[Trade] Elias Lindholm + Noah Hanifin to Flames for D. Hamilton, Micheal Ferland, & Adam Fox

[Corral]

Originally Posted by transplant99

People here have been preaching patience with Sam Bennett because he is so young, he needs time, he will break out if we trade him etc etc....oh and because he was a 4th overall pick.

Hanifin is younger than Sam and plays a way way harder position to become good at, outyscored Sam last season. He was a 5th overall pick

Lindholm is a year older has already produced way more than Sam and again is a 5th overall pick.

Should we not all be super excited about these guys using the same parameters that so many apply to Bennett?

Many of us are. Today was a great day for the Calgary Flames.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How home fans try to rationalize a lost hockey trade:

1. Guys we traded are suddenly mysteriously worse than they were yesterday (see "Hamilton is terrible at defense")
2. Guys we traded suddenly have other problems plaguing them that don't relate to their hockey ability (see "Hamilton didn't fit in" or "We wouldn't have been able to sign Fox")
3. Trying to justify it based on contract status - which is hilarious in this case since Hamilton's on a great cost-controlled deal for 3 more years while Lindholm and Hanifin don't have contracts at all.
4. "You don't know how this will turn out yet so how can you say it's bad"

The immediate reaction was the right one. Read the first dozen pages of this thread while it was breaking. It's basically all "we'd better be getting more than that back" and "Even just Hamilton for Lindholm/Hanifin might be a win for Carolina, why is Brad adding Ferland and Fox". That's essentially the naked, honest truth before motivated reasoning has had a chance to set in. Yeah, it could turn out fine. Could be great. Hanifin could turn into a Norris winner. But based on what we've seen so far you've got a middle six 40-50 point forward and a second pairing defenseman.

I'm sure Oiler fans said many of the same things about Adam Larsson and Ryan Strome - highly drafted players who hadn't yet lived up to the hype when they were acquired. I think Hanifin and Lindholm are better than those guys right now, and I think Brad gave up less to get them. But the point is that if you're looking at a player who's played well over 200 NHL games in Hanifin's case and almost 400 in Lindholm's, and saying "these guys are just scratching the surface of what they're truly capable of", I'm raising an eyebrow. That's a long track record. They've had plenty of chances to prove they can give more.

I hope it pays off, but I don't like it right now.

Go to any non-fan oriented place covering the trade, such as this video ( https://youtu.be/9NbnkDYflek ) and take a gander through the comments. I never judge a trade based on homer reactions from either side... to vested personally to be rational about it.

This is not a clear cut won/loss trade. If anything the general consensus seems to be it was win/win. We needed a change obviously and so did they.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How home fans try to rationalize a lost hockey trade:

1. Guys we traded are suddenly mysteriously worse than they were yesterday (see "Hamilton is terrible at defense")
2. Guys we traded suddenly have other problems plaguing them that don't relate to their hockey ability (see "Hamilton didn't fit in" or "We wouldn't have been able to sign Fox")
3. Trying to justify it based on contract status - which is hilarious in this case since Hamilton's on a great cost-controlled deal for 3 more years while Lindholm and Hanifin don't have contracts at all.
4. "You don't know how this will turn out yet so how can you say it's bad"

The immediate reaction was the right one. Read the first dozen pages of this thread while it was breaking. It's basically all "we'd better be getting more than that back" and "Even just Hamilton for Lindholm/Hanifin might be a win for Carolina, why is Brad adding Ferland and Fox". That's essentially the naked, honest truth before motivated reasoning has had a chance to set in. Yeah, it could turn out fine. Could be great. Hanifin could turn into a Norris winner. But based on what we've seen so far you've got a middle six 40-50 point forward and a second pairing defenseman.

I'm sure Oiler fans said many of the same things about Adam Larsson and Ryan Strome - highly drafted players who hadn't yet lived up to the hype when they were acquired. I think Hanifin and Lindholm are better than those guys right now, and I think Brad gave up less to get them. But the point is that if you're looking at a player who's played well over 200 NHL games in Hanifin's case and almost 400 in Lindholm's, and saying "these guys are just scratching the surface of what they're truly capable of", I'm raising an eyebrow. That's a long track record. They've had plenty of chances to prove they can give more.

I hope it pays off, but I don't like it right now.

The first reaction was natural because:

1. Fans get attached to their own players often, and tend to over value them (me included)
2. The rumored deal from yesterday was Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm, and that was it. Then that's what breaks today and those are the names that come out first. Then all of a sudden Ferland is added. then it gets worse as Fox is also added.

Naturally fans flipped the #### out (myself included). I was pissed that Fox was in the deal because I felt that Hamilton and Ferland for Hanifin and Lindholm was good enough. I have no problem trading Fox either, as I was kind of doubtful he'd sign all the way up here in western Canada and thought he could be a trade chip to bring yet another top 6 forward in.

I guess my valuation of him was off, or maybe word leaked that he wouldn't sign here and that was that.

Then you start to think bout things more, and read opinions and analysis.

Hamilton - Something seems off, UFA in 3 years, maybe didn't want to be here for whatever reason.

Ferland - UFA in one year, going to have to overpay to keep him here and he's more of a depth piece, not a core piece.

Fox - Covered above, it's clear he wasn't going to sign in CGY.


Hanifin - 4 more years of control minimum (likely much more whether it be a 3 year bridge, then a 6-8 year extension, or just an immediate 7 year extension), high pedigree, already a proven NHLer.

Lindholm - RFA, 2 more RFA years but will probably now get extended for 6-7 years, high pedigree, already a proven NHLer with room to grow, fits the criteria of what we need (top 6 forward, right shot, can play RW or C)

Basically we added two high quality long term young pieces to the core while technically subtracting just one.

Now, hopefully these two players continue to develop and improve.

[Cortez]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How home fans try to rationalize a lost hockey trade:

1. Guys we traded are suddenly mysteriously worse than they were yesterday (see "Hamilton is terrible at defense")
2. Guys we traded suddenly have other problems plaguing them that don't relate to their hockey ability (see "Hamilton didn't fit in" or "We wouldn't have been able to sign Fox")
3. Trying to justify it based on contract status - which is hilarious in this case since Hamilton's on a great cost-controlled deal for 3 more years while Lindholm and Hanifin don't have contracts at all.
4. "You don't know how this will turn out yet so how can you say it's bad"

The immediate reaction was the right one. Read the first dozen pages of this thread while it was breaking. It's basically all "we'd better be getting more than that back" and "Even just Hamilton for Lindholm/Hanifin might be a win for Carolina, why is Brad adding Ferland and Fox". That's essentially the naked, honest truth before motivated reasoning has had a chance to set in. Yeah, it could turn out fine. Could be great. Hanifin could turn into a Norris winner. But based on what we've seen so far you've got a middle six 40-50 point forward and a second pairing defenseman.

I'm sure Oiler fans said many of the same things about Adam Larsson and Ryan Strome - highly drafted players who hadn't yet lived up to the hype when they were acquired. I think Hanifin and Lindholm are better than those guys right now, and I think Brad gave up less to get them. But the point is that if you're looking at a player who's played well over 200 NHL games in Hanifin's case and almost 400 in Lindholm's, and saying "these guys are just scratching the surface of what they're truly capable of", I'm raising an eyebrow. That's a long track record. They've had plenty of chances to prove they can give more.

I hope it pays off, but I don't like it right now.

That’s a well thought out, rational response. I disagree with it - but I understand where you are coming from

[Vinny01]

I can’t think of a trade that generated so many different opinions. Reading this forum, HFboards, Reddit, people love, hate, win/win, lose/lose type responses.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by transplant99

From earlier today...he is the senior writer for the local Raleigh paper and has covered them for many many years.

I take it he’s suggesting they’re punishing Lindholm by trading him to play for Peters, who he presumably didn’t like? It just reeks of bitterness from that writer.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Corral

Many of us are. Today was a great day for the Calgary Flames.

We needed a change, last season sucked and it seemed to be an X factor problem. We got that change.

I don’t believe we became a worse team for this trade and potentially we just became better. We certainly became younger with more control over the future, both good. We also got a flexible right shot RW who can take face offs with a 55% winrate. Exactly what we needed, so I’m happy there.

We also found out Brodie is being move back with Gio, another thing I’m happy to hear. Also got a top 4yound D Man back.


On the flip side, rumours suggest both RFA contracts weren’t going well for Carolina, they got a 1D under a good contract and a long shot but stellar D prospect.

I frankly think both teams have a right to be happy.

[transplant99]

However, while Flames GM Brad Treliving is taking the high road on Hamilton’s situation, the fact that the 25-year-old has been traded twice in three years says plenty about the 6-foot-6, 210-lb. defenceman.

Treliving’s contriteness when addressing the reasons why you’d trade a player with Hamilton’s stats says even more.

“Dougie is a terrific talent on the ice,” said the Flames GM, who traded for Hamilton at the NHL Draft three years earlier.

“I think I have a good and open relationship with players, and so there’s things I’m not going to share. We take everything on and off the ice into consideration here. I’m going to keep that stuff internal.”

Hamilton isn’t disruptive or hated in the room or by the media.

He simply falls into the category of a player who isn’t bothered at all by losses, which rubs teammates and upper management the wrong way

Winning, and all the things necessary to do so, isn’t paramount to him
.

Treliving explained the addition of Fox in the mix was essentially out of necessity, as he wasn’t coming to Calgary.

“We obviously felt and got to a conclusion that after talking to his representative, it was clear there was a potential for a signing issue,” said Treliving, who decided to get whatever he could for a player most teams know will likely bolt for free agency after his fourth year with the NCAA’s Harvard Crimson.

The GM tried hard to convince the 20-year-old U.S. World Junior star to turn pro this spring, but he committed instead to a third year in college.

Treliving lamented losing Ferland, whose size, physicality and scoring this year demonstrated an upside that will land the 26-year-old significant money on the open market next summer.

“It hurt trading Micheal Ferland,” said Treliving of the 6-foot-2, 210-lb. punisher who had tremendous first-half chemistry with the big guns before tapering off.

“I love this kid. Sometimes the business part of the game gets in the way. He’s (an unrestricted free agent) at the end of the year, and he’s a good player, and they make money,”

http://calgaryherald.com/sports/hock...e-00750cdd7eab

[ricardodw]

Hanifin's favorite player growing up was Joe Thornton.

He started playing hockey at 4 and loves playing it.

link from 2014 article

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

From what I read on the Canes forum Hanifin is similar. I believe that someone said he is -53 in his three years with Carolina. I understand that overall Carolina has been pretty awful but that shouldn't be an excuse for -53.

Originally Posted by dammage79

Their goaltending has been bad. really bad for years.

As a team the canes are a -71 since hanifin entered the league. Flames are a -52 goal diff and Brodie is a -28. Bennett a -45.

It's an ugly plusminus but he's young on a terrible, terrible roster.

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How home fans try to rationalize a lost hockey trade:

1. Guys we traded are suddenly mysteriously worse than they were yesterday (see "Hamilton is terrible at defense")
2. Guys we traded suddenly have other problems plaguing them that don't relate to their hockey ability (see "Hamilton didn't fit in" or "We wouldn't have been able to sign Fox")
3. Trying to justify it based on contract status - which is hilarious in this case since Hamilton's on a great cost-controlled deal for 3 more years while Lindholm and Hanifin don't have contracts at all.
4. "You don't know how this will turn out yet so how can you say it's bad"

The immediate reaction was the right one. Read the first dozen pages of this thread while it was breaking. It's basically all "we'd better be getting more than that back" and "Even just Hamilton for Lindholm/Hanifin might be a win for Carolina, why is Brad adding Ferland and Fox". That's essentially the naked, honest truth before motivated reasoning has had a chance to set in. Yeah, it could turn out fine. Could be great. Hanifin could turn into a Norris winner. But based on what we've seen so far you've got a middle six 40-50 point forward and a second pairing defenseman.

I'm sure Oiler fans said many of the same things about Adam Larsson and Ryan Strome - highly drafted players who hadn't yet lived up to the hype when they were acquired. I think Hanifin and Lindholm are better than those guys right now, and I think Brad gave up less to get them. But the point is that if you're looking at a player who's played well over 200 NHL games in Hanifin's case and almost 400 in Lindholm's, and saying "these guys are just scratching the surface of what they're truly capable of", I'm raising an eyebrow. That's a long track record. They've had plenty of chances to prove they can give more.

I hope it pays off, but I don't like it right now.

Lol

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How home fans try to rationalize a lost hockey trade:

1. Guys we traded are suddenly mysteriously worse than they were yesterday (see "Hamilton is terrible at defense")
2. Guys we traded suddenly have other problems plaguing them that don't relate to their hockey ability (see "Hamilton didn't fit in" or "We wouldn't have been able to sign Fox")
3. Trying to justify it based on contract status - which is hilarious in this case since Hamilton's on a great cost-controlled deal for 3 more years while Lindholm and Hanifin don't have contracts at all.
4. "You don't know how this will turn out yet so how can you say it's bad"

The immediate reaction was the right one. \.

What an awful take.
For a guy who tries to be so pragmatic you seem to be arguing that gut reaction is an accurate one.
I would debate you on every point, but the Flames have come out and since admitted Fox was unlikely to be signed. Are you just ignoring that part?

Again, you are acquiring two younger core players for one young core player, a pending UFA that I wouldn't re-sign, and a guy who apparently was going to walk in 2 years.

[Brouhaha]

So the Hurricanes must have a forum as well? Judging by many Flames' fans disappointment to overblown outrage over the trade, they must be over the moon with this deal. Anyone read their glee and gloating over such a lopsided deal?

[sketchyt]

I don’t feel like either team got better with this trade. Odd one IMO,

Losing Ferland is a big one though.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Brouhaha

So the Hurricanes must have a forum as well? Judging by many Flames' fans disappointment to overblown outrage over the trade, they must be over the moon with this deal. Anyone read their glee and gloating over such a lopsided deal?

Reading through HF boards they are pretty neutral with slight positivity compared with our neutral to slight negativity.

Really comes down to whether Carolina can sign Fox.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

I don’t feel like either team got better with this trade. Odd one IMO,

Losing Ferland is a big one though.

I loved Ferly as much as the next guy but it's being made out like he's irreplaceable. Let's be serious here. For a guy who is pegged as rugged and fights a lot...he had 24 PIMS in 77 games this year. Johnny had 2 more PIMS. Let that sink in. His physical style was declining with his recent concussions.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

I don’t feel like either team got better with this trade. Odd one IMO,

Losing Ferland is a big one though.

I think both sides got what they needed, though.

Carolina traded two RFAs that they could not afford to sign for two players with team-friendly contracts and a possible home-run prospect.

Calgary traded a left-shooting winger one year from UFA and an offensive defenceman who seems to have had some chemistry issues with teammates, plus a college player who did not intend to sign here. They got back two younger players with more room for growth and more years under the team's control, and one of them is a right shot who can play centre or wing.

It looks to me like a risk-reducing move for both sides. Carolina is short of money and averted the risk of paying too much for the RFAs. Calgary is short of talent and averted the risk of losing Ferland and Fox for nothing.

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I loved Ferly as much as the next guy but it's being made out like he's irreplaceable. Let's be serious here.

I just said it’s a “big one”. You turned it into irreplaceable lol.

His value to Calgary is bigger than to Carolina as he’s a style of player the flames have a heavy shortage of. Free agency could solve that though.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What an awful take.
For a guy who tries to be so pragmatic you seem to be arguing that gut reaction is an accurate one.
I would debate you on every point, but the Flames have come out and since admitted Fox was unlikely to be signed. Are you just ignoring that part?

Yeah, because an organization that trades a good young player never tries to justify it by citing extraneous circumstances. That never happens. Who's Tyler Seguin?

Anyway, regardless of whether you believe that about Fox, the initial post made it very clear that I think this is a bad hockey trade. In terms of hockey playing ability, potential risks and rewards, the Flames lose. Of course people want to talk about other factors - that's how motivated reasoning works. You don't want to think X, so you look for reasons that X can be questioned and latch onto them. It's actually a good sign of a lost trade - when you see that reaction happen shortly after the immediate shock and disappointment of the fanbase wears off. "No, you guys, I was thinking about it and it's actually not that bad because..."

Again, you are acquiring two younger core players for one young core player, a pending UFA that I wouldn't re-sign, and a guy who apparently was going to walk in 2 years.

Just listen to yourself trying to spin this. Hilarious. Let me try... "The Hurricanes are acquiring a legitimate top-pairing d-man entering his prime who can run their blue line for ten years, who's currently on an awesome sweetheart contract, along with a sure-fire 20 goal scorer and a bona fide blue chip blue line prospect, and all they gave up in exchange was two underachieving middling players who have had every opportunity to succeed and instead have posted a combined -109".

That analysis isn't any more or less slanted than what you posted. You can make any trade look good or bad if you want to cast it in a negative or positive light, as you prefer. I'm looking at who the players the Flames got are today, based on a significant sample size of games. It's not ugly, but it's not pretty either. They're fine, upper middle of the roster players. Would it be an absolutely shocking, William Karlsson-esque surprise if they play better than that now that they're Flames? No. Is it a good bet that they will? I personally don't think so.

Anyway. I'm interested to see what they end up signing for. I doubt it'll make me change my mind, but it's an important factor in evaluating this.

[TheScorpion]

I have a nasty feeling that Ferland is going to be the next Matt Beleskey. Probably good the Flames dealt him now.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yeah, because an organization that trades a good young player never tries to justify it by citing extraneous circumstances. That never happens. Who's Tyler Seguin?

Anyway, regardless of whether you believe that about Fox, the initial post made it very clear that I think this is a bad hockey trade. In terms of hockey playing ability, potential risks and rewards, the Flames lose. Of course people want to talk about other factors - that's how motivated reasoning works. You don't want to think X, so you look for reasons that X can be questioned and latch onto them. It's actually a good sign of a lost trade - when you see that reaction happen shortly after the immediate shock and disappointment of the fanbase wears off. "No, you guys, I was thinking about it and it's actually not that bad because..."

Just listen to yourself trying to spin this. Hilarious. .

My opinion right away was that it was a pretty even trade because, as I've stated, I'm not a big Ferland fan and never have been.
So this isn't "I thought about things and..." my opinion has been consistent.
Plus new information has been revealed throughout the day so why are you berating people for updating their viewpoint?

I see it as a pretty even deal. I guess that's "spin".

Fun fact: every player the Flames dealt today could be a unrestricted free agent in the next 2 years. Including Dougie. If he wasnt happy here, as it seems, would he have re-signed?

More spin I suppose. Because facts are spin.