2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Maybe the Flames get a discount on a goalie as well? Of course, the thought of losing Ferly in order to get a discount on MAF is vomit inducing for me, but I'm no MAF fan.

I dunno. I'm no Spector fan, but at least he has reasoning behind it. It hinges on Vegas being very high on Ferland though, which isn't unrealistic. Look how much higher we all are about Ferland compared to Brouwer.

Well, it's hard to say what that deal would look like without knowing what goalies LV has. We can sort of assume MAF is one, but if they get one of the really highly touted backups (say, Pickard, Mrazek, maybe Grubauer), you could do some sort of deal to expose Ferland, then trade for one of those goalies for cheap. But that deal leaves a bigger hole at RW than they already have.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Maybe the Flames get a discount on a goalie as well? Of course, the thought of losing Ferly in order to get a discount on MAF is vomit inducing for me, but I'm no MAF fan.

I dunno. I'm no Spector fan, but at least he has reasoning behind it. It hinges on Vegas being very high on Ferland though, which isn't unrealistic. Look how much higher we all are about Ferland compared to Brouwer.

You are right on the money here. Just because it's written by an idiot doesn't make it not a possibility, however remote.
So Flames expose Ferland in exchange for a swap of Stajan for MAF, plus maybe some other bits and pieces exchanged.
It's interesting, but I don't really like it that much.

Let's not kid ourselves though. Vegas only takes Brouwer, if exposed, if the Flames throw them something really good to go along with him.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I think the Flames are too high on Ferland to include him in any trade that at least in part makes him the sweetener. Bouma and Stajan have a year left on their deals. I can't envision any scenario where the Flames trade Ferland for anything short of an over-payment. Ferland would be the sweetener in a multi-asset deal to consummate a trade involving the Flames obtaining a much better player.

Call me crazy, but I think Stajan is very movable right now (and I pick him to be the guy that Vegas is targeting in expansion from the Flames) as his cap hit is not ugly (3.5 million), he has only one year left on his deal (centers command a lot back at the deadline like defencemen do) and that his actual salary is only 2.5 million (saving a budget team 1 million annually - nothing to sneeze at).

Bouma is probably not a very desirable asset, but again he only has one year left. Occasionally a team will look to trade for a 'heart and soul' guy who plays PK and has a lot of grit (playoff Bouma is an asset, even if he is a minimal one).

Brouwer is really the team's only poor contract, but even then it isn't completely ugly. I personally wasn't impressed by his performance this past season - though he wasn't all bad, I do think he was mostly bad and was fittingly demoted to the 4th line. However, I do think that there is a chance that he rebounds a bit, and a reasonable 'excuse' was that he wasn't feeling 100% due to his injury. I would rather have the Flames get rid of him somehow, but his contract really isn't THAT ugly. Every team has at least one poor contract (usually more) and as long as Brouwer remains the only poor contract, I can live with it. I can't live with getting rid of Ferland to erase it.

Edit: The Spector article still doesn't make sense anyways. If Vegas wanted Ferland, they wouldn't get him through the expansion draft. Why not select Stajan through the expansion draft on the condition that Calgary would then trade Ferland for whatever goalie they desired? The optics for Vegas in selecting Ferland is great, but then it would look like a 'terrible move' to then trade for Stajan (or whomever) for an asset like one of the goalies. It is a poorly thought-out scenario in my opinion. Either way, fat chance of that happening.

[TheScorpion]

Ferland isn't proven, which apparently makes him worse than Brouwer. That would be all fine, except that Brouwer has been proven to be terrible.

[Roof-Daddy]

Just for the record, I'm not saying it's want I want the Flames to do (especially for MAF, barf) but when you think about that scenario it doesn't seem completely unrealistic.

When I first skimmed the article I just thought the dummy was saying the Flames would protect Brouwer and expose Ferland to avoid hurt feelings.

The Flames getting something out of it makes more sense.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Apparently Spector thinks the Flames exposing Brouwer will cause a big rift in the locker room, so instead Ferland will be exposed.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/c...draft-preview/

tl;dr he is a moron and shouldn't be writing for the Flames.

Poisonous? Plenty of players were likely asked this week if they would waive their NTC's and I'm sure Phaneuf isn't the only one to refuse. Are we to assume that all those locker rooms will be poisonous as well? It's business and veterans like Brouwer especially know the routine and how things work. He's probably expecting it at this stage as I'm sure he knows very well he didn't keep up his end of the bargain based on last season's play.

Why does RSN have to have an Oilers writer doing Flames stories? The Flames exposing Ferland over Brouwer is the Oilers fan in him hoping the team would do something silly. I will say if there's any truth to Vegas coveting Ferland I suppose the Flames could strike up a deal involving Fleury or another goaltender but otherwise that's just pie in the sky Oilers fan talk.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

LOL, @ you guys. Spector is writing for his audience when he points to possible disaster scenarios for the Flames during the expansion draft. But guess what? Flames fans are not his audience. Clearly this is one of those articles for Oilers fans to hold up to Flames fans and point out how much the expansion draft is going to suck for us.

Obvious troll job is obvious.

[Mister Yamoto]

The Flames exposing Ferland is about as likely as Vegas choosing Brouwer.

If you really do HAVE to protect Brouwer, you expose Lazar before Ferland IMO.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

The negotiating would be done before the exposure.

"Hey Tre, we really like Ferland, any way we can pry him off you"

"Well, I don't want to but I can leave him exposed in the ED instead of Brouwer. We need something out of it though. Which goalies do you think you will take and look to flip?"

"Looks like we might take Raanta and if we do there is a good chance we flip him"

"How about we leave Ferly exposed, and then flip you Stajan/Bouma for Raanta?"


"Alright, let's get the paperwork drawn up"


Flames get a young goalie, give up Ferland and Stajan/Bouma to get him freeing up a roster spot and some cap space.

I think we are both saying the same thing. My issue with the Spector article is that it somehow conflates issues with Brouwer and the above conversation. Brouwer really has nothing to do with it.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Ferland isn't proven, which apparently makes him worse than Brouwer. That would be all fine, except that Brouwer has been proven to be terrible.

No one says he is worse. But to other teams, the more proven guy might just have more value. As for "proven to be terrible", this was indeed his worst full year in the league, stat-wise. But to me that doesn't mean he has fallen off a cliff, necessarily. He has probably passed his peak, which was three-four years ago. But he could well bounce back. He was injured, which hadn't happened to him in 4 years at least, and that probably affected his totals even after he came back. Since it was a hand injury, it probably affected his ability to fight or take part in scrums as well, to some extent.

[Robbob]

Kind of putting the cart before the horse exposing Ferland in that scenario. Logically you would think you keep him protected and during the three days where rosters are frozen you complete the deal. You need to protect asset and make sure you don't give up leverage.

[Ashasx]

Bob McKenzie‏ @TSNBobMcKenzie
NYR centre Derek Stepan's name is fairly prominent in trade chatter. Stepan's contract has four more years with AAV of $6M.

oh my

[sureLoss]

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
NYR centre Derek Stepan's name is fairly prominent in trade chatter. Stepan's contract has four more years with AAV of $6M.

Bob McKenzie‏Verified account
@TSNBobMcKenzie
Worth noting, Stepan has full NTC (for next two seasons) that kicks in on July 1. No NTC until then. Final 2 yrs of deal is modified NTC.

Bob McKenzie‏Verified account
@TSNBobMcKenzie
Make that $6.5M AAV, not $6M. Haste makes waste, as my mother used to tell me.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Bob McKenzie‏ @TSNBobMcKenzie
NYR centre Derek Stepan's name is fairly prominent in trade chatter. Stepan's contract has four more years with AAV of $6M.

oh my

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
NYR centre Derek Stepan's name is fairly prominent in trade chatter. Stepan's contract has four more years with AAV of $6M.

Well, this seems out of order....

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
NYR centre Derek Stepan's name is fairly prominent in trade chatter. Stepan's contract has four more years with AAV of $6M.

Bob McKenzie‏Verified account
@TSNBobMcKenzie
Worth noting, Stepan has full NTC (for next two seasons) that kicks in on July 1. No NTC until then. Final 2 yrs of deal is modified NTC.

This has desperate Marc Bergevan written all over it.

[Love]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

This has desperate Marc Bergevan written all over it.

@InRodWeTrustMTL
McGuire says hes heard Galchenyuk's name in rumours around the league, including possible 27+1st rnd pick for player X "would be brutal deal

[Husky]

Stepan would be a Great pickup.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

This has desperate Marc Bergevan written all over it.

You know it wouldn't be the #1 center they are looking for but he isn't terrible.

He is about $1M overpaid but he is still only 26 years old, is pretty much a lock to put up 50 points, and doesn't have the worst numbers from a possession perspective.

Not a #1 center but is a pretty good second line center if you can slot him there.

Of course it's dependent on cost - Galchenyuk+1st would be a crazy overpayment. Like McDonaugh + Higgins for Gomez all over again.

[SofaProfessor]

Originally Posted by Husky

Stepan would be a Great pickup.

Maybe for some team that's short at centre depth but not the Flames.

Monahan > Stepan

Backlund > Stepan

You gonna put a $6.5M cap hit out there as the third line centre? No thanks.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

LOL, @ you guys. Spector is writing for his audience when he points to possible disaster scenarios for the Flames during the expansion draft. But guess what? Flames fans are not his audience. Clearly this is one of those articles for Oilers fans to hold up to Flames fans and point out how much the expansion draft is going to suck for us.

Obvious troll job is obvious.

I think you are reading something into Spector that isn't there.

Look what he says about the Oilers in his first sentence: "The Edmonton Oilers are a 7-3-1 team whose chronic lack of organizational depth actually comes in handy here, leaving them without a lot of major issues in this Expansion Draft."

He's just kind of negative by nature.

Then he goes on to say the Oilers will protect Letestu, who is a 32 year old 4th line center with one year remaining on his contract. I don't think that is very likely either.

Looks like he is just defaulting to the veterans. That doesn't show team bias.