QOTD: Would you deal Curtis Glencross?

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Murph

The only way I am ok with trading Glencross is if it is for a piece that helps us both now and in the future. A young defenceman currently playing 3rd pairing minutes but projected to be a second pairing guy fits that description. Simon Despres in Pittsburgh fits that description. Would Glencross + 2015 2nd get it done?

I wouldn't be giving up any 1st or 2nd round picks in a deal at this stage of the rebuild.

[CsInMyBlood]

Obviously not in the plans going forward, so you get what you can for him. SC contenders must be looking at his situation and thinking he would be a good addition.

I do think we have enough forwards knocking at the NHL door that losing him wont hurt that much. Then again if we don't move him he could be good depth incase we actually do make the playoffs.

As long as we don't re-sign him, I'm pretty much fine with whatever happens.

[Journey17]

Really have to know what the return is. I wouldn't trade him for a low 3rd round pick as he is more valuable to the team than that return. Hard to evaluate without that info. I don't really know that the Leafs trade set the bar for a Glencross return.

[Stay Golden]

Glencross can't be dealt fast enough.
Shows no leadership. Lazy gives up on passes and half heartingly plays his shifts.
If he was a rookie or a player with a 2 way. Most coaches would have sent him down.
With that said because of his past decent seasons he should fetch the Flames a 3rd possibly a 2nd but every lack luster effort game he has doesn't help.
He needs a change of scenery i don't think he enjoys playing on this roster.
Glencross will probably bounce back a bit score 15-17 for what ever new team he is with next season.
Keeping Glencross is not part of the solution moving him at the deadline is.

[Murph]

Originally Posted by Rick M.

I wouldn't be giving up any 1st or 2nd round picks in a deal at this stage of the rebuild.

If it were for a veteran I would see your point, but Despres is 23. He's big, mobile, and can move the puck. Just not sure Glencross and the 2nd get it done.

[Ashasx]

I wonder if the Flames would be looking to trade him for picks or for a NHL defenceman, maybe with term, of similar value.

I don't know who that would be though.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I wonder if the Flames would be looking to trade him for picks or for a NHL defenceman, maybe with term, of similar value.

I don't know who that would be though.

No term left but Pens UFA Paul Martin could work

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin

I think it's a no-brainer to trade Glencross right now.

1. He's a UFA who doesn't fit in with the rebuild.
2. He's having a pretty good year.
3. The Flames have tons of forward depth.
4. The Flames have minimal defensive depth.

Trade Glencross for a defenseman.

I think most people would agree with this, but the question is what if you can't get that?

There are many people wanting to get "anything" for him, which IMO is a wrong mindset to have. He is a valuable player to a team in the playoffs (which we probably will be), so why trade him to a contender when we can keep him for our own playoffs? No one is expecting a Cup run, but no one expected playoffs either. If you believe Glencross can help this team for the next 20+ games, it's not worth trading him unless you're getting back A) a decent, young defenseman with upside (like a Tom Erixon, without the Tom Erixon). B) Packaged with something else for an upgrade at his position (likely means trading to a non-contender, in which case he likely doesn't wave). Or C) a 1st rounder, which IMO is unlikely.

Anything less than those things and it's not worth trading him IMO. We have good prospect depth and don't necessarily need to stack up 2nd, 3rd and/or 4th rounders.

[Caged Great]

I think it would almost be better for the Flames to trade for a draft pick that they could then use on a defenseman rather than getting one to slot in right now. They are kind of stuck with a log jam of veteran d-men at the moment with most of them having 2 years left after this one. You might be able to replace one of them and allow Wotherspoon to take a spot, but it would be difficult to move out two of the D-men.

[noreply]

For those who suggest trading Swen remember these trades and the borderline negligence in management decisions? Brett Hull for Wamsley and Rob Ramage. Exposing St Louis to 2000 expansion draft then bought out his contract making him a UFA. How'd that work out? Swen is a 30+ goal scorer in the making. Just like St.Louie he's taken time to reach his potential. Don't make the same mistake again. Just go back and watch his WinterHawk highlights one more time!

[McG]

Asset management. There are no guarantees that we make the playoffs. Trade him. Glencross i mean, as per the QOTD.

[Ashasx]

hehe swen

[Robbob]

I say if we can flip him for an asset then do it. I know he is part of the leadership group, but I think the group is looking mighty good with vets that are there. I think we are seeing an emergence from some of the younger players that can help fill the void left by trading Glencross (Russell seems to have elevated up into that group). Bottom line I don't think him leaving will cause any huge waves right now.

[mrkajz44]

There are too many people in the "trade him because we don't want to lose him for nothing" camp.

I think we don't get anything more than a second round pick. In my opinion, a draft pick that is somewhere near 45th overall (middle of the second round) is pretty much "nothing" anyway, so why get rid of him down a playoff drive? I think the experience in the room to help the younger guys develop is worth more than a second round pick.

[mrkajz44]

double post

[Flash Walken]

If he isn't going to be re-signed I would trade him for a 4th or higher.

GIVE ME PICKS

[CalgaryFan1988]

I'm sure that i'm in the minority here, but I would trade Glencross for a 2nd+ and then I would try and get Stewart on the cheap.

Stewart - 54gp (9G, 13A, 22pts)
Glencross - 48gp (8G, 18A, 26pts)

why you ask?

a) I want Adirondack to have a strong playoff push this season and don't want to take anyone off of their team, barring injury.

b) LW is our position of depth, while RW is our position of weakness.

c) While Glencross has better value league-wide, their difference in production isn't all that noticeable.

[Table 5]

See you later, alligator.

I think his role on the team isn't that crucial that it can't be filled, or his apparent leadership so good that his absence will crater the team. While he has had a decent season points wise, he's clearly not coming back next year, so it's time to get what you can for him. Rebuilding teams don't pass on getting 2nd round picks for assets that aren't coming back.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

The Anaheim option is tempting. Hate to trade within the division, but they have a high 3rd to go along with their low 2nd. That would be enough for me.
Not sure if reasonable, but there is talk that Toronto is looking for a 2nd and 3rd for Winnik. Different players, but I would hope Glencross>Winnik.

[FBI]

How about Glencross for a 2nd AND a 3rd ? Or a 2nd AND a 4th or something..

edit: wow same wave length as Banana Slug