2017/2018 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Toonage]

Probably rehashing a previous discussion but over the past day I've heard two people (Dave Poulin, Eric D) bring up Carter Hutton's name as a possible 1B to Mike Smith. Purely speculation on their parts but the idea seems to be whether or not the Flames trust Rittich (or Gillies) in the event Smith goes down long term again.

He's a UFA and had a great year so he's likely to get a raise, but he's also in his early 30s and has never been a starter.

Would you get him? If so, what would you pay?

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

Which is basically what Vegas built their whole team on...

I'm not sure what your point is. They had a historical season by any measure, nobody thought they would have success. Do you want to try to emulate what they did? Seems rather optimistic.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Probably rehashing a previous discussion but over the past day I've heard two people (Dave Poulin, Eric D) bring up Carter Hutton's name as a possible 1B to Mike Smith. Purely speculation on their parts but the idea seems to be whether or not the Flames trust Rittich (or Gillies) in the event Smith goes down long term again.

He's a UFA and had a great year so he's likely to get a raise, but he's also in his early 30s and has never been a starter.

Would you get him? If so, what would you pay?

I'm 50/50 on it.

Mike Smith IMO is going to get injured again. I would bet on it. You hope Rittich and Gillies will take another step forward, but I don't know if I'd want to bet the season on it.

Sign a guy like Hutton and you have an insurance policy, and if the younger goalies play really well you can always trade Hutton down the road and get back an asset.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Probably rehashing a previous discussion but over the past day I've heard two people (Dave Poulin, Eric D) bring up Carter Hutton's name as a possible 1B to Mike Smith. Purely speculation on their parts but the idea seems to be whether or not the Flames trust Rittich (or Gillies) in the event Smith goes down long term again.

He's a UFA and had a great year so he's likely to get a raise, but he's also in his early 30s and has never been a starter.

Would you get him? If so, what would you pay?

Well if the organization continues to bring in 30 year old backup goaltenders blocking their prospects it's bit of a self fulfilling prophecy that the organization will never find that elusive franchise goaltender of the future. Hutton's numbers have been good but he's also played for organizations that make goaltenders look pretty good. This current Flames roster hasn't made things terribly easy on their goaltenders so don't expect Hutton to replicate his Blues stats in Calgary and if that's the case is he really going to be better than Rittich or Gillies?

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I'm 50/50 on it.

Mike Smith IMO is going to get injured again. I would bet on it. You hope Rittich and Gillies will take another step forward, but I don't know if I'd want to bet the season on it.

Sign a guy like Hutton and you have an insurance policy, and if the younger goalies play really well you can always trade Hutton down the road and get back an asset.

I'm in a similar boat. What if Smith is hurt in October and is out the same amount of time? Can they trust Rittich/Gillies to keep them afloat or do the Flames lose the season in the first month? They need to know if these guys can play, but like Eric D noted today, he believes the Flames are really waiting on Parsons and don't see Rittich or Gillies as the next starter.

If thats accurate, and the Flames feel that way, then they absolutely need to make sure they have a 1B to not only take the reigns if Smith goes down long term but a guy that can also start more than once every few weeks like Rittich did. If its not Hutton, who else is out there?

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by Saqe

I'm not sure what your point is. They had a historical season by any measure, nobody thought they would have success. Do you want to try to emulate what they did? Seems rather optimistic.

Totally agree with the NHL18 reference to the trade. But Vegas was built on mediocrity throughout the lines. They had guys step up, but at the start of the season I think they were going with the hope that they had four #2 lines. They lacked star power but had balance.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well if the organization continues to bring in 30 year old backup goaltenders blocking their prospects it's bit of a self fulfilling prophecy that the organization will never find that elusive franchise goaltender of the future. Hutton's numbers have been good but he's also played for organizations that make goaltenders look pretty good. This current Flames roster hasn't made things terribly easy on their goaltenders.

If neither Gillies or Rittich is trusted (or they just don't pan out) and Smith is on an expiring deal, you sort of need that veteran to be there to bridge the gap. Especially if its parsons they have the most belief in and he's a few years out.

The real mistake was probably signing Smith without knowing for sure you had a starter in waiting but I get why they went after him and I understand he wasn't the first choice. I also understand they had high hopes for Gillies, and a lottery ticket in Rittich.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

Yup. A top four defenseman and a top nine winger for a guy who scores 20-25 goals a year seems more than fair. Stone put up an anomalous season last year. I wouldn't pay a huge return for a player unless he has a track record, and Stone's track record is not worth anything more than I suggested. I think people are grossly undervaluing our players and willing to throw away good assets for the shiny bobble in the window.

T.J. Brodie is the 7th or 8th best player on the team that finished 20th in the NHL.

It's just funny that fans think the Flames will be able to acquire a difference-maker from another team - a player who's the 3rd or 4th best player on an NHL roster - without giving up any of our top 8 players. If the Flames had such a stellar core they'd have made it into the playoffs and won a round or two.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

Totally agree with the NHL18 reference to the trade. But Vegas was built on mediocrity throughout the lines. They had guys step up, but at the start of the season I think they were going with the hope that they had four #2 lines. They lacked star power but had balance.

Sure, I just think it's more of a flash in the pan type of thing then a real model to build after. Everything went their way which goes to show how big of a deal team chemistry is.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

T.J. Brodie is the 7th or 8th best player on the team that finished 20th in the NHL.

It's just funny that fans think the Flames will be able to acquire a difference-maker from another team - a player who's the 3rd or 4th best player on an NHL roster - without giving up any of our top 8 players. If the Flames had such a stellar core they'd have made it into the playoffs and won a round or two.

Stone is the 2nd or 3rd best player (depending on your view of Duchene) on a team that finished 30th, 17 points behind Calgary. If you downgrade Brodie on the basis of team finish, you downgrade Stone too.

Of course, it's not that simple.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

T.J. Brodie is the 7th or 8th best player on the team that finished 20th in the NHL.

The Flames had the worst coaching staff in the league, and a bad coach can undo a lot of good.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Stone is probably the last guy Ottawa wants to trade right now.

Good. Let them keep him. Stone has a Ryan Smyth vibe to me. I think he's a guy that will do great on a nothing team, but not elevate his game to the levels needed to be a winner. Until Stone develops a track record of success, I treat him as a support player. I think Hoffman has the better and more consistent track record. I'd rather take him on a down year than take Stone after an up year.

[Weitz]

There is always value in a contract that only costs 66% of the actual cap hit for teams that are not max cap spenders.

I do think Lucic will be traded after July 1 when his bonus is paid, I think the trade will surprise. Not because it will return anything great, but it won't cost much if anything to get rid of.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Weitz

There is always value in a contract that only costs 66% of the actual cap hit for teams that are not max cap spenders.

I do think Lucic will be traded after July 1 when his bonus is paid, I think the trade will surprise. Not because it will return anything great, but it won't cost much if anything to get rid of.

I could see that argument if this was the final year of his contract, but he's got five more years. You might save $3.5 million this year if you get him after July 1, but you're paying full price in each of the next 4 years, and he'll just keep getting older.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

There is always value in a contract that only costs 66% of the actual cap hit for teams that are not max cap spenders.

I do think Lucic will be traded after July 1 when his bonus is paid, I think the trade will surprise. Not because it will return anything great, but it won't cost much if anything to get rid of.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by getbak

I could see that argument if this was the final year of his contract, but he's got five more years. You might save $3.5 million this year if you get him after July 1, but you're paying full price in each of the next 4 years, and he'll just keep getting older.

You save $1.5 million per year for 5 years (compared to amount against the cap). Not nothing to a cost conscious owner.

I think there is too much smoke from non-oiler media talking trade that it doesn't happen. Hilariously now the idiot bloggers and media in Edmonton are saying "don't give him away!!"

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

You save $1.5 million per year for 5 years (compared to amount against the cap). Not nothing to a cost conscious owner.

But you also get Lucic, who is no good.

[bax]

Originally Posted by New Era

Good. Let them keep him. Stone has a Ryan Smyth vibe to me. I think he's a guy that will do great on a nothing team, but not elevate his game to the levels needed to be a winner. Until Stone develops a track record of success, I treat him as a support player. I think Hoffman has the better and more consistent track record. I'd rather take him on a down year than take Stone after an up year.

Hoffman has a better track record than Stone? What?

Hoffman is a one dimensional shooter that has never broke 30 goals. He has a career high of 61 points. I can’t imagine comparing him to Stone and determining he is more valuable.

By labeling Stone as a “20-25 goal guy” you are grossly undervaluing him. If he was a center he would be in talks for the Selke. He is that good defensively.

I don’t know what you mean by up and down years? Stone is younger and has shown progression in every year he’s been in the league. Last season wasn’t a down year for Hoffman, it was right in line with his career averages.

[Yrebmi]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Either Hanifin or Faulk won't make much of a difference in Edmonton but I can't believe they could get rid of that terrible contract just like that.

I can't either, and they won't.
Dreger made it clear it was just his own idea, and not any sort of rumor.
Just another Edmonton fan wishful thinking.

[Yrebmi]

Dbl post. sry