What was the worst trade in Flames history?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Jaybo was playing on the greatest d ever assemled about a year later...he also had a year left on his deal, it was a terrible trade.

Lol make up your mind....just spent time revisiting the Bouwmeester trade thread and guess who had the most posts by a mile in that thread? You did, and you were claiming Bouwmeester sucks and it was a good trade.

Originally Posted by dino7c

you guys are idiots, the Flames dropped 6.8 million off the cap and added another first, how is this less than Iggy? the pick is far better. The only people upset are the ones with ridiculous expectations that we were getting a 1st and a top end prospect for a guy that everyone has hated 90% of the time he has been on the Flames

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Doug Gilmour trade might be one of the worst in NHL history, let alone Flames history. It changed the direction of 2 franchises, almost immediately.
The Savard deal would garner dishonorable mention for sure. Complete lunacy at the time.

[ToewsFan]

The Doug Gilmour trade was the worst trade the Flames have ever made.

[ToewsFan]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Iginla wasn't a star when he was traded. Bouwmeester was a pylon for Calgary his entire tenure here and his value suffered. Phaneuf trade was terrible now and then. Even though he was also a pylon, he brought other facets to the game where you'd think his value would have been higher especially considering his age.

Looking back in retrospect, I cannot believe how little the Flames received in return from Toronto in the Phaneuf trade. I personally did not care for him, but he was 24, about to hit his prime, and was a big and imposing defensemen. I wish Calgary had held out for someone like Luke Schenn or Nazem Kadri, instead of spare parts.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Lol make up your mind....just spent time revisiting the Bouwmeester trade thread and guess who had the most posts by a mile in that thread? You did, and you were claiming Bouwmeester sucks and it was a good trade.

OMG my opinion changed over a 4 year period! well I take it all back lol

Anyway, that quote is out of context anyway...I am disagreeing with those who said that they got more for Iggy. Both terrible returns but Jaybo netted more than Iginla. Also, at the time it looked like that cap space could be a useful asset (like Feaster said himself) In the end that saved cap space just went in the owners pockets the following year and that made a major difference to a potential return. Had they used that 6.8 to take on some bad contracts with an asset attached as a certain GM talked about it would be a totally different conversation.

[calgaryblood]

You also said in this thread he also had a year left on his contract meaning you thought the trade was bad at the time.

That was one of many posts in that thread where you called him terrible and called it a fair trade at the time and anyone who disagrees it was a bad trade you called all sorts of names.

And in this thread you acted as if it was a bad one all along. Hypocrisy at its finest. it was a fair trade because Bouwmeester did in fact suck like you said and 90% did hate him and his value wasn't high like you also said in that thread.

[dino7c]

You have never changed your opinion? Dude it's been multiple years get over yourself. Since you have so much time to search my posts I have been lambasting the Jaybo trade for years. Maybe the day it happened I was under the Feaster fanboy spell but with the benefit of heighseight that was a terrible deal. Many of us were clowns for putting so much balme on Jaybo when there were many other issues with the team. In the final year of that deal he was one of the better dmen in the league. If you want to start bringing up old posts you my friend have had some doozies.

[You Need a Thneed]

We all expected more offense from Bouwmeester, but defensively, he was still elite while he was here.

I remember looking up defensemam stats around the time the 2010 Olympic team was announced. In ES/SH goals against per 60 minutes, Bouwmeester was better than every Defenseman that went to the Olympics. Significantly better than most of them.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by dino7c

You have never changed your opinion? Dude it's been multiple years get over yourself. Since you have so much time to search my posts I have been lambasting the Jaybo trade for years. Maybe the day it happened I was under the Feaster fanboy spell but with the benefit of heighseight that was a terrible deal. Many of us were clowns for putting so much balme on Jaybo when there were many other issues with the team. In the final year of that deal he was one of the better dmen in the league. If you want to start bringing up old posts you my friend have had some doozies.

I honestly don't know why people engage him in serious talk.

One page ago he called Bouwmeester a "pylon".

I get that he was largely disappointing in terms of the high expectations we had for him, but he's certainly not Anders Eriksson.

There's no middle ground with calgaryblood. If something isn't good, it's the worst ever.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

OMG my opinion changed over a 4 year period! well I take it all back lol

It's easy to judge trades in hindsight, but they really need to be judged based on the parameters at the time.

Saying a trade is terrible that you thought was great at the time, and panning the people responsible for it, makes little sense when the people responsible thought no different than you at the time.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

It's easy to judge trades in hindsight, but they really need to be judged based on the parameters at the time.

Saying a trade is terrible that you thought was great at the time, and panning the people responsible for it, makes little sense when the people responsible thought no different than you at the time.

He was an NHL GM and I am a fan...he also had a master plan for the cap space he never executed. The question was what is the worst Flames trade off all time not what did you think was the worst trade at the time. Gilmour is the worst but Jaybo is up there considering how things played out.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

He was an NHL GM and I am a fan...he also had a master plan for the cap space he never executed. The question was what is the worst Flames trade off all time not what did you think was the worst trade at the time. Gilmour is the worst but Jaybo is up there considering how things played out.

If the Jaybo first round pick had hit gold would that suddenly make it a spectacular trade?

That makes zero sense in evaluating the trade.

[I_H8_Crawford]

1) Gilmour
2) Phaneuf
3) Bouwmeester

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

If the Jaybo first round pick had hit gold would that suddenly make it a spectacular trade?

That makes zero sense in evaluating the trade.

It makes all the sense in the world looking at it years later...although that would have been a fluke considering track record of late round picks.

When the GM himself defends a trade by saying he will use the cap space as an asset and do something creative, then never does a ####ing thing and is 20M under the cap the next season...maybe, just maybe, he ####ed up lol

[calgaryblood]

It makes no sense. None at all. Trades should be evaluated on the day they are made as that's when the value of the player only matters.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

It makes no sense. None at all. Trades should be evaluated on the day they are made as that's when the value of the player only matters.

The thread is literally about the Flames HISTORY

"what was the worst trade in Flames HISTORY" is the title

its not

"what did you think was the worst trade at the time it happened"

HISTORY...in other words use the benefit of hindsight

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

It makes no sense. None at all. Trades should be evaluated on the day they are made as that's when the value of the player only matters.

Then the Gilmour trade might not be as bad as people think, under that condition. I still didn't like the return, but on the day of the trade you had a player in a mid season holdout on one side and guy who'd scored 50 a year prior (and who had four straight 20 goals seasons, plus 17 in 52 games in another) on the other side. Of course Risebrough was no hockey analyst so he couldn't see Leeman was in the process of falling off a cliff.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Then the Gilmour trade might not be as bad as people think, under that condition. I still didn't like the return, but on the day of the trade you had a player in a mid season holdout on one side and guy who'd scored 50 a year prior (and who had four straight 20 goals seasons, plus 17 in 52 games in another) on the other side. Of course Risebrough was no hockey analyst so he couldn't see Leeman was in the process of falling off a cliff.

That mid-season holdout had lasted for all of 24 hours, and only happened because of the incompetence of the very same general manager who made the trade. You certainly can't use it to excuse him, with or without the benefit of hindsight.

As for Leeman, he had already fallen off the cliff. His track record made it clear that he was only a prolific scorer if you put him on a line with a top-quality playmaking centreman. The Flames had just one player on their roster who could have got the most out of Leeman: Doug Gilmour. So after they traded Gilmour for Leeman, all they had to do was put him on Gilmour's line… errr…

After that horrible beginning, the more players Risebrough added to the deal, the worse it got. Even on the day of the trade, it was obvious that it was a complete botch.

If you were to talk about a trade that seemed to make sense at the time but went sour in retrospect, that would probably do a better job of supporting your point.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Then the Gilmour trade might not be as bad as people think, under that condition. I still didn't like the return, but on the day of the trade you had a player in a mid season holdout on one side and guy who'd scored 50 a year prior (and who had four straight 20 goals seasons, plus 17 in 52 games in another) on the other side. Of course Risebrough was no hockey analyst so he couldn't see Leeman was in the process of falling off a cliff.

Leeman didn't just fall off a cliff, he had already hit the ground and his grave was in the process of being dug. you should have said, Risebrough failed to notice the body was cold and had been for a long long time. Weird, because even the most novice of fans noticed right away what Risebrough had failed to, it was a bad bad trade. Now, having the benefit of hindsight, even the most novice of fans realized it was a bad bad trade.
Like CalgaryBlood pointed out, most fans, even the not so novice thought the Boumeester trade was fair at the time, given the benefit of hindsight, some have changed their minds. Now hopefully for them, Poirier doesn't do anything in the next few years, otherwise those same people will be back telling us all how great the trade was. you know, because they can change their minds.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That mid-season holdout had lasted for all of 24 hours, and only happened because of the incompetence of the very same general manager who made the trade. You certainly can't use it to excuse him, with or without the benefit of hindsight.

As for Leeman, he had already fallen off the cliff. His track record made it clear that he was only a prolific scorer if you put him on a line with a top-quality playmaking centreman. The Flames had just one player on their roster who could have got the most out of Leeman: Doug Gilmour. So after they traded Gilmour for Leeman, all they had to do was put him on Gilmour's line… errr…

After that horrible beginning, the more players Risebrough added to the deal, the worse it got. Even on the day of the trade, it was obvious that it was a complete botch.

If you were to talk about a trade that seemed to make sense at the time but went sour in retrospect, that would probably do a better job of supporting your point.

The holdout was ongoing. Who knows how long it would have gone on. As for Leeman, yeah it's not the best example, but leeman was two years removed from 51 goals, three from 30 in something like 50 games, and one year from 17 in 50, which was better than his career average. Some thought he needed a change of scenery. But yeah, Riser's homework was lacking, including letting Macoun go. And Gilmour, while good, was still thought of as a second line, two way centre. Riser probably thought he was deep down the middle, with Newy, Fleury, Otto, Reichel and Wilson.

But at the time, while lots of people