2015/2016 Trade Speculation and Rumors v2 - Page 140 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

edslunch · 04-10-2016, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So let's say Vancouver pulls 2nd in the draft lottery and the Flames retain their 5th spot...

Would the Flames offer Jankowski to move up? Would the Nucks do it?

The Canucks need Cs. Well okay, they need everything. But if they can't get Matthews, would they be willing to trade down to walk away with Chychrun and Jankowski?

I think it's a lot to pay. The only reason I would do it is that Laine is exactly what the Flames need.

Thoughts?

Quality always trumps quantity. You don't trade a top pick

Enoch Root · 04-10-2016, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edslunch

Quality always trumps quantity. You don't trade a top pick

it doesn't happen a lot, but it happens

Enoch Root · 04-10-2016, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

What team in earth would take Chychrun and Jankowski over Laine? Not many I'd imagine. Vancouver needs stars of all positions, not complimentary pieces.

the 5th overall doesn't get you a complimentary piece

and Jankowski would arguably be their best C prospect

dissentowner · 04-10-2016, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by New Era

Damn. I would have loved to see Leeman coach the Flames. One of the best Xs and Os guys around. His teams are seldom ill-prepared or out-coached.

We already have a better coach.

Street Pharmacist · 04-10-2016, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

the 5th overall doesn't get you a complimentary piece

and Jankowski would arguably be their best C prospect

Vancouver has really no potential superstars after the Sedins retire. Jankowski isn't that and I don't think the 5th is either. They desperately need a top 3 puck far more than we do

Lanny_McDonald · 04-10-2016, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissentowner

We already have a better coach.

No we don't. Hartley is not a good coach. All you have to do is look at his refusal to make adjustments to a system that everyone knew was coming at them. Look at the absolute gong show that was our special teams. Look at how many times the team came out flat or didn't look prepared for the team they were about to play. I've never considered him a good coach and last year's trophy doesn't change that.

Erick Estrada · 04-10-2016, 02:38 PM

I think the Flames will stick with Hartley for one more season but if by chance both Julien and especially Dave Tippet become available I could see a the Flames making strong considerations to moving on.

Roof-Daddy · 04-10-2016, 02:45 PM

Might be time to hire Julien on as a "Pro Scout" if the Bruins let him go.

*wink wink*

d_phaneuf · 04-10-2016, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So let's say Vancouver pulls 2nd in the draft lottery and the Flames retain their 5th spot...

Would the Flames offer Jankowski to move up? Would the Nucks do it?

The Canucks need Cs. Well okay, they need everything. But if they can't get Matthews, would they be willing to trade down to walk away with Chychrun and Jankowski?

I think it's a lot to pay. The only reason I would do it is that Laine is exactly what the Flames need.

Thoughts?

Jankowski would be behind Horvat, McCann, and Sutter

so no that trade makes no sense for Vancouver

d_phaneuf · 04-10-2016, 06:52 PM

the only way I see the Canucks trading down is if they get the 5th or 6th pick and all the picks before them are all forwards

supposedly they like Bean a lot and value him in the same range as the other d men, so if they could go 6 to 10-12 and grab other picks plus still getting one of the 4 d men maybe they do it

but trading out of the top 3 for a marginal center prospect doesn't make any sense, Benning has said there's a clear top 3 at F and then after that they like the Defencemen, not over them

Flames Draft Watcher · 04-10-2016, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

the 5th overall doesn't get you a complimentary piece

and Jankowski would arguably be their best C prospect

In regards to that hypothetical I think its best to imagine what you would trade down for if you had the #2 pick and VAN had 5th overall. Given that you'd be trading out of the top tier of players it would require an overpayment to get you to listen IMO. We'd love to draft Laine. Why would we trade out of the #2 pick? You'd have to put forth a pretty crazy offer because we're happy to grab Laine ourselves.

Would you trade #2 as CGY for VAN's #5, McCann and a 2nd? Hmmm, probably not right? Laine would be amazing for us. Click.

Would you trade #2 as CGY for VAN's #5, Demko, Boeser and a 2nd? Wow, I think that would probably be a winning offer. I think the risk of losing out on a franchise player in Laine is mitigated by getting back 3 high end assets (#5, Boeser and Demko) and one second level type asset (2nd rounder). Is it close? Is it too much? Is it too little?

I think we'd have to offer VAN two of our top prospects (Jankowski, Andersson, Kylington, Gillies), the #5 pick plus at least a 2nd for them to not hang up the phone. And that's a price I'm not sure we'd want to pay.

And this is why teams almost never trade out of the top tier.

drewtastic · 04-10-2016, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Strange Brew makes Strange Posts

On a boat in the middle of a raging sea
She would make a scene for it all to be
Ignored
And wouldn't you be bored?
Strange Brew

Demetric · 04-12-2016, 04:51 PM

from Elliotte's 30 thoughts: link

Quote:

22. Does Dennis Wideman to Edmonton make sense to anyone? Peter Chiarelli acquired him and traded him in Boston.

Is there anything worth taking other than draft picks?

bax · 04-12-2016, 04:59 PM

Wideman for Yak

getbak · 04-12-2016, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demetric

from Elliotte's 30 thoughts: link

Is there anything worth taking other than draft picks?

I want the net from the one end of Rexall where the Flames always scored the late game, fluky goals to win games.

That's a good net.

Lanny_McDonald · 04-12-2016, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demetric

from Elliotte's 30 thoughts: link

Is there anything worth taking other than draft picks?

I think Dallas is a great fit. They have three defensemen signed for next season (Klingerg, Oduya and Nemeth) and only one RFA (Oleksiak). That isn't even $9M committed to next season on the blue line. Add in we own their first or 2nd rounder and I think we could make it worth their while to move an asset to use we have interest in. I think if we packaged Wideman along with Dallas' pick, and possibly another of our 2nd rounders, we might be able to pry out one of their big RWs in Nichushkin or Ritchie. Would work for both teams IMO.

flamesforcup · 04-12-2016, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demetric

from Elliotte's 30 thoughts: link

Is there anything worth taking other than draft picks?

yakupov?

Makarov · 04-12-2016, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

Wideman for Yak

Do Oilers have enough cap room for Wideman? In any event, feel like the Flames would have to add a 3rd or 2nd.

Lanny_McDonald · 04-12-2016, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makarov

Do Oilers have enough cap room for Wideman? In any event, feel like the Flames would have to add a 3rd or 2nd.

No. As much as I want Wideman gone there is no way we add to Wideman and then take on Fail Crapupov. No way. I'd rather fire Wideman into the sun than take on that brain dead bum.

1qqaaz · 04-12-2016, 05:35 PM

Would you do Wideman for Ference and Edmonton's 2016 2nd? Ference's contract ends after 16-17 season. So we'd be trading Wideman, plus getting a short-term bad contract, for a very high second round pick. It would also leave us with a bit more cap room to sign someone else this summer.