade, that's fine. But don't sling him as a tradeable asset because he's considered redundant. It's a poor argument.

And you say you're the realist....

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

This thread has a lot of arguments going on, so apologies if this has been gone over.

If TO is looking to move up, what would you want for our #4?

No way I would trade it personally, but I believe on the Fan they were talking about #8 and Kadri to move up. Even that's not good enough for me.

Kessel and the 8th for #4?

You think the leafs are going to offer up one of the highest scoring wingers in the league to move up 4 spots in the draft?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by saXon

That's a lot of perception. Trading Hudler, a single vet, is going full Oiler. I guess we'll never trade a single one...they're too precious...

Precious? Leaders are. Guys that help young players are. Winners are. Hudler is all of the above. You don't trade away guys like that.

Here's the other side to your argument. If you refuse to trade your vets, you enter into a repetitive carousel of the past with the Flames' history; playing their vets longer than they are needed. You also enter into Canuck territory where they are terrified to trade away any of their vets for future progression. Kesler, the Sedins, Edler, etc all have had chances to be moved, yet they've opted to keep them and are losing value. Instead they traded their future in Schneider, and have a projected 3rd line C going forward. Smart business...

The Flames were there when they refused to move Iginla, who had stayed too long in Calgary. The much suggested resigning of Cammalleri would be one of those moves. The stench of losers past hang on players like him. You let guys like that walk away. That prevents you from turning into a Vancouver, who ironically enough, is turning into a Calgary.

Eventually this team is going to have to move forward with their assets, and this would include Baertschi. You don't give up the 2nd best LW'er in your system for a little upgrade on D. You have Ferland pegged as better and more developed than Baertschi, and my perception is off? That's rich. He's is nowhere near better, and Granlund is a center.

They aren't giving up their 2nd best LWer. Only in the mind of the hockeysfuture set is Baertschi the 2nd best LWer in the Flames organization. Prospects need to step up and show growth to continue remaining in the team's good graces, not go retrograde or take steps backward.

Ferland was on of Abby's best players when he went down with injury. His game took incredible leaps forward and the management were extremely excited to see him take the next step. He was doing all the things expected to become a NHL forward and make the Calgary Flames. He had skill, size and speed. Qualities the Flames have been looking for. He had jumped ahead of Baertschi in the AHL and likely would have got his first NHL games had he not got hurt.

Granlund is not going to play center in the NHL. He doesn't have the size the Flames want in the middle. He'll end up on the wing and be a finisher. He's the type of player that could step in and replace Cammalleri next season. Similar skill set and instincts. He has also developed a strong defensive awareness and will fit in nicely because of his stronger two-way game. He is well ahead of Baertschi in all regards.

That is all without considering the likes of Agostino, Hanowski and Klimchuk. Two of those three could play up on the 2nd line if they continue to show growth. Considering the Flames desire to inject size into the lineup, small wingers need to be exception in the offensive zone and good in the defensive zone.

They would also not be getting a minor upgrade on defense. Pysyk would immediately become our best defensive prospect and likely challenge for a roster spot immediately. That is not a minor upgrade, that is a major upgrade.

If you aren't high on the kid, and he's the first guy you go to in a trade, that's fine. But don't sling him as a tradeable asset because he's considered redundant. It's a poor argument.

That is why Baertschi is tradeable. He was a guy they were hoping would become that star scorer on the LW and Gaudreau would be a long shot to unseat Sven. The roles have now been reversed. There just isn't enough room on the team for a collection of small players and the Flames have a small roster. Something has to give and Gaudreau has made Baertschi a redundant piece in the big picture. If the Flames believe a smallish Klimchuk has the stuff to play in the NHL, and it appears they do since they signed him already, it makes Baertschi that much more redundant. Whether you like it or not.

And you say you're the realist....

You can't seem to understand that player rankings change. Baerstchi was hot stuff a year ago, but he had a poor season in comparison to many of his peers. That is going to alter his standing with the club. It doesn't mean that he's a poor prospect, just that other players stepped up their games and surpassed him because of their play. Acknowledging that and planning for that change is being a realist. Refusing to do so just means you've spent too much time reading sites like hockeysfuture or have fallen for the hype. Performance matters most, and the Flames are only going to invest so much time in a player not performing to expectations. There will be player moves and it will likely be guys that have promise but need a change of scenery who go first. I think Baertschi may have played himself onto that potential list of players. I hope not, but if he has, I hope the Flames can rally that asset into a player that can help us at another position.

[Hackey]

Lol. Make it sound like Hudler is Toews.

[Hackey]

I agree we shouldn't trade him though because we'd almost be guaranteed to replicate the Oilers for the next 5 years.

[saXon]

Originally Posted by New Era

Precious? Leaders are. Guys that help young players are. Winners are. Hudler is all of the above. You don't trade away guys like that.

The Flames were there when they refused to move Iginla, who had stayed too long in Calgary. The much suggested resigning of Cammalleri would be one of those moves. The stench of losers past hang on players like him. You let guys like that walk away. That prevents you from turning into a Vancouver, who ironically enough, is turning into a Calgary.

They aren't giving up their 2nd best LWer. Only in the mind of the hockeysfuture set is Baertschi the 2nd best LWer in the Flames organization. Prospects need to step up and show growth to continue remaining in the team's good graces, not go retrograde or take steps backward.

Ferland was on of Abby's best players when he went down with injury. His game took incredible leaps forward and the management were extremely excited to see him take the next step. He was doing all the things expected to become a NHL forward and make the Calgary Flames. He had skill, size and speed. Qualities the Flames have been looking for. He had jumped ahead of Baertschi in the AHL and likely would have got his first NHL games had he not got hurt.

Granlund is not going to play center in the NHL. He doesn't have the size the Flames want in the middle. He'll end up on the wing and be a finisher. He's the type of player that could step in and replace Cammalleri next season. Similar skill set and instincts. He has also developed a strong defensive awareness and will fit in nicely because of his stronger two-way game. He is well ahead of Baertschi in all regards.

That is all without considering the likes of Agostino, Hanowski and Klimchuk. Two of those three could play up on the 2nd line if they continue to show growth. Considering the Flames desire to inject size into the lineup, small wingers need to be exception in the offensive zone and good in the defensive zone.

They would also not be getting a minor upgrade on defense. Pysyk would immediately become our best defensive prospect and likely challenge for a roster spot immediately. That is not a minor upgrade, that is a major upgrade.

That is why Baertschi is tradeable. He was a guy they were hoping would become that star scorer on the LW and Gaudreau would be a long shot to unseat Sven. The roles have now been reversed. There just isn't enough room on the team for a collection of small players and the Flames have a small roster. Something has to give and Gaudreau has made Baertschi a redundant piece in the big picture. If the Flames believe a smallish Klimchuk has the stuff to play in the NHL, and it appears they do since they signed him already, it makes Baertschi that much more redundant. Whether you like it or not.

You can't seem to understand that player rankings change. Baerstchi was hot stuff a year ago, but he had a poor season in comparison to many of his peers. That is going to alter his standing with the club. It doesn't mean that he's a poor prospect, just that other players stepped up their games and surpassed him because of their play. Acknowledging that and planning for that change is being a realist. Refusing to do so just means you've spent too much time reading sites like hockeysfuture or have fallen for the hype. Performance matters most, and the Flames are only going to invest so much time in a player not performing to expectations. There will be player moves and it will likely be guys that have promise but need a change of scenery who go first. I think Baertschi may have played himself onto that potential list of players. I hope not, but if he has, I hope the Flames can rally that asset into a player that can help us at another position.

So, keeping Cammy would be a poor choice, but the Flames need to retain a guy like Hudler? Double standard much? Cammy has lead as much if not more than Hudler in the last 2 seasons. I get your love affair with Hudler, it was made known not only in this thread, but also in the "Who will mentor JG" thread too. You may not like Cammy, but "stench of losers past".....ok. Whatever that means.

You place Ferland above Baerstchi in the LW depth, although he's lost almost a full season of development to injury. Instead, you base Ferland's position on the depth chart based on what could have happened.

You'd be wise to remember that Ferland was put back into Jr. due to his poor fitness. Baertschi was placed in the A due to playing a full 200ft game, nothing more. His offense hasn't been the subject of scrutiny here. All prospects meet adversity some time or another. I don't follow Hockey's Future, sorry, but your empty accusations hold no value. I do know that Baertschi's stock isn't going to plummet based on a half year's play. Like it or not.

I do know that Baertschi has statistically shown he's the 2nd best LW'er in the Flames' system. The stats of his production are solid proof, and so far you've failed to show me irrefutable proof otherwise.

I do know that the Flames are rebuilding, and moving a single vet isn't going to set them back, however moving an asset of Baertschi's caliber absolutely could. The history is there with moving guys out too early. Prime examples are Hull and St. Louis. The brass at the time would have laughed in the face of anyone suggesting they were top 10-20 talent. No one's laughing now. The history is also there for moving vets too late.

Your crystal ball shows Granlund playing wing permanently. You should start a psychic business. You'd make some mega $$.

I'm done arguing. I don't debate with people who have double standards, play favorites to build your roster, or use assumptions or predictions on "what could have happened if" to order the prospect depth. It's not worth my time and is very much a cue for me to walk away from the conversation.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

Kessel dion and 8th for 4th?

I just got here after work and already think I may have to take a break.

I agree. As ridiculous as the proposal is, I believe both of those players have the ability to completely destroy the rebuild and attitude we worked hard to create last year. We should be looking for humble and redemption players or players wanting to develop their game (choked up in a bad system on another team).

Not cocky players who think they're all that and above the system currently in place. (Which I believe both Kessel and Phaneuf would be).

[kyuss275]

I see both points of the "new era" " saXon" dispute. Yes you need leaders for the youth, but at the same time they can also be found through trade and ufa. Maybe it's the Sutter era that has made some on cp think that it's hard to pick up good mentors for youth. Sutter seemed to have no bridge players. He had many veteran players that "just went home to families" after games/practice. Every team in the nhl since I have been following hockey (1979) has had role players. Hudler is nothing new in the mentor department .

Should Hudler stay next year? I would say yes. Should we not be thinking about trading Hudler ever and extending him? I would say no.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by saXon

So, keeping Cammy would be a poor choice, but the Flames need to retain a guy like Hudler? Double standard much? Cammy has lead as much if not more than Hudler in the last 2 seasons. I get your love affair with Hudler, it was made known not only in this thread, but also in the "Who will mentor JG" thread too. You may not like Cammy, but "stench of losers past".....ok. Whatever that means.

No double standard at all. Cammalleri is no leader, at least not a good one. Montreal couldn't wait to get rid of him and didn't want him around their team. They traded him mid game and didn't even give him a chance to bid adeau to his team mates. They pulled him from the lineup and had him pack his bags and gtfo of town asap. He's one of those guys that gets hot and scores a bunch of points that makes the fans get all gooey, but when he's not scoring he's pretty useless and a detriment. When he doesn't get the ice time he thinks he deserves he shows his displeasure. That wasn't appreciated in Montreal and it isn't appreciated here. His performance this season, and the contract off floated by the club, tells you all you need to know.

You place Ferland above Baerstchi in the LW depth, although he's lost almost a full season of development to injury. Instead, you base Ferland's position on the depth chart based on what could have happened.

You can talk to PMM about what the Flames thought about Ferland and his potential this season. Ward spoke extremely highly of him and stated how important he was to the Flames future and how it was just going to take Ferland believing in himself and how good he really is.

You'd be wise to remember that Ferland was put back into Jr. due to his poor fitness. Baertschi was placed in the A due to playing a full 200ft game, nothing more. His offense hasn't been the subject of scrutiny here. All prospects meet adversity some time or another. I don't follow Hockey's Future, sorry, but your empty accusations hold no value. I do know that Baertschi's stock isn't going to plummet based on a half year's play. Like it or not.

Ferland came to camp in great shape this season and was impressing prior to his injury. Again, talk with PMM to get some insight as to what the club thought of Ferland. Baertschi was placed in the AHL for a lot of reasons, not just on ice related matters. He's got a lot of maturing to do both on and off the ice. His 200 foot game needs work and his offense needs work. A player that is supposed to be a big time talent should rip up the AHL and post strong numbers. See Tyler Toffoli for an example of top prospect producing at a clip expected. As I stated, more than once, Baertschi is still a good prospect, which is why he could be used in a deal to strengthen the club. Never said he wasn't a good prospect, just that he has fallen on the Flames depth chart which could make him expendable.

Also, sorry, there must be another poster over at hockeysfuture that uses saXon as a handle and has the same signature. Honest mistake.

I do know that Baertschi has statistically shown he's the 2nd best LW'er in the Flames' system. The stats of his production are solid proof, and so far you've failed to show me irrefutable proof otherwise.

Statistics are half the story on any player. Statistically the Oilers wunderkinds are really something special. To those who watch and understand hockey, those statistics don't amount to a hill of beans. Scoring points doesn't mean much if you can't contribute to a winner. Baertschi and all of the Flames prospects are learning this lesson so they will be good NHL players.

I do know that the Flames are rebuilding, and moving a single vet isn't going to set them back, however moving an asset of Baertschi's caliber absolutely could. The history is there with moving guys out too early. Prime examples are Hull and St. Louis. The brass at the time would have laughed in the face of anyone suggesting they were top 10-20 talent. No one's laughing now. The history is also there for moving vets too late.

Moving one asset, where we have substantial depth and strength, for another, where we have little depth or NHL ready talent, is called good asset management. Losing a player of Baertschi's talent is a significant hit, if we only had two or three players at that position. When we have half a dozen players at that position, and a number of centers that could also switch to that same wing, we are leveraging a strength to address a weakness. If we can move a quality player like Baertschi and recoup a player of similar quality at another position, we strengthen our team, not weaken it. There are only so many slots available at certain positions and when you have an over-abundance of one and are sorely lacking in others it is wise to use that over-abundance to your advantage.

I do have wonder about if you have a clue about the history of the Flames. Hull was traded in a move that provided the Flames with the depth required to win our only Stanley Cup. Without the trade that brought Ramage and Wamsley to Calgary we likely never would have won the cup.

I completely agree the Marty St. Louis decision was a bad one, but that was made by arguably the worst GM the team has had.

Your crystal ball shows Granlund playing wing permanently. You should start a psychic business. You'd make some mega $$.

No psychic powers required. You just have to listen to management and the coaching staff to get an idea where the team wants certain players to shake out. I would recommend you try the same.

I'm done arguing. I don't debate with people who have double standards, play favorites to build your roster, or use assumptions or predictions on "what could have happened if" to order the prospect depth. It's not worth my time and is very much a cue for me to walk away from the conversation.

Yes, take that cue and walk away. Your understanding of the overall situation of the hockey club is obviously very limited and you have no desire to consider another perspective. You talk about having a dislike of playing favorites, but it is obvious that Baertschi is your favorite and you do not want to hear that anyone has challenged the prospect in any shape or form. Even when someone states the player is still a quality asset you try to marginalize the opinion because it does not match how you see things. Your problem, not mine. We can continue this at any time in the future though. I don't have a problem with discussing players and their development and how the team can get better by making specific moves.

[kehatch]

People are getting too hung up on specific players. We need leaders and veterans to support the youth. Leave it at that and leave the specific names out.

The only veteran on the roster that us untouchable is Giordano. The rest are fair game for the right return, with the caveat that we maintain a support structure. If you trade one you can always replace them with someone else.

I like Hudler. He is good with the kids on his line. Plus losing him, Stempniak, and Cammalleri is going to out to much pressure on the kids. That said, he is replaceable and he may be the odd man out in an effort to get some size.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

[jg13]

Kessel + Dion + 8th OA

for

4th OA and Spare Parts?

I really hope other fan bases don't know about CP we'd be the laughing stock of hockey forums.

[Malkin]

Originally Posted by jg13

Kessel + Dion + 8th OA

for

4th OA and Spare Parts?

I really hope other fan bases don't know about CP we'd be the laughing stock of hockey forums.

They already do

[djsFlames]

So... Reinhart for Kessel, Phaneuf and Ritchie?

Funny enough I still wouldn't do it. Don't want the Leafs' filth that have failed to lead them anywhere except one first round exit in the last handful of years. Truth is, neither are the kind of player you win with.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by jg13

Kessel + Dion + 8th OA

for

4th OA and Spare Parts?

I really hope other fan bases don't know about CP we'd be the laughing stock of hockey forums.

There are poor trade proposals on every hockey board on the planet. If someone lurks from another board and picks one trade proposal out of all the ones on this site and paints the entire board with the same brush.....well, then that's their problem.

[Day Tripper]

Elliotte Friedman interview: http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/tsnradio/EFJun414.mp3

They start talking about this at 6:52, saying the Panthers could move down twice -- first to Edmonton, Calgary, or NYI -- and then move down again to take Nylander or Ehlers.

[Gaskal]

At this point I think we'd be able to put together a nicer package pick-wise for trading up than Edmonton or NYI. Edmonton doesn't have another pick after the 1st until the 4th round and while NYI have two 2nds like us, ours are higher overall.

[Vulcan]

I'd trade Sven to move up to 1st overall. He has dropped on our depth chart. I'd still leave Granlund at centre. Who Sven's dropped behind IMO are Byron, Gaudreau and Max Reinhart. Looking at Capgeek we only have 8 forwards signed with 4 RFAs. At LW I'd guess our depth chart would look something like this.

Glencross - a lock
Boumo - another lock (RFA)
Byron - nothing written in stone, another small forward but played well (RFA)
Galiardi - I think he's a good spare part but will he be back? (RFA)
Gaudreau - huge promise
Reinhart - really stepped up and showed he could score, at least in the AHL
Baertschi - step back but still shows promise, great skill - is he becoming injury prone
Ferland - looked real good in the short time he had in the AHL
Agostino - decent prospect
Van Brabant - could surprise at camp, very physical and not intimated
Klimchuk - still has another year in junior so not really an option yet

Probably missed someone

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by Malkin

They already do

Further to the point, my initial post was to generate discussion regarding TO moving up, and what it would take from our side to drop to #8.

I'm not interested in any other player on their roster other than Kessel. Maybe I didn't intimate that clearly enough. I guess I can understand how it would be misconstrued to generate EHRMAGERD must.....post.....hilarity....

I clearly said I wasn't interested in trading the #4, but if TO was that high on the players in the top 4 I don't consider it unless Kessel comes the other way. Kadri doesn't do it (for me), and neither do their prospects (that I can see from my limited exposure to them).

My line of thinking was Calgary has cap room. Dion is a boat anchor. #4 has the ability to be another franchise player, and TO can't win with the current group. Would they trade Kessel in that package to dump Phaneuf and pick up a (possible) franchise forward? Possibly. But if he's not in the deal I'm not interested.

Clear enough for everyone?

[ForeverFlameFan]

I just don't really have as much interest in Phaneuf than I used to. It's funny to think that his best career numbers were with the Flames. But does that mean he is regressing? I think so.

Kadri on the other hand, he might be a player that I'd be willing to trade down for. If Toronto absolutely overpaid, like a Kadri + a conditional 2nd (3rd rounder if we make the playoffs with Kadri) and the 8th OA (for Ritchie/Fleury), I'd be willing to do that.

What would be best for our organization is to go for one of the top 4, they will help the Flames in the long run.