2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dino7c

How is Stone better? Their career highs in goals and points are within spiting distance of each other and o e guy plays defence FFS

I realize the popular opinion would follow that Hamilton > Stone but I actually think Stone is a better player. He's got an uncanny ability to elevate his game when his team needs him, and he's very multidimensional with goal scoring, playmaking, and he's arguably the top defensive winger in the entire NHL.

Honestly, while I don't think Hamilton is even an average never mind bad defenseman by any means, I feel he's pretty one-dimensional, that one dimension being his ability to get his shot off on the offensive zone. It's a very useful dimension, but one I could live without compared to all that a Stone brings. Honestly I don't think defensively he's much better than any of Kulak, Hamonic, Brodie, or Giordano, and offensively I don't think he's a better actual playmaker than Brodie or Giordano. His shooting is elite, probably second only to Brent Burns in the entire NHL, but how vital is that? I'm not convinced it is, but I am convinced Hamilton holds very high value relative to his impact.

Originally Posted by dino7c

Hamilton just lead the entire league for goal scoring at his position.

I've seen this posted often, but what exactly does that mean for a team? Seventeen goal scorers are dime a dozen - doing it from the backend might even be a bad gameplan if you had to Glen Gulutzan Mindless Volume Shoot your way to do it. Seventeen goals from a Dman IS impressive, as an individual accomplishment, but does it help a team win more compared to a 40 assist defenseman or a 30 goal scoring forward?

My real question is this - can Dougie Hamilton one-man-QB a power play a la Shattenkirk, Carlson, etc? And if so, why has no coach in his entire career given him that opportunity?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

The number of posters who STILL think building around wingers is a smart decision is unbelievable. Flames fans are obsessed with points. Speed and offence are super important, more than ever, but the game is STILL dictated by centres and defencemen. Having your three best players as wingers is about the stupidest way to build a hockey team I can think of. The Flames are already in tough with their two best players as wingers. At least at this point there is hope that Hamilton could become more impactful than he has been the last two seasons and give Tkachuck a run for his money as second most important player. Trading him for Stone is about the silliest thing management could do...

Unsurprisingly, Monahan gets no credit from a huge number of posters, but he is one of the two best forwards on the team, and is still a better player than Matthew Tkachuk. Someday, that may change, but that day has not yet come.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I realize the popular opinion would follow that Hamilton > Stone but I actually think Stone is a better player. He's got an uncanny ability to elevate his game when his team needs him, and he's very multidimensional with goal scoring, playmaking, and he's arguably the top defensive winger in the entire NHL.

Honestly, while I don't think Hamilton is even an average never mind bad defenseman by any means, I feel he's pretty one-dimensional, that one dimension being his ability to get his shot off on the offensive zone. It's a very useful dimension, but one I could live without compared to all that a Stone brings. Honestly I don't think defensively he's much better than any of Kulak, Hamonic, Brodie, or Giordano, and offensively I don't think he's a better actual playmaker than Brodie or Giordano. His shooting is elite, probably second only to Brent Burns in the entire NHL, but how vital is that? I'm not convinced it is, but I am convinced Hamilton holds very high value relative to his impact.





I've seen this posted often, but what exactly does that mean for a team? Seventeen goal scorers are dime a dozen - doing it from the backend might even be a bad gameplan if you had to Glen Gulutzan Mindless Volume Shoot your way to do it. Seventeen goals from a Dman IS impressive, as an individual accomplishment, but does it help a team win more compared to a 40 assist defenseman or a 30 goal scoring forward?

My real question is this - can Dougie Hamilton one-man-QB a power play? And if so, why has no coach in his entire career given him that opportunity?

Hamilton would have a lot more points if the Flames had more than three forwards on the entire team that could score. Coach not using him on the PP for half a season didn't help either.

Hamilton for Stone would be terrible asset management...if you are trading Hamilton you better be getting a young 80-90 point forward. Not mid 60s.

Stone is a player I would love to have though.

Why are the Sens trading him though? I think we are all arguing about nothing...their PR this summer is bad enough they don't really need to lose all their best players.

[Erick Estrada]

Why would the Senators even entertain trading Stone especially for a defenseman? He’s one of only two first line forwards they have left on their roster.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Why would the Senators even entertain trading Stone especially for a defenseman? He’s one of only two first line talents they have left on their roster.

They're likely going to be forced to tear it down...and does Stone want to be a part of that?

He's currently an RFA, so I guess we'll see how it goes.

I'm all for going for Stone, but I'd much sooner pay out prospects and futures (yes, the 2019 1st would happily be included for a player like Stone).

2019 1st round pick
Rasmus Andersson

I imagine that pair of assets gets the ball rolling.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Hamilton for Stone would be terrible asset management...if you are trading Hamilton you better be getting a young 80-90 point forward. Not mid 60s.

Uh, Stone was on pace for 88 points this season.

[Erick Estrada]

They still have to ice a product unless they are entertaining the idea of playing in half empty arenas at home. The fantasy of Stone becoming a Flame is just that.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Uh, Stone was on pace for 88 points this season.

And at one point Gaudreau was on pace for +100 points. I tend to be fairly dubious of exceptional returns in injury-shortened seasons. Most of the time these players are not able to maintain that pace over the course of a full 82-games.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And at one point Gaudreau was on pace for +100 points. I tend to be quite Leary of exceptional returns in injury-shortened seasons. Most of the time these players are not able to maintain that pace over the course of a full 82-games.

Regardless, 62 points in 58 games is a far cry from "just" being a 60 point forward. Unless you think he would have gone scoreless in the games he missed to a leg injury.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And at one point Gaudreau was on pace for +100 points. I tend to be fairly dubious of exceptional returns in injury-shortened seasons. Most of the time these players are not able to maintain that pace over the course of a full 82-games.

There are as many players who score more in the 2nd half than they did in the first half. Scoring as a whole does not decrease as the season wears on; if anything scoring as a whole increases.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Regardless, 62 points in 58 games is a far cry from "just" being a 60 point forward. Unless you think he would have gone scoreless in the games he missed to a leg injury.

Well, it is still premature to call him a 70-point forward because we just do not know. Historically speaking most scoring forwards tend to plateau in production by their mid-twenties, so I think it is pretty reasonable to identify Stone as a 60-point forward until he proves otherwise.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Regardless, 62 points in 58 games is a far cry from "just" being a 60 point forward. Unless you think he would have gone scoreless in the games he missed to a leg injury.

His career high is 64 points... until he has a better season that is the best he has done

Anyway I like the player...would not do that deal

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

There are as many players who score more in the 2nd half than they did in the first half. Scoring as a whole does not decrease as the season wears on; if anything scoring as a whole increases.

So what? None of this is useful for arguing that Mark Stone is much better than a 60–65-point forward. Until he actually achieves better than his career high he is what he is.

[JTech780]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Why would the Senators even entertain trading Stone especially for a defenseman? He’s one of only two first line forwards they have left on their roster.

He's a RFA with arb rights and is 1 season away from UFA, so if he refuses to sign a multi year extension and instead opts to go to arbitration or only wants a 1 year extension, that is him effectively telling the team that he doesn't want to be there.

If you are Stone would you want to sign long term in Ottawa. The last contract negotiations he has were quite contentious with the team low balling one of their best players. Stone holds pretty much all the leverage. Melnyk might want him traded instead of having to pay a big pay day in arbitration.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So what? None of this is useful for arguing that Mark Stone is much better than a 60–65-point forward. Until he actually achieves better than his career high he is what he is.

Has the same career high for points as Monahan, but a better defensive game.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by JTech780

He's a RFA with arb rights and is 1 season away from UFA, so if he refuses to sign a multi year extension and instead opts to go to arbitration or only wants a 1 year extension, that is him effectively telling the team that he doesn't want to be there.

If you are Stone would you want to sign long term in Ottawa. The last contract negotiations he has were quite contentious with the team low balling one of their best players. Stone holds pretty much all the leverage. Melnyk might want him traded instead of having to pay a big pay day in arbitration.

They are probably also going to be looking for a Karlsson replacement.

As a trade idea I think it makes a lot of sense.

If you thought backlund was a defensive monster with frolik....

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Has the same career high for points as Monahan, but a better defensive game.

He is also three-years-older, and plays the easier position.

[Erick Estrada]

Thing is they will be able to pay him once they trade Karlsson. They do have to hit the rising cap floor as with Karlsson they aren’t much over it at present time.

[Beninho]

Tkachuk and Stone would give us two of the best two way wingers in the league... please Brad do what you need to do. Stone is one of the few players I would unload a very good prospect, picks, and a good roster player. He’s a stud

[FlamesNation23]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Intersting little quote from Treliving:





https://theathletic.com/398936/2018/...alth-and-more/

A couple names that come to mind, fitting that bill are Austin Czarnik and Seth Griffith

This is okay if they are looking for depth forwards but they absolutely need to sign a big name FA or trade for a top 6 winger. If our biggest move is signing Czarnik, I will be pissed