2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by New Era

Would you do the following, if both the UFAs agreed to terms that fit within the budget?

To Calgary: Stone, Dzingle, & Borowiecki

To Ottawa: Tkachuk

This must be about uniting brothers. But why?

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by New Era

Would you do the following, if both the UFAs agreed to terms that fit within the budget?

To Calgary: Stone, Dzingle, & Borowiecki

To Ottawa: Tkachuk

I would not because of the age difference and Stone as an UFA versus Tkachuk as a RFA. I think it would be uncontroversial to suggest Stone has 2 years left in his prime and Tkachuk could very well have a cheaper contract than Stone. If so, I think you would have to let Dzingle walk.

However, you deserve a lot of credit for creativity and outside-the-box thinking. I don't think it ever hurts to come up with an idea and suggest it.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by New Era

Would you do the following, if both the UFAs agreed to terms that fit within the budget?

To Calgary: Stone, Dzingle, & Borowiecki

To Ottawa: Tkachuk

[manwiches]

https://theathletic.com/809372/2019/...or-mark-stone/

Good article on reasoning behind going all in on Stone.

I won't break the paywall, but the proposed trade goes something like

Jankowski, Czarnik, 2019 1st, 2020 2nd, and Kylington.

Even breaks out scenarios to keep Stone, by offloading salary in a few different forms.

Good read if you have subscription

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Yes and yes. I mean, there's a lot that went wrong for the Flames last year, but the inability of that pairing to stop secondary scoring was a huge reason for the Flames poor position in the standings. The Flames own secondary scoring was also missing.

Brodie-Stone didn't play together last year. Brodie-Hamonic did. I'll get back to that later.

Brodie-Stone played together in 2016-17 after the Stone trade. We went on an immediate 10 game win streak. That pairing also dominated in the playoffs - this was both wthout Giordano and within the last couple of years.

Tell the truth - the only reason Mike Stone is signed to a 3.5M, 3Y contract is because he got to play with TJ Brodie in a contract year l.

Now for Brodie-Hamonic, they had three distinct stretches of very different play.

First part - Hamonic wasn't very good. His gaps were consistently Kris Russell-esque. Brodie wasn't great but Brodie wasn't bad either, and the pair generally had issues getting out of their zone - which in the past hadn't been a weakness for either player. For Hamonic much of this was carryover from his abysmal 2016-17 season in Brooklyn, and he needed time on the video room to iron out his kinks. Brodie's struggles during this stetch were actually offensively because he was on PP1 and people were frustrated by his overpassing. This compounded 5v5 because as a passer, Brodie didn't fit beside Hamonic who is a terrible point shot. Brodie works best with shoogers like Stone, Andersson, Giordano.

Second part - Hamonic was excellent defensively, still an offensive non factor. Brodie had the strangest stretch of his career with giveaways that kept ending up in the back of the net and the Fanbase turned on him and started pointing to plus minus as a reason he was never good without Giordano. No excuses for Brodie here - whatever it was it was a legitimate slump.

Third part - Brodie was the villain in the eyes of the fanbase even though he started to play really well and had some of the best games of his season. The problem? Even though the Brodie-Hamonic pair was dominant in terms of zone time and defensive play, their on-ice SH% was virtually zero and they kept racking up minuses simply because no one was scoring when they were on the ice, period.

Fourth part - Brodie got a concussion. This interrupted the strong play of Brodie-Hamonic because one of them was no longer on the ice and let "the second part" overwhelm perceptions of TJ Brodie in 2017-18, and people would then bring up +/- numbers to attribute Brodie's poor play in that part two to his entire Gulutzan career, even though most of his minuses in 2016-17 came because Wideman was done as an NHLer and a lot of soft perimeter goals were scored when Brodie was on the ice that year.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

This must be about uniting brothers. But why?

I wonder if any GM has done that only to find out that the brothers weren't really that fond of each other. I'd hate to work with any of my siblings.

[AC]

Originally Posted by manwiches

https://theathletic.com/809372/2019/...or-mark-stone/

Good article on reasoning behind going all in on Stone.

I won't break the paywall, but the proposed trade goes something like

Jankowski, Czarnik, 2019 1st, 2020 2nd, and Kylington.

Even breaks out scenarios to keep Stone, by offloading salary in a few different forms.

Good read if you have subscription

That cost doesn't seem realistic for a UFA at the deadline.

Karlsson has been with SJ the whole season.

Evander Kane was a pending UFA and traded for a conditional first-round pick, a conditional fourth-round pick and a prospect. I'd suggest the cost to acquire Mark Stone would be closer to the Kane price than Karlsson's.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

This must be about uniting brothers. But why?

Doesn't really have anything to do with brothers, has to do with making a hockey deal and addressing holes. This may seem a little outrageous, but you do get more than you give up. I love Tkachuk, but he's going to be good for ~35 goals and 75-80 points? In this deal you get back two guys who will get you 50+ goals, and 100+ points. Then you also get the left handed depth defenseman we're supposedly looking for. You get better depth and only give up one asset. The issue is the long term, but since people have been willing to trade away every single draft pick we own to improve our depth I see this as a hockey trade that accomplishes just that, but by only giving up one asset. Doesn't impact the window in any shape or form and makes us a better team IMO. My concern is the long term. Both Stone and Dzingel are 26, so should begin to regress in the next five to six years. If the goal is to win the Stanley Cup, this is a deal that makes sense and arguably pushes the team over the top outside of the crease.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by New Era

Would you do the following, if both the UFAs agreed to terms that fit within the budget?

To Calgary: Stone, Dzingle, & Borowiecki

To Ottawa: Tkachuk

No

[Split98]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Edmonton should be looking at Brodie really hard. They have 4-5 guys who'd be ideal partners for him.

So many Gios, and not a Brodie to match...

Also, they already have GG there to ensure they get terrible TJ

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Brodie-Stone didn't play together last year. Brodie-Hamonic did. I'll get back to that later.

Except when they did play together, which you asked about. Without looking up exactly, a good 20% of Brodie's time on ice was with Stone last season and they weren't good.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Fourth part - Brodie got a concussion. This interrupted the strong play of Brodie-Hamonic because one of them was no longer on the ice and let "the second part" overwhelm perceptions of TJ Brodie in 2017-18, and people would then bring up +/- numbers to attribute Brodie's poor play in that part two to his entire Gulutzan career, even though most of his minuses in 2016-17 came because Wideman was done as an NHLer and a lot of soft perimeter goals were scored when Brodie was on the ice that year.

So a lot of excuses, but I don't care about his partners or his coach. I thought Brodie was significantly worse last year than this year, I don't care if Wideman pulled a Space Jam and stole Brodie's mojo or whatever the argument may be. Brodie, in my eyes, sucked last year compared to what we had come to expect from him. I'm certainly sympathetic if it was due to off-ice circumstances, but again his play was not up to par of what we expect and, as you admit, at times hot trash for month long stretches.

Now he's back with Giordano and regained form, great, but I'm less optimistic that it's Brodie alone and not Giordano who's been part of the "top defensive pairing" in the league for several seasons despite his partners. And again, you fail to address who the Flames keep in the draft. Somethings got to give, Seattle is claiming a defenseman if Brodie is re-signed. If he isn't re-signed, then it's a perfectly reasonable position to reclaim some assets in a trade.

[rain_e]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

This must be about uniting brothers. But why?

Well if you look at when the Flames brought the Hamilton brothers together it resulted in 142 points between them. Isn't that reason enough?

[Nelson]

I'm sure someone has already posted this, but, just in case, here is Pierre LeBrun's breakdown of the Flames' approach from The Athletic (I apologize to whomever posted this previously).

Calgary Flames: No question GM Brad Treliving has done his homework and phoned around on a long list of potentially available players. The Flames, I’m told, are still in the mode of sizing up the market. I think depending on the cost, the Flames could add a top-nine forward and also a third-pair defenceman. I’ve always liked the idea of Micheal Ferland returning to Calgary but I think once the Flames found out a few weeks ago from Carolina a first-round pick was part of the ask, that was a pass until further notice. The Flames don’t have their second-round pick for June so while I wouldn’t say their first-round pick is off the table, the Flames certainly aren’t going out of their way to flaunt it. Now if it could get them Stone, well, that’s a different story. On a more medium scale, two rentals I think Calgary should look at: Gustav Nyquist in Detroit or Marcus Johansson in New Jersey. Both pending UFAs would add more versatility and scoring depth to the Flames’ lineup.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by New Era

Would you do the following, if both the UFAs agreed to terms that fit within the budget?

To Calgary: Stone, Dzingle, & Borowiecki

To Ottawa: Tkachuk

Ottawa does that trade in a second.

[Phagoof]

Id consider Stone Duchene Dzingel

for Neal Frolik Tkachuk 1st

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm
Dzingel-Duchene-Stone
Bennett-Backlund-Ryan
Mangiapane-Jankowski-Hathaway

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by Phagoof

Id consider Stone Duchene Dzingel

for Neal Frolik Tkachuk 1st

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm
Dzingel-Duchene-Stone
Bennett-Backlund-Ryan
Mangiapane-Jankowski-Hathaway

That 2nd line would probably cost like 22 million dollars after they signed their inflated ufa deals

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Phagoof

Id consider Stone Duchene Dzingel

for Neal Frolik Tkachuk 1st

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm
Dzingel-Duchene-Stone
Bennett-Backlund-Ryan
Mangiapane-Jankowski-Hathaway

Disgusting. We could lose all 3 players in the summer and then have no Tkachuk or 1st.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by manwiches

https://theathletic.com/809372/2019/...or-mark-stone/

Good article on reasoning behind going all in on Stone.

I won't break the paywall, but the proposed trade goes something like

Jankowski, Czarnik, 2019 1st, 2020 2nd, and Kylington.

Even breaks out scenarios to keep Stone, by offloading salary in a few different forms.

Good read if you have subscription

I would be very unhappy if this was the cost of a UFA Deadline deal for the flames. I prefer the two players listed over a rental Stone never mind the first and second.

[Kasi]

I’d do New Eras trade for sure. Stone is better than Tkachuk now and likely will still be at least as good in 3 years. If you get another asset on top (or two like his) than yeah I’d do it.

[Geeoff]

I don't think this team gets better by trading Matthew Tkachuk. He provides a unique skillset