2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[TheScorpion]

I just think most of the 1 for 1 proposals I've seen are very unrealistic... you're not getting Konecny, you're not getting Hischier, you're not getting Eichel, it's probably not going to be Reinhart.

Once again I'd be looking at Oliver Bjorkstrand and maybe a small adder if it's Columbus. But that said I fail to see how the package I proposed is really all that difficult from the Philadelphia ideas that people have been throwing around for weeks. Might as well go get a ton of young guys with big upside. The Gilmour and Phaneuf trades were decidedly not that. They brought in guys at the ends of their careers, in their 30s.

[Flames_F.T.W]

I think the important thing to remember is that we DON'T HAVE TO TRADE Gaudreau now. The idea would be to move him now if it's a slam dunk win for us. Not simply taking the best package available. Some of these offers are widely mediocre and in such cases, we'd be better off trying to squeeze Hall in and go all in for a season or two.

I'm firmly in the "trade Gaudreau this offseason" camp, but only if we come away clear winners (ie future #1 C as part of the package or a top 10 pick that would net us an elite, blue chip prospect with a VERY high floor)

[Monahammer]

Ew wtf scorp I wouldn't do any of those trades.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Flames_F.T.W

I think the important thing to remember is that we DON'T HAVE TO TRADE Gaudreau now. The idea would be to move him now if it's a slam dunk win for us. Not simply taking the best package available. Some of these offers are widely mediocre and in such cases, we'd be better off trying to squeeze Hall in and go all in for a season or two.

I'm firmly in the "trade Gaudreau this offseason" camp, but only if we come away clear winners (ie future #1 C as part of the package or a top 10 pick that would net us an elite, blue chip prospect with a VERY high floor)

I agree with the premise of what you’ve written, but a few comments.

I’m not certain that any GM should approach trades that he needs to come away from the trade as a “clear winner”. If he does, he likely makes few trades. The Flames are likely the team who is doing the selling of Johnny, and I think their goal needs to be more in the range of “ have they done what’s best for the team long term”. The goal should be both teams being “winners”.

Secondly, if you need a blue chip prospect with a “very high floor”, you may be waiting a lifetime. Even the first pick in the draft can crash and burn. What would you consider Lafreniere’s floor to be?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Flames_F.T.W]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I agree with the premise of what you’ve written, but a few comments.

I’m not certain that any GM should approach trades that he needs to come away from the trade as a “clear winner”. If he does, he likely makes few trades. The Flames are likely the team who is doing the selling of Johnny, and I think their goal needs to be more in the range of “ have they done what’s best for the team long term”. The goal should be both teams being “winners”.

Secondly, if you need a blue chip prospect with a “very high floor”, you may be waiting a lifetime. Even the first pick in the draft can crash and burn. What would you consider Lafreniere’s floor to be?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Essentially no Hanowski's is what I mean. A lock for top 6 with an excellent chance of being a top line player.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Flames_F.T.W

Essentially no Hanowski's is what I mean. A lock for top 6 with an excellent chance of being a top line player.

The number of players who are drafted who are “a lock for top 6” is arguably close to zero, and some might argue is zero.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I just think most of the 1 for 1 proposals I've seen are very unrealistic... you're not getting Konecny, you're not getting Hischier, you're not getting Eichel, it's probably not going to be Reinhart.

Once again I'd be looking at Oliver Bjorkstrand and maybe a small adder if it's Columbus. But that said I fail to see how the package I proposed is really all that difficult from the Philadelphia ideas that people have been throwing around for weeks. Might as well go get a ton of young guys with big upside. The Gilmour and Phaneuf trades were decidedly not that. They brought in guys at the ends of their careers, in their 30s.

Most of those Philly trades are garbage as well. I think people are saying they don’t want to get a collection of assets with varying degrees of panning out. I would rather target high picks than what you have proposed.


I very perplexed that you think Columbus needs maybe just a small adder to Bjorkstrand who is a 25 year old with a career high of 40pts. I am interested tonhesr your justification for such a poor return?

[Roof-Daddy]

Honestly, if Treliving were to trade JG this off season and the return was watered down with a mediocre top 4 Dman I would probably lose my ####.

He already gave up a 1st and two 2nds for Hamonic, who is now probably gone as a UFA, and he missed his window to recover some assets for Brodie who is also likely gone as a UFA.

Imagine if he diluted the JG return by adding the likes of Ryan Murray to the deal, only to have Murray also walk away as a UFA 1 year later after playing 30-50 games as a Flame in another injury riddled season.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Proposal

Gaudreau
Kylington

for

Josh Anderson
Ryan Murray
Liam Foudy
Emil Bemstrom

You could probably get close to that trading Johnny on deadline day in the final year of his contract. With 2 years left they better get a blue chip prospect.

[TheScorpion]

A) NJ got a much worse return than that for Hall and Ottawa got a much worse return for Duchene. IMO that's a similar return to what Colorado got for Duchene.

B) Foudy is a top prospect... but I suppose that's where we're just going to have to disagree.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I just think most of the 1 for 1 proposals I've seen are very unrealistic... you're not getting Konecny, you're not getting Hischier, you're not getting Eichel, it's probably not going to be Reinhart.

I agree wit you here. It is highly unlikely the Flames will be looking at a 1-for-1. They will be trying to fill gaps and make the team better. It will be a multi-player deal where the Flames move Gaudreau and a couple other low level assets to grab multiple assets below Gaudreau and above the other players we give up. Yes, we are going to have to eat some type of negative component to get a deal done. That's the reality we are facing with a capped NHL world.

Once again I'd be looking at Oliver Bjorkstrand and maybe a small adder if it's Columbus. But that said I fail to see how the package I proposed is really all that difficult from the Philadelphia ideas that people have been throwing around for weeks. Might as well go get a ton of young guys with big upside. The Gilmour and Phaneuf trades were decidedly not that. They brought in guys at the ends of their careers, in their 30s.

Not sure I see the attraction of Bjorkstrand. Maybe as part of a larger package, but I don't see him a difference maker on this team. If they can manage to swing a deal where he's the second best piece coming back from Columbus, then maybe, but I don't see much upside where he is the guy you focus on.

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Most of those Philly trades are garbage as well. I think people are saying they don’t want to get a collection of assets with varying degrees of panning out. I would rather target high picks than what you have proposed.

Targeting picks for this team would be a massive fail. That is a signal that a rebuild is underway. Draft picks are nothing but lottery tickets, and it is highly unlikely that that you are going to get high draft picks in a deal for a player like Gaudreau. You likely could make a deal for picks, but you're going to have them spread out over a number of years and those picks will likely drop into a lower band as Gaudreau has a positive impact on his new team.

When you do take on draft picks you have to hit them out of the park. Take the 2015 and 2016 drafts for perfect examples. The 2016 draft was supposed to be a great one, with can't miss prospects at any position in the top 15. That top 15 included Jesse Puljujarvi, Olli Juolevi, Alexander Nylander, Logan Brown, Michael McLeod, and Jake Bean. Woof. The 2015 draft had the Bruins doing exactly what you suggest. The stockpiled picks and had the 13th, 14th, and 15th selections. Success was certain to follow with those three high draft picks. Unfortunately they picked Jakub Zboril, Jake DeBrusk, and Zachary Senyshyn. Again, woof. DeBrusk is the only guy that panned out. Thankfully the Bruins had a plethora of talented players to fall back on and that bust at the draft table didn't crush them.

The smart play is to target a team with a number of young players who are on the verge of or just braking in, and then raid that team. I appreciate that is not as sexy or fun as going into the draft with a handful of draft picks, but you are also not stuck waiting for three to five years as those picks develop and potentially turn into a NHL player. You're better off grabbing a player that you are confident will play and contribute in areas where the team is in need that taking a flyer on a handful of magic beans. I would prefer walking away with a Corey Millen and Jarome Iginla than a handful of picks and end up with Emile Poirier and Morgan Klimchuk, or a whole draft of Sam Bennett, Mason MacDonald, Hunter Smith, Brandon Hickey, Adam Ollas-Mattsson, and Austin Carroll.

I very perplexed that you think Columbus needs maybe just a small adder to Bjorkstrand who is a 25 year old with a career high of 40pts. I am interested tonhesr your justification for such a poor return?

I agree. That suggestion is crazy. That is such a major step down from Gaudreau and there is no potential in the pipeline from deal. You need to find that deal where you get a higher functioning Corey Millen and a couple young players that are going to contribute and help control costs.

[Love]

Originally Posted by thescorpion

Proposal

Gaudreau
Kylington

for

Josh Anderson
Ryan Murray
Liam Foudy
Emil Bemstrom

lmfaoooooooooooooo

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Alternatively I'd love to see something around Gaudreau for Oliver Bjorkstrand +.

why would any flames fan love to see this

[TheScorpion]

I don't understand the derision. The four pieces I listed coming back to the Flames all have tremendous value. Replace Murray with Bjorkstrand and go with Gaudreau for Bjorkstrand, Foudy, Anderson, and Bemstrom. I think that would be a terrific return that would set the Flames up nicely to sign Hall and roll with a deep roster.

A top-nine featuring Hall, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Monahan, Bjorkstrand, Mangiapane, Backlund, Anderson, and Bemstrom would likely be incredibly well-rounded and effective. Bjorkstrand is a terrific player who scored 21 goals in just 49 games this year. He's a RHS RW with good size.

But maybe I shouldn't expect more than a flippant "lmao" from somebody who has referred to Sean Monahan as a third-line centre.

[Harry Lime]

Everyone was wetting their pants over Josh Anderson at the trade deadline, and although Foudy is a step down from some of the other prospects Tre might be able to pry out, at least he has a high ceiling, just a lower floor than would make me comfortable.

This is a more realistic discussion than the Barzal/Hirchier/Zibenejad talk that pops up with some regularity.

[Ashasx]

This is Bjorkstrand's first season at over 0.5 ppg (outside of 12 games in 15/16) and he's not exactly a young guy with a ton of room to grow at 25. He could just as likely fall back to the level he's played at seasons prior - it's probably even more likely that happens than maintaining his 0.73 ppg pace from this season.

And even if he does maintain that pace... that's the big piece we'd trade Gaudreau for?

Is this a Flames' forum?

[TheScorpion]

In any trade you make involving Gaudreau, he's going to be the best player involved. That's just the reality of it, IMO.

But Bjorkstrand is very Lindholm-esque in terms of his on-ice impact. He had a breakout year this year, but not due to an inflated shooting percentage -- with Atkinson being injured and Panarin having left, his ATOI jumped from 12:20 last year to 17:56 this year.

He shined with increased opportunity. But there's still uncertainty there in terms of, "can he do it again." The Flames capitalized on the uncertainty surrounding Lindholm and they'd be well-served to capitalize here.

With Bjorkstrand, he's signed for one more year and then he becomes an RFA entering his age-26 season. (He just turned 25). If you can lock him up for 7 years, you get him for 8 years including the final year of his current contract.

One of the big things with the Dougie Hamilton trade was cost-certainty. They traded 3 years of Dougie, 1 year of Ferland, and 0 years of Fox for 6 years each of Hanifin and Lindholm. With Bjorkstrand and Anderson, the Flames have an opportunity to do something similar. They're both still firmly entrenched in RFA status. They're both big right-shot right-wingers, the Flames' biggest area of need.

Trading Gaudreau for Bjorkstrand, Anderson, and two top prospects directly addresses the Flames' biggest area of need up front. It gives them the cap space to sign Taylor Hall. In Bjorkstrand, it gives them a guy on the verge of breaking out into a star who is a tremendously impactful player for Columbus whenever he's on the ice and who has thrived with increased opportunity.

With Bjorkstrand on the ice, Columbus jumps up from 2.34 expected goals/60 to 2.86. Defensively, they go from allowing 2.36 expected goals/60 to a sparkling 1.95. Those are Lindholm numbers. In fact, they're much better than Lindholm's numbers. He's a star in the making.

He'd be my #1 target.

Edit: this article spells out a lot of the reasons why I'd be all over Bjorkstrand. 1stohiobattery.com/columbus-blue-jackets-analysis/2020/05/4827/bjorkstrand-has-chance-to-shine-on-national-stage-vs-maple-leafs

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

In any trade you make involving Gaudreau, he's going to be the best player involved. That's just the reality of it, IMO.

But Bjorkstrand is very Lindholm-esque in terms of his on-ice impact. He had a breakout year this year, but not due to an inflated shooting percentage -- with Atkinson being injured and Panarin having left, his ATOI jumped from 12:20 last year to 17:56 this year.

He shined with increased opportunity. But there's still uncertainty there in terms of, "can he do it again." The Flames capitalized on the uncertainty surrounding Lindholm and they'd be well-served to capitalize here.

With Bjorkstrand, he's signed for one more year and then he becomes an RFA entering his age-26 season. (He just turned 25). If you can lock him up for 7 years, you get him for 8 years including the final year of his current contract.

One of the big things with the Dougie Hamilton trade was cost-certainty. They traded 3 years of Dougie, 1 year of Ferland, and 0 years of Fox for 6 years each of Hanifin and Lindholm. With Bjorkstrand and Anderson, the Flames have an opportunity to do something similar. They're both still firmly entrenched in RFA status. They're both big right-shot right-wingers, the Flames' biggest area of need.

Trading Gaudreau for Bjorkstrand, Anderson, and two top prospects directly addresses the Flames' biggest area of need up front. It gives them the cap space to sign Taylor Hall. In Bjorkstrand, it gives them a guy on the verge of breaking out into a star who is a tremendously impactful player for Columbus whenever he's on the ice and who has thrived with increased opportunity.

With Bjorkstrand on the ice, Columbus jumps up from 2.34 expected goals/60 to 2.86. Defensively, they go from allowing 2.36 expected goals/60 to a sparkling 1.95. Those are Lindholm numbers. In fact, they're much better than Lindholm's numbers. He's a star in the making.

He'd be my #1 target.

I get it, you're team building and adding pieces the Flames could use. I mean this deal has the Flames plundering the Jackets RHS RW depth, and on paper with Hall the Flames forward core looks admittedly pretty good. Not a fast forward group though as Mony, Tkachuk Bjorkstrand and Anderson are all average skaters at best.

Hall - Monahan - Bjorkstrand
Tkachuk - Lindholm - Anderson
Mangiapane - Backlund - Bemstrom
Lucic - Ryan - Phillips

Still feels like an underwhelming return for one of the games best LWers still in his prime though.

Funny thing is though, if you proposed that trade on a Jackets board they'd probably run you off of there with torches and pitchforks.

[Vinny01]

The Gaudreau trade also needs to take into consideration expansion

Forwards
1.Tkachuk
2.Lindholm
3.Monahan
4.Hall*
5.Backlund
6.Mangipane
7.Dube/Bennett/god forbid we have to protect Looch

Defense
1. Hanifin
2. Andersson
3. Giordano/Valimaki/Kylington

Adding multiple depth pieces for Gaudreau could result in losing one of those pieces or another important piece to Seattle after one year.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

In any trade you make involving Gaudreau, he's going to be the best player involved. That's just the reality of it, IMO.

There is no doubt about this. Unless the Flames are going to package two of their top six to make a deal, then we are taking back current lesser players. The secret is to find players that fill the gaps we need most and have the greatest impact.

But Bjorkstrand is very Lindholm-esque in terms of his on-ice impact. He had a breakout year this year, but not due to an inflated shooting percentage -- with Atkinson being injured and Panarin having left, his ATOI jumped from 12:20 last year to 17:56 this year.

Not even close. Yes, Bjorkstrand had a huge jump in production, primarily because of opportunity. He got first line time because the other top RWs on the team were injured. And with that he put up the 33rd best numbers for a pure RW in the league. Bjorkstrand took advantage of the best ice time he's ever had and put up second line numbers. To suggest he is like Lindholm is a massive insult to a multi-dimensional talent who plays in all situations. Bjorkstrand is strictly a soft one-way player. I'd possibly take him as a second/third line support player, but not as the primary asset coming back for our best player.

He shined with increased opportunity. But there's still uncertainty there in terms of, "can he do it again." The Flames capitalized on the uncertainty surrounding Lindholm and they'd be well-served to capitalize here.

Lindholm played in all situations and was a tough player to play against on Carolina. Bjorkstrand does not and is not. Not even close to being the same type of player.

With Bjorkstrand, he's signed for one more year and then he becomes an RFA entering his age-26 season. (He just turned 25). If you can lock him up for 7 years, you get him for 8 years including the final year of his current contract.

Yeah, you don't give up a seven year contract for Oliver Bjorkstrand. That's too much of a commitment for a guy that is not a core player. Massive pass unless he's signing for 7x$3M.

One of the big things with the Dougie Hamilton trade was cost-certainty. They traded 3 years of Dougie, 1 year of Ferland, and 0 years of Fox for 6 years each of Hanifin and Lindholm. With Bjorkstrand and Anderson, the Flames have an opportunity to do something similar. They're both still firmly entrenched in RFA status. They're both big right-shot right-wingers, the Flames' biggest area of need.

I take a flyer on Anderson. Buy low maybe score high long-term. Bjorkstrand you are buying high on. This was a guy gifted ice time, time he would not get on the Flames. You're buying high and are highly unlikely to see him repeat this season's performance when he ends up playing behind Atkinson upon his return.

Trading Gaudreau for Bjorkstrand, Anderson, and two top prospects directly addresses the Flames' biggest area of need up front. It gives them the cap space to sign Taylor Hall. In Bjorkstrand, it gives them a guy on the verge of breaking out into a star who is a tremendously impactful player for Columbus whenever he's on the ice and who has thrived with increased opportunity.

The idea is a sound one, but the talent being returned isn't enough IMO. Bring back a proven veteran that is proven to be able to play on the top line. The prospects are great, but I don't want any more junior players, I want guys that are ready to play. Give me two Dillon Dubes over a junior age kid who didn't really step it up as expected but still has the "potential" card to play.

With Bjorkstrand on the ice, Columbus jumps up from 2.34 expected goals/60 to 2.86. Defensively, they go from allowing 2.36 expected goals/60 to a sparkling 1.95. Those are Lindholm numbers. In fact, they're much better than Lindholm's numbers. He's a star in the making.

I'd let Columbus assume the risk of that bet coming to fruition. I'd bet Bjorkstrand is back to his usual production once he's supplanted from the first line. Bottom line, Bjorkstrand is NOT a first line player. Never has been and wasn't this year until the two guys who played in front of him both went down with injuries.

He'd be my #1 target.

Treliving would be fired if that came out of his mouth.