2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[TheoFleury]

Brouwer's terrible play wasn't overblown at all. I wouldn't want him at the league minimum, much less 4.5m. He's slow, provides no offense, his defensive zone coverage is average at best and he doesn't really provide that physical element that we thought we were getting (he's too slow to line people up most of the time). Not sure how people can argue he was ok if not for his salary. He scored 6 goals for crying out loud and he brings nothing else to the table.

[Imported_Aussie]

Originally Posted by Toonage

For what its worth, Boomer mentioned yesterday morning that Hanifin & the team were
interested in a longer deal. If someone recalls the conversation please chime in.

It sounded like a bridge deal may not be in the offing but something a little longer. That would put the cost up, probably past $4M

If I were the Flames I would want to lock up Hanifin long term. He hasn't done enough yet to make major coin, and if he breaks out, that cost could well go up a lot.

in the 2015 draft class, no other high pick D have been signed past their ELC yet, but going back to 2012, a defence heavy draft, gets a lot of comparables:

Hampus Lindholm - signed longterm, 31.5/6 years, but due to late signing = 5.205M AAV
Morgan Rielly - signed longterm 30/6 years = 5M AAV
Jacob Trouba - bridged at 6/2 years = 3M AAV - asking for 7M now
Matt Dumba - bridged at 5.1/2 = 2.55M AAV, up for a raise

If we compare the Trouba vs Rielly deals (closest comparables IMO):
If Trouba signs for less than 24/4 = 6M AAV, then the bridge was a win for the team. But if he signs for more, without giving good value with more UFA years, then the player won. With Trouba seeking 7M and the Jets seeking 4M, this is up in the air. The only reason it is up in the air though is Trouba only playing 60 and 55 games the past 2 seasons.

Another consideration to long term is that it buys UFA years and therefore avoids arbitration. If there is one thing we know with Treliving as a GM it is that he likes to avoid arbitration and other low-leverage situations.

However, if Hanifin is looking at say 3M AAV vs 5M AAV, he may want to back himself to take a run at a bigger deal with the cap rising.

But then again the uncertainty with the next CBA (opt out 2 years, expiry 4 years) a 2 year deal may be a risk as he could be waiting on bargaining to determine potentially a new structure, so there are a lot of factors.

I think long term favours the team over the player with a guy like Hanifin, as he has showed some growth, yet has not done so much as to make a bigger deal like Hamilton got from the Flames when they picked him up. Only considering cap inflation would result in his market value on a long term deal starting with a 5

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

1) Getting rid of Brouwer JUST to free-up a roster spot is irrelevant. Brouwer still is NHL capable, just as a depth forward. If he is displaced on the roster, it is going to be from a younger player, in which case I will happily rather have Brouwer as the 13th forward, and not worry about making sure a young player is getting enough development time.

2) Cap space is where it makes sense to me. If the Flames NEED the space this year to make a further move, or get Hanifin signed for a higher dollar long-term contract, then it is important to find a way to unload that contract as best as possible - trade, waive, trade with retention or (most likely) through a buy-out.

I don’t think freeing up a roster spot is irrelevant. I think another issue not enough of us are taking into account is that a veteran player often doesn’t handle being scratched gracefully. You think Brouwer is going to be happy and cool with being the 13th or 14th forward? It’s possible he might but it’s as likely or moreso that he pouts, complains and becomes a distraction. The roster spot also prevents other players from getting ice time. Frankly I’d rather have Czarnik, Hathaway or Lazar in Brouwer’s spot. I’m not convinced he’s any better than those guys so I’d rather play the younger player who isn’t on the decline.

The salary argument is merely icing on the cake.

I think a Brouwer buyout makes a lot of sense when you combine all the reasons. I don’t think trading any valuable assets to trade him salary retained makes anywhere near as much sense.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by jayswin

So we sign Hanifin to a bridge deal so that we can evaluate where we're at and then....re-sign Hanifin to a potentially massive contract in two years?

Young players with star potential are rarely bridged anymore for good reason.

A bridge deal for Hanifin would be a dumb move for sure.

2 x 3.5m-4.0m followed by 7-8 x 7.0m-9.0m

or 7x 5ish m right now.

Granted these numbers are just guesses but I have visions of Subban every time someone proposes bridging Hanifin. Just a bad way to go unless Flames management doesn't have faith he will improve. And if that is the case, why bother trading for him in the first place?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I feel like we're undervaluing Hanifin in conversation on CP here.

Hanifin may not be a direct comparable to Dougie at the time we acquired Dougie, but he's very close to being a direct comparable.

I don't want to sell Hanifin too short, but I think there's a bigger difference when they signed than being stated.

Neither of these guys were defensive stalwarts, and that's to be expected at 21.

Hanifin has 83 points in 239 games. Hamilton had 83 points as well when acquired, but he did it in 178 games. Hamilton was coming off a 48 (pro-rated) point season when 50 points that year was good enough for top 10 by defenseman. Hanifin was 45th in scoring by defenseman this year.

Look at his own team. Hanifin became expendable because of the play of Slavin and Pesce. Slavin very easily became their number 1, although older, while Pesce quite arguably past Hanifin on the depth chart - although different roles, and again slightly older. They both recently signed long-term contracts at 5.3M (Slavin) and 4M (Pesce). Makes sense that, had he still been with the Hurricanes, he would be getting a contract between those numbers.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by jayswin

So we sign Hanifin to a bridge deal so that we can evaluate where we're at and then....re-sign Hanifin to a potentially massive contract in two years?

Young players with star potential are rarely bridged anymore for good reason.

Hanifin is a slow burner, he has yet deserved a high pay raise. What has he done to warrant a long term 7 year deal?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hanifin is a slow burner, he has yet deserved a high pay raise. What has he done to warrant a long term 7 year deal?

It’s called managing risk. If you believe in his upside then it’s a risk to sign him short term because the deal after that may cost you a lot more than just signing him long term now. What has he done? He’s played competently in the NHL since being drafted and has improved. Given his age and skill he’s likely to continue to improve over the next few years. Unfortunately if you don’t pay for potential at times you’ll screw yourself over with these bridge deals.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hanifin is a slow burner, he has yet deserved a high pay raise. What has he done to warrant a long term 7 year deal?

It's called planning ahead. Unless of course the flames don't think he will develop further. Which would be very odd considering they traded for him under the premise that he will improve.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hanifin is a slow burner, he has yet deserved a high pay raise. What has he done to warrant a long term 7 year deal?

Well his numbers have improved every year in the league for one. But the Flames could try to save a few bucks by signing him to a 2 year deal, keep Brouwer and Stone and then pay him more later on.

[dammage79]

I'm of the mind set you do not bridge Hanifin. You should be able to lock him up for Dougie money and 6 years. That's what I think we will see.

Easier to offload a few million bucks in a trade than to bridge Hanifin and see that AAV jump up a million+.

[Imported_Aussie]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well his numbers have improved every year in the league for one. But the Flames could try to save a few bucks by signing him to a 2 year deal, keep Brouwer and Stone and then pay him more later on.

If saving money to keep Brouwer (at best a 3rd liner, likely 4th/pressbox) is the main reason to bridge, you buy out Brouwer.

Hypothetical 3M bridge vs 5M long term:

Bridge: Hanifin + Brouwer = 7.5M for 2 years, then sign Hanifin long term, replace Brouwer with ELC

Long term = Hanifin + Brouwer Buyout + forward on ELC/cheap deal = 7.2-7.5M years 1-4, 5.8-6M years 5-6


If Hanifin is bridged, it is because he does not want term or the valuation the Flames have of him at term is not to his liking and he holds out for the bridge

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

It’s called managing risk. If you believe in his upside then it’s a risk to sign him short term because the deal after that may cost you a lot more than just signing him long term now. What has he done? He’s played competently in the NHL since being drafted and has improved. Given his age and skill he’s likely to continue to improve over the next few years. Unfortunately if you don’t pay for potential at times you’ll screw yourself over with these bridge deals.

I was a big fan of the Hamilton trade from day 1. The reason was based on lindholm and hanifin production to this point the flames should be able to get these guys to commit to 6 or 7 years at around 10 vs ferland and Hamilton getting 13 or so when Hamilton contract was up. This allows the flames to keep Johnny, Monahan, tkachuk, other rfas and add a number 1 goalie over the next year or 2. Taking that risk makes way too much sense. The risk imo is very low as hanifin probably worth 4 already anyways vs what he could become maybe as early as this year. Only way a bridge makes sense is if your fighting to keep a cup contending team together and you don’t have easy moves to make to stay under cap. Trade Stone or buyout Brouwer are no brainer type moves imo

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hanifin is a slow burner, he has yet deserved a high pay raise. What has he done to warrant a long term 7 year deal?

10 goals, 32pts all-star as a 20/21 year old. Former top 5 pick that had a high upside. IMO worth a long term deal he will only get better.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

Brouwer's terrible play wasn't overblown at all. I wouldn't want him at the league minimum, much less 4.5m. He's slow, provides no offense, his defensive zone coverage is average at best and he doesn't really provide that physical element that we thought we were getting (he's too slow to line people up most of the time). Not sure how people can argue he was ok if not for his salary. He scored 6 goals for crying out loud and he brings nothing else to the table.

13 goals the year before. It's not like he always scores 6. Anyway, last year he had a better PPG than Hathaway. Same PPG (0.3) as Bennett, Jankowski, Versteeg and Jagr. He was 5th in hits. Led the fwds in blocked shots at even strength. https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...-flames/stats/

No one is arguing he is "ok". The point is whether he is better than other candidates on the fourth line wing. My issue is letting disappointment over his past performance (versus expectations) cloud the judgement.

[goflamesgo18]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well his numbers have improved every year in the league for one. But the Flames could try to save a few bucks by signing him to a 2 year deal, keep Brouwer and Stone and then pay him more later on.

Sign him cheap for 2 years then watch him have a 47 pt season, then he will cost 7+ per long term.

Sign him to same deal as brodie and lindholm now and brag about the value very soon.

[Oling_Roachinen]

I think that 2020-2022 era is the best bet for the Flames to be a contender.

Brouwer off the books, Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm are around ~25-26 years old with great cap hits, Tkachuk, Hanifin ~22-23, Neal, Ryan, Backlund still well under 35, Giordano will be the only one a bit long in the tooth at 36ish. Valimaki will still be on ELC.

That should be the time that the Flames aim for big agent splashes to supplement the core and bring them to the next level. So Tkachuk and Hanifin contracts should not be two-to-three year bridge contracts, instead they should be focused on having the lowest cap-hit possible at that time.

Might as well gamble and go all out. If Hanifin 'busts' anyways, by the time the Flames recoup from that Giordano will be too old, Gaudreau and Monahan will have huge contracts. So go all out and risk it all for that 2020-2021 season and give Hanifin a 7 year contract today to keep the cap-hit small.

[Flash Walken]

6 months from now we'll all be saying 'dougie who?'

Who here knows me to be a flames rose coloured optimist or cheerleader?

I maintain, right now, Hanifin is a better 3 zone defender than Hamilton. He will not score as many goals, but that's low on my priority for guys charged primarily with prevented them and moving the puck quickly and effectively out of danger areas. I think Hanifin is already better at that than Hamilton is.

Can't believe the Flames were on the positive end of capitalizing on the high water mark for players.

[mrdonkey]

Bridging Hanifin to keep Troy ****ing Brouwer on the roster would be monumentally stupid. Thankfully I trust Treliving is smarter than that and would simply eat the buyout if that's what it came down to.

[bluck]

Just buyout Brouwer already. He provides nothing and it's time to let the kids play. Tre has made all these good moves to get the team in a position to win this year, why not admit the mistake that is Troy Brouwer and move on rather then risking him being a liability. If this truly is our time to make a run then assemble the best team possible and the best team possible would not have Troy Brouwer on it.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by saXon

Unless you use that freed up cap to acquire more futures.

You can't buy draft picks or prospects for cash.