2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[AustinL_NHL]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Where can I hear this interview?

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/boomer-...ing-situation/

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You are missing the most important thing you are trying to accomplish which is to maintain or grow the value of the asset.
3 outcomes
1. He walks for nothing
2. He is signed to a risky long-term deal
3. He is traded for a return

Depending on what you can get for him I would strongly suggest the third outcome in the best one for this organization. And if you agree with that it is reasonable to suggest that the time to maximize that return is now to avoid several risk factors that will erode the player's value further
- restrictive NTC kicking in
- less term on the very affordable contract
- continued degradation in the player's value due to declining or continued poor play.

The first two are certainties. Those are things that are going to happen. The last one is an unknown. The only unknown that could improve the players value as an asset is improved play.

So balance all the risk factors, and to me you conclude two things
1. The best outcome is to trade the player
2. The time to maximize the return for that trade is this off-season

So that's what you are trying to accomplish and what is drives the intent to trade him.

Why is a long term deal risky? Isn't every long term deal risky? If you trade Gaudreau and then sign an oft injured Taylor Hall to a 6 or 7 year deal is that not also risky? If you give Tkachuk an 8 year deal and he suffers multiple concussions and injuries due to the way he plays wasn't that risky? I think Ward's coaching stifled the offense of this club, you bring a puck possession quick transition coach and I think Gaudreau is an 80-100 point player and given his non physical play I don't see any reason why he won't be that player for the duration of a long term deal.

[Tkachukwagon]

Jesper Fast headed to free agency:

https://www.foreverblueshirts.com/ex...r-free-agency/

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Why is a long term deal risky? Isn't every long term deal risky? If you trade Gaudreau and then sign an oft injured Taylor Hall to a 6 or 7 year deal is that not also risky? If you give Tkachuk an 8 year deal and he suffers multiple concussions and injuries due to the way he plays wasn't that risky? I think Ward's coaching stifled the offense of this club, you bring a puck possession quick transition coach and I think Gaudreau is an 80-100 point player and given his non physical play I don't see any reason why he won't be that player for the duration of a long term deal.

The risk factors I see are as follows
- Johnny isn't known to maintain strong off-ice fitness. I know you disagree with this being a factor, but I see it as one
- We are already seeing a potential fall of in play
- You will be buying only UFA years as opposed to a combo of RFA and UFA years.

Frankly, I think the Flames should be cautious about re-signing any pending UFAs to long-term deals as they enter their 30s. More cautious than they have been.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon

Jesper Fast headed to free agency:

https://www.foreverblueshirts.com/ex...r-free-agency/

Perfect fit for CGY IMO. 3rd or 4th line RW. Hed be a good fit with say Dube and Bennett?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Perfect fit for CGY IMO. 3rd or 4th line RW. Hed be a good fit with say Dube and Bennett?

I strongly disagree. He is going to be looking for a raise and where does he fit? He is not bouncing Lucic off that 3rd line so he is going to be a 2.5-3M 4th line player. These are the kind of deals the Flames need to avoid.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The risk factors I see are as follows
- Johnny isn't known to maintain strong off-ice fitness. I know you disagree with this being a factor, but I see it as one
- We are already seeing a potential fall of in play
- You will be buying only UFA years as opposed to a combo of RFA and UFA years.

Frankly, I think the Flames should be cautious about re-signing any pending UFAs to long-term deals as they enter their 30s. More cautious than they have been.

Well we don't know that at all. We know when he first entered the league his diet was bad and yet he seems to have turned a corner. He came back from the break in great shape and when he talks food now it seems to be high protein meals. He talked about getting into the gym right away in his exit interview and I am sure his fiance being a nurse could have had a huge influence on his diet and fitness as well. As for the fall in play we saw his offensive numbers come down while his backcheck vastly improved. Everybody's offensive numbers fell off as the system was changed. He is one season removed from 99 points. If his play has fallen off then so has Monahan's, Lindholm's, Gio's, and even Tkachuk's to a degree. When you have a skilled offensive player told to play a chip and chase backcheck game his numbers are going to suffer. I am not sure what the buying UFA years point is. Should we trade Tkachuk too when his contract is up? Just recycle for young talent where we can bank cheaper RFA years? That doesn't sound like a way to ever win to me.

[Cobra]

Why?
A player with 55 career goals and he will be 29 in December.
There is a reason the Rangers are moving on from him.

We need to get bigger and more mean.

[Roof-Daddy]

Yeah I'm not interested in Fast. I'd rather get a RW like Anderson via trade. A healthy Josh Anderson is what the Flames need. Big, mean, physical, can skate and score goals and has a right shot for the top 6/9. If they do plan on keeping Bennett and running him as a C, Anderson on his wing would be awesome.

Dube - Bennett - Anderson

Speed, grit, snarl, skill...

[Manhattanboy]

^^^sounds like Mark Stone Jr? If so count me in.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

^^^sounds like Mark Stone Jr? If so count me in.

I think Anderson is more Tom Wilson Jr. Still a good player to have if he's healthy though.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Well we don't know that at all. We know when he first entered the league his diet was bad and yet he seems to have turned a corner. He came back from the break in great shape and when he talks food now it seems to be high protein meals. He talked about getting into the gym right away in his exit interview and I am sure his fiance being a nurse could have had a huge influence on his diet and fitness as well. As for the fall in play we saw his offensive numbers come down while his backcheck vastly improved. Everybody's offensive numbers fell off as the system was changed. He is one season removed from 99 points. If his play has fallen off then so has Monahan's, Lindholm's, Gio's, and even Tkachuk's to a degree. When you have a skilled offensive player told to play a chip and chase backcheck game his numbers are going to suffer. I am not sure what the buying UFA years point is. Should we trade Tkachuk too when his contract is up? Just recycle for young talent where we can bank cheaper RFA years? That doesn't sound like a way to ever win to me.

I suck at calculating age so if this is wrong someone can correct me
- Johnny is 27 now, and will be 29 when the current deal expires. A 6 year deal takes him to the age of 35.
- Tkachuk is 22 now, and will be 24 when the current deal expires. A 6 year deal takes him to the age of 30.

That right there is a huge difference in terms of my willingness to commit big bank over the long-run. I see Tkachuk as being a pretty safe bet. And he's a more complete player.

I think Johnny improved on his back check but his offensive game suffered as a result, and when in his own zone, once the play was set up - he was still very poor.

Which is OK. He's not going to be a complete player. But this year he was an adequate offensive player and a below average defensive player.

In the past he was a premiere offensive player and a below average defensive player that netted out to the good overall, during the regular season.

I don't want to commit big long-term dollars to an incomplete player, who hasn't shown the ability to deliver in the playoffs. It just comes down to that.

I think franchises should be very focused on how their key core players are and move the other parts around to support and maximize asset value. Johnny to me is one of those.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I suck at calculating age so if this is wrong someone can correct me
- Johnny is 27 now, and will be 29 when the current deal expires. A 6 year deal takes him to the age of 35.
- Tkachuk is 22 now, and will be 24 when the current deal expires. A 6 year deal takes him to the age of 30.

That right there is a huge difference in terms of my willingness to commit big bank over the long-run. I see Tkachuk as being a pretty safe bet. And he's a more complete player.

I think Johnny improved on his back check but his offensive game suffered as a result, and when in his own zone, once the play was set up - he was still very poor.

Which is OK. He's not going to be a complete player. But this year he was an adequate offensive player and a below average defensive player.

In the past he was a premiere offensive player and a below average defensive player that netted out to the good overall, during the regular season.

I don't want to commit big long-term dollars to an incomplete player, who hasn't shown the ability to deliver in the playoffs. It just comes down to that.

I think franchises should be very focused on how their key core players are and move the other parts around to support and maximize asset value. Johnny to me is one of those.

I see your point, I just don't agree with it. Thanks for posting your viewpoint though in a way I can absolutely appreciate. Well written and very valid points, that is what makes CP great. Diehard fans that cheer for the same team but see the direction in differing views.

[Enoch Root]

Regarding that Philly proposal - where are their 1st round picks?

I hate when people just say '1st round pick', they are not at all the same things. Late 1sts are magic beans with about a 50% chance of being a good player. If you're trading your best player, you better be getting more back than 'hope'.

Now, if the picks are early 1st rounders, then it is a completely different trade.

[Harry Lime]

Philly's pick is #28, but it is a deep draft this year. I agree that #23 and up have more value in this draft class though.

edit : I would point out that Frost, York and Laughton were all first rounders, so at worst the offer has the value of 5 late first rounders, which is still pretty solid. And I put more value in players who are farther along in development.

[TheScorpion]

Elliotte on Twitter says Florida is closing in on naming CBJ AGM Bill Zito as their new manager.

[TheScorpion]

Also lots of smoke on Twitter today about Max Domi, whose days in Montreal "appear to be over" according to the Gazette and who has fired his agent Pat Brisson and replaced him with Darren Ferris

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/h...ear-to-be-over

[ComixZone]

With Friedman openly speculating on Kuemper, I wonder if this would work:

To Arizona: 2021 1st, 2021 2nd
To Calgary: Darcy Kuemper (1M+ retained), Taylor Hall’s negotiation rights

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You are missing the most important thing you are trying to accomplish which is to maintain or grow the value of the asset.
3 outcomes
1. He walks for nothing
2. He is signed to a risky long-term deal
3. He is traded for a return

Depending on what you can get for him I would strongly suggest the third outcome in the best one for this organization. And if you agree with that it is reasonable to suggest that the time to maximize that return is now to avoid several risk factors that will erode the player's value further
- restrictive NTC kicking in
- less term on the very affordable contract
- continued degradation in the player's value due to declining or continued poor play.

The first two are certainties. Those are things that are going to happen. The last one is an unknown. The only unknown that could improve the players value as an asset is improved play.

So balance all the risk factors, and to me you conclude two things
1. The best outcome is to trade the player
2. The time to maximize the return for that trade is this off-season

So that's what you are trying to accomplish and what is drives the intent to trade him.

Are you sure the bolded is correct Jiri?



If being high up in Pronman's rankings every year is important to you, then yes, your statement is 100% correct and I also agree with the rest of your post.



However, what really is the most important thing? Winning the cup, no? Keeping that goal in mind should allow you to see that ensuring asset retention really doesn't matter at all.


Look, the Flames are losing Hamonic for absolutely nothing most likely. They are also going to most likely lose Brodie - which stings a LOT more since I think he has a lot more value both to the team itself, and in terms of trade value.


Plus, every season this organization seems intent on 'supplementing' with guys like Fatenberg, Gustafsson and Forbort, instead of allowing your own players to gain that experience and actually develop - like Kylington and Yelesin. Heck, the whole Kulak history that I think Granteed (or was it someone else?) posted was eye-opening in terms of how much asset value was lost subsequently simply because the Flames didn't retain Kulak and allow him the opportunity to grow his game here.


Now in terms of Gaudreau - sure, I have no problems of moving him in a package that helps now. Take a look at the other contracts on the roster, and the best time to win really is now. Tkachuk is also up after 2 more seasons. Giordano is slowing down, and he will also probably be gone. Dube is on a ELC. Backlund is going to be slowing down.



Trading one of the support beams for futures makes absolutely no organizational sense. You are either rebuilding, or you are competing. You can't do both well. It will just prolong your stay in the desert. If you feel you can, then great, there is no point in trying to convince one another.


I did, however, not miss the point about retaining asset value. It just isn't the most important thing. I think the Flames would be wise to do a rebuild now to maximize their assets, or they should go all-in for the next 2 seasons. I am tired of this desert.

[Jiri Hrdina]

The reason why they are in this desert is because they have miss managed assets in the past (Iginla, Regehr, Bouw, Kipper)...they can’t afford to do that with Johnny