[Rumour] Kypreos: Duclair can be had for the right price

[Young_Guns]

Duclair has upside for sure, but we kind of need a top 6 RW, not LW.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by flamesforcup

A deal around Hamilton is the only realistic thing i can see between the 2 clubs.

Duclair and Stone for Hamilton?
We get a solid winger and Hamiltons contract off the books. Plus we get a nice defensive top 4 dman who we can re-sign at the end of the year

edit: nevermind see he only has 3 points on the season loool

For Christmas all I want is a fan base that won't give up on a 6'6 23 yr old great skating defenseman that puts up 40+ points.

[IgiTang]

Arizona would likely ot do this but let's say BT offered Wotherspoon for Duclair as he dealt from a position of strength, would anyone be upset? What if it was Wotherspoon and a 3rd or even a 2nd?

That would be a great trade in my humble opinion and those are the types of deals the flames need to be making. Instead of losing guys like Ramage, and Seiloff etc.. move them for guys where we lack positional strength rather than lose them for nothing. If you have to add a mid round pick for a guy who has proven he can stick in the NHL, then so be it.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Young_Guns

Duclair has upside for sure, but we kind of need a top 6 RW, not LW.

Again.. Duclair plays mainly RW.

Any kind of research you will see LW/RW under position.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Arizona would likely ot do this but let's say BT offered Wotherspoon for Duclair as he dealt from a position of strength, would anyone be upset? What if it was Wotherspoon and a 3rd or even a 2nd?

That would be a great trade in my humble opinion and those are the types of deals the flames need to be making. Instead of losing guys like Ramage, and Seiloff etc.. move them for guys where we lack positional strength rather than lose them for nothing. If you have to add a mid round pick for a guy who has proven he can stick in the NHL, then so be it.

Your trade proposals are always woefully biased towards the Flames.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Arizona would likely ot do this but let's say BT offered Wotherspoon for Duclair as he dealt from a position of strength, would anyone be upset? What if it was Wotherspoon and a 3rd or even a 2nd?

That would be a great trade in my humble opinion and those are the types of deals the flames need to be making. Instead of losing guys like Ramage, and Seiloff etc.. move them for guys where we lack positional strength rather than lose them for nothing. If you have to add a mid round pick for a guy who has proven he can stick in the NHL, then so be it.

If they are losing those guys for nothing, then I would assume they are worth - nothing.
Why would you think they have any trade value at all?
Sieloff also wasn't lost for nothing.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Your trade proposals are always woefully biased towards the Flames.

Well sure, I'm a Flames... go figure. But I did state that it is the type of trade I would hope BT would be looking at. Not as actual proposals.

Replies such as yours are a polite way of calling me a homer, which is fine but I'm not saying that is the kind of deal I would expect, but a deal LIKE that is the area in which I hope BT is looking.

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

If they are losing those guys for nothing, then I would assume they are worth - nothing.
Why would you think they have any trade value at all?
Sieloff also wasn't lost for nothing.

Totally understandable, but before they were released, there were a lot of people expecting these guys to be given a cup of coffee at the very least.

The fact they found jobs at the pro level suggests they hold some value, how much is debatable sure. But my point is that with such a plethora of players at that position, trying to move some of these guys with some mid to late picks for players who have potentially lost favour is a route I would like to see taken more often.

[JiriHrdina]

OK but why would assume that the GM hasn't thought of that, explored that route, and any other route to extract any value out of an asset, before moving on?

You may want to see that route taken more often, but I don't see it being a route that is possible in most cases when you are talking about guys like Sieloff or Ramage.

Plus what you describe IS what they did with Sieloff. They moved him for a guy that had fallen out of favor with the Sens.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

OK but why would assume that the GM hasn't thought of that, explored that route, and any other route to extract any value out of an asset, before moving on?

You may want to see that route taken more often, but I don't see it being a route that is possible in most cases when you are talking about guys like Sieloff or Ramage.

Plus what you describe IS what they did with Sieloff. They moved him for a guy that had fallen out of favor with the Sens.

Right you are. I forgot he was part of the Chiasson package.

I would like to see more of those deals. I do agree that most prudent GM's would Pursue that option before releasing a player, that said, we've seen some pretty questionable moves or non-moves throughout the years to make a person have doubts.



As for Duclair, I think we have a few guys in our D ranks that could fit that type of trade scenario in Morrison, Wotherspoon, Culkin.. Etc. combined with a mid to late round pick.

Jayswin, All the "do not wants" and "underachiever" comments regarding Duclair, I'm not sure how you can misconstrue what I'm saying and call it unfair bias to the Flames. It would be a pretty sensible deal for both sides if Duclair has truly fallen out of favour.

Edit: I meant Kenny Morrison, not Josh morrisey

[JiriHrdina]

Prospects like that combined with a mid pick just isn't going to get you a player like Duclair. They are worth next to nothing

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Prospects like that combined with a mid pick just isn't going to get you a player like Duclair. They are worth next to nothing

So is the guy a grade "a" prospect ( not blue chip) who is underachieving and has met his ceiling or what?

Earlier you said he perhaps has played his best season, eluding to he may have capped out or hit his potential already, if so... then yes, those kind of deals get you that type of players.

You aren't handing over a Emile Porier, drafted in the first round and hasn't even had a real chance to show what he has at the NHL level, nor a Morgan Klimchuk for that very reason. Let alone add a pick.. unless Duclair is not underachieving but yet still growing and developing which would give him tons of potential.

Which is it guys?

[PepsiFree]

If you want Duclair for a D, you're giving up Kulak, Kylington, Andersson, or Hickey. Plus a good pick.

You don't generally get something of value for something of none.

[JiriHrdina]

It's neither
He's not a guy I would overpay to get but he isn't a guy with no value.
And for the record I would hand over Poirier or Klimchik (hell both!)for him in half a second.

[IgiTang]

Are you repeating yourself cause I missed your point or you're just reiterating?

Or is it a double post?

Or am I taking crazy pills?

Lol

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If you want Duclair for a D, you're giving up Kulak, Kylington, Andersson, or Hickey. Plus a good pick.

You don't generally get something of value for something of none.

Agreed.. unless ... he's like some have said, the guy the NYR's didn't hesitate to move or a guy who has played his best season.

You do not give up a Kulak, Kylington, Hickey or Andersson for a guy who, by this thread is being painted as the second coming of Evander Kane with or without the potential attitude. And no, I'm not comparing the two because of race. It's merely coincidence.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Agreed.. unless ... he's like some have said, the guy the NYR's didn't hesitate to move or a guy who has played his best season.



You do not give up a Kulak, Kylington, Hickey or Andersson for a guy who, by this thread is being painted as the second coming of Evander Kane with or without the potential attitude. And no, I'm not comparing the two because of race. It's merely coincidence.

That's the problem, he could be that, or he could be what he was last season (or better).

Unfortunately, if you want to acquire him you're going to have to pay like he's last year's player, not like he's the problem he might be.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

It's neither
He's not a guy I would overpay to get but he isn't a guy with no value.
And for the record I would hand over Poirier or Klimchik (hell both!)for him in half a second.

And that's funny about handing over Porier or Klimchuk, as I was thinking the same thing but didn't say so cause I could sense people jumping all over me cause I was suggesting giving up a first rounder who has yet to play a game at the NHL level or one who has all the intangibles of Duclair but hasn't gotten a real chance at the NHL level himself.

But agreed, I would move at least of if them if not both for Duclair.

[Jordan!]

Duclair isn't going anywhere..

[ignite09]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

Duclair isn't going anywhere..

Well there you go. Close thread.

[ricosuave]

I'm sure Treliving and Maloney have enough of a read on him