[Trade] Flames trade Frolik to Buffalo for a 2020 4th

[Robbob]

Besides the benefit of cap space for the trade deadline, it also allows the team to play their kids who have graduated. Getting them in will only help them develop and hopefully continue to arc.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

The tangible asset in question (the 4th round pick) is a really really small positive (and nothing stops the coach from using the younger player if the younger player is in fact better anyways). Absent future knowledge I'd rather have the NHL depth. Hence why it being a "win" depends on Treliving effectively using the space he created. If he does that then it was a good move, if he doesn't then it wasn't.

I'm just not going to call it a good move until we see what he does with that space. If he get's Jason Zucker (at a reasonable price) then I'll say "#### YA! it was a good move!", if he sits on his hands I'll say it was a poor move, and if he uses the space to get us a Troy Brouwer redux then I'll say it was a ####ty move.



Then I guess it's a good thing that I don't care whether I have the minority opinion or not.

My trading brain again.

But when I buy an option with a small cost and a huge win payoff with a decent probability I call it a win without even cashing in the option.

The setup of the opportunity is already a win.

Without the move you have depth you don't need and almost zero chance of acquiring an impact player this season.

[Parallex]

But when I buy an option with a small cost and a huge win payoff with a decent probability I call it a win without even cashing in the option.

If you say so... I'm pretty sure if someone had an option on Microsoft in 1986 and didn't take it they wouldn't go on about it being a win today. An opportunity to get something isn't an actual something and folk shouldn't pretend like it is.

[mrdonkey]

Cap space is extremely valuable these days, and I would’ve guessed Frolik had minimal or negative value for that reason alone. So the trade itself is actually pretty good.

The real question is what to do with that cap space. If Tre goes out and blows a significant chunk of assets for a middle 6 complementary piece like Kreider or Toffoli I think that’s a net loss. Players like that are regularly available as free agents, and generally don’t move the needle much for teams sitting on the bubble.

I‘d like to believe he’s working on something for a significant player nobody knew was available.

[FBI]

Originally Posted by Parallex

The tangible asset in question (the 4th round pick) is a really really small positive (and nothing stops the coach from using the younger player if the younger player is in fact better anyways). Absent future knowledge I'd rather have the NHL depth. Hence why it being a "win" depends on Treliving effectively using the space he created. If he does that then it was a good move, if he doesn't then it wasn't.

I'm just not going to call it a good move until we see what he does with that space. If he get's Jason Zucker (at a reasonable price) then I'll say "#### YA! it was a good move!", if he sits on his hands I'll say it was a poor move, and if he uses the space to get us a Troy Brouwer redux then I'll say it was a ####ty move.



Then I guess it's a good thing that I don't care whether I have the minority opinion or not.

What if he uses it plus let's say first round pick #15 to move up to #7 overall pick.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

If you say so... I'm pretty sure if someone had an option on Microsoft in 1986 and didn't take it they wouldn't go on about it being a win today. An opportunity to get something isn't an actual something and folk shouldn't pretend like it is.

You don't cash them all in.

But if they're relatively inexpensive they are worth having on hand any way.

I still think the cost which is 100% guaranteed is a mixture of gains and losses.

+ 4th round pick
- NHL Depth
+ Development of younger player

We don't have to agree on that cost, but those are the elements.

So you have 100% x relatively small cost vs say 20% x huge payoff

You accumulate those all day, and be happy if you can cash in 20% of them.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by FBI

What if he uses it plus let's say first round pick #15 to move up to #7 overall pick.

Are you really going to predicate a hypothetical question on the idea that some GM lost his marbles and moved 8 spots down out of the top 10 just to get a pick in the 100ish range? Flames example: When they drafted Mark Jankowski they moved down from #14 to #21 and got #42. They moved down 7 spots (from the mid-1st round) and got a mid 2nd round pick but in your hypothetical the Flames can use an early-mid 4th round pick to move up 8 slots into the top third of the draft?

Tre ain't that lucky and I don't think there is a GM in the league that stupid.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

We don't have to agree on that cost, but those are the elements.

I would disagree about including "development of young player" as an element. The Flames could do that with or without Frolik if they wanted. They didn't gain the ability to do that they always had it.

Right now it's straight up +4th round pick - NHL depth. If some people want to value the 4th round pick highly that's their prerogative I just disagree. If Treliving does something meaningful with the cap space then we can have a different conversation.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Dan403

Anyone who said that Frolik had a negative value, doesn't understand hockey.

I’d say he did at some point, or next to no value, but as the season went along, and the impact of his cap hit shrunk, it seems Treliving found a taker.

IMO this was a very good trade for Calgary as I really doubt there was any kind of bidding war here.

[dammage79]

You can smell that cap space burning a hole in Trelivings pocket.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I’d say he did at some point, or next to no value, but as the season went along, and the impact of his cap hit shrunk, it seems Treliving found a taker.

IMO this was a very good trade for Calgary as I really doubt there was any kind of bidding war here.

Calgary was not interested in using the player, therefore his cap hit was not good value for money. So yes, it was a good trade.

I will add that I think the player is clearly a positive contributor in a middle six role.

I also will add that in his last nine games, he had 6 points, playing 8-13 minutes with no PP time.

In those same 9 games, by comparison, Gaudreau had a total of 7 points, playing 15-19 minutes including ample time on PP1.

Mangiapane had 5 points, 3 in that one game against Edmonton

I wish Fro the best in Buffalo

[Enoch Root]

Bingo has it right - the value of the trade is the cap space, the opportunity to acquire a player that fits the roster better (i.e. the option)

The value in this case - specifically - is that Treliving now has enough cap space to acquire the player he wants, without having to send similar cap back. Does that guarantee that he can find a willing trading partner and the right player? No, of course not.

But he has made it significantly more likely, simply because he now has much more flexibility, and can put more types of trades together.

And the subtraction of Frolik is minimal to the lineup. Small cost, significant potential gain.

[SeanCharles]

I don’t know how anyone doesn’t like this trade.

- He was gone next season
- was regularly playing on the 4th line or scratched
- $4.3mill in cap off the books
- opens the door for future trades
- is a vote of confidence for Dube

I get we are a better team with him but there will be additional moves and cap space is extremely valuable

[FBI]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Are you really going to predicate a hypothetical question on the idea that some GM lost his marbles and moved 8 spots down out of the top 10 just to get a pick in the 100ish range? Flames example: When they drafted Mark Jankowski they moved down from #14 to #21 and got #42. They moved down 7 spots (from the mid-1st round) and got a mid 2nd round pick but in your hypothetical the Flames can use an early-mid 4th round pick to move up 8 slots into the top third of the draft?

Tre ain't that lucky and I don't think there is a GM in the league that stupid.

I spent zero effort on the hypothetical. Just curious about when you think the trade becomes a win. We have a 4th rounder which is great currency to help other deals. Very valuable.

1st round #15 plus 4th round pick to go up to #10? #12?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Dan403

Anyone who said that Frolik had a negative value, doesn't understand hockey.

They would have happily traded him for a pick this summer...its not much of a stretch

How many teams with over 4M in cap space would want to spend it on Frolik? Frolik at full salary had little to no value. Some recent injuries and forced moves made this deal doable.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He's already said he's going to do something with the space.

But even if he didn't, but thought they had younger options that were just as good it's not a failure as he added a 4th round pick for an expiring contract in exchange for depth they may not need.

Plus opening options always has value. Even unused cap space doesn't mean that said space wasn't an opener for a discussion on a trade that almost happened, but never would have had a chance without the space opened.

Yea Feaster said that too..."cap space was one of the assets in the return for Jaybo" he never used it

Tre better use the space, good thing is he has lots of time

[jayswin]

A 4th round pick for Frolik with some retained salary would have been a win for the pick. A 7th round pick and no salary retained would have been a win for the cap space. Brad got both, that's incredible. I'm very pleasantly surprised by this trade.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by FBI

I spent zero effort on the hypothetical. Just curious about when you think the trade becomes a win. We have a 4th rounder which is great currency to help other deals. Very valuable.



1st round #15 plus 4th round pick to go up to #10? #12?

Teams usually have guys they really like in that range. He'd have to be assured his guy was still available a few picks later, and how do you do that? A 4th doesn't even mitigate the risk of 10 to 12 unless there are 3 players the scouts like equally. A 4th is like a lottery ticket, its nice but a 1st, even just dropping a couple spots in rd 1, is worth far more than a 4th imo.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Some overreactions over such a minor trade. Pretty funny.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FBI

I spent zero effort on the hypothetical. Just curious about when you think the trade becomes a win. We have a 4th rounder which is great currency to help other deals. Very valuable.

1st round #15 plus 4th round pick to go up to #10? #12?

Would take much more than a 4th rounder to move from 15th to 10th overall. Probably a late 1st (like in the 20-25 range). To go to 12th, a very late 1st or early 2nd maybe.