2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by 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

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Prepare to be bitterly disappointed by the return if you think it will be dramatically better than a .93 ppg 23 year old winger who plays with an edge on a 5.5 mil a year contract for five more years.

To substantiate your opinion, since the 2018-19 all star break( Jan 30, 2019) to the Pandemic Break ( March 11, 2020), Konecny has .84 PPG (-3) and Johnny has .83 PPG (-11).

With the age and salary difference, looks like a pretty favorable trade for Flames, IMO.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

Shhhh, new regime, things are better now...

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

That’s a depressing truth. You could also argue it’s worse because at least we got “stuff” back for Iggy and Bouw. Hamonic and Brodie? Nothing.

Our 3rd and 4th round picks we spent on Gus and Forbort? Nothing.

Treliving’s last 2 years have been nothing but poor.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by bax

For sure I can. Essentially there are a lot imaginary deadlines, but nothing concrete. The Flames don't need to trade Gaudreau, and in fact I think it's likely that they don't. Treliving is more than comfortable keeping him and trying to build around him next season and possibly the following season.

Gaudreau is a player that out performs his contract and still has 2 more years on his deal. That is extremely valuable in a league where the cap is staying flat. There isn't a need to trade Gaudreau this offseason so if a team really wants him- they can pay up. Treliving doesn't need to take back a garbage contract or accept a less than stellar return.

The NTC issue is overblown too. Realistically everybody knows Johnny is either going to end up long term in Calgary or one of the east coast teams. Teams that will be willing to put together a significant package for him will have an understanding if they can sign him or not and I'm sure his NTC won't exclude east coast teams.

Realistically there are four different times you can trade him. This offseason, 2021 deadline, 2021 offseason, or 2022 deadline. Who's to say Johnny wouldn't be willing to waive his NTC to go to any team for a playoff run and then go to free agency? Even in that worst case scenario the Flames probably make out with a 1st and prospect (plus 1.5 seasons of Gaudreau vs trading him this offseason) at a minimum. Is that return really all that worse than what's being proposed in this thread?

Erik Karlsson was traded as a pending UFA and brought back Tierny, Demelo, Norris (1st round pick), Balcers (5th round pick), a 1st round pick, and a 2nd round pick. I don't know if Johnny will pull quite that much as a UFA, but bottom line Treliving isn't in a position where he needs to force a trade in fear of losing out on value.

Thanks for answering the question. I actually agree that in a vacuum, and assuming Gaudreau reverts to his 'mean', the return won't vary that greatly whether it's now or his final TDL before UFA. But there are 2 more elements to consider:

1. Gaudreau's play if he remains a Flame - the return diminishes fairly quickly if he is below average again. I'm not sure the inverse is as true (an acquiring GM has already convinced himself that Gaudreau will be his 'above average' self on their team...if JG is playing closer to that level it increases the GMs confidence in that belief, but not necessarily the price he is willing to pay)

2. What that return means from a timeline standpoint considering the Flames other assets. A prospect/pick today has potential to start paying off ~1-4 years from now. Waiting 1.5 more years pushes that window back, too.

IMO a re-tool should be targeting contention by spring '23. If it hasn't happen, you reassess whether you re-tool again by moving Monahan/Lindholm/Hanifin/Backlund (if you still have them) or blow it up altogether. Waiting until spring '22 to get assets from Gaudreau will make it nearly impossible for them to pay off while any of the aforementioned are under contract (so you might as well fire sale them at that point, too).

IMO you roll the dice on taking a step back to build towards contention in the mid '20s, or accept a few more years of mediocrity now and a near-guarantee of tear down by '24.



More generally, I actually think a slow/patient approach of perpetual mediocrity is okay, so long as that mediocrity hasn't been achieved on the basis of spending your most valuable futures. We'll never know if we could have achieved this same level of success mediocrity without chasing Hamilton, Hamonic, Elliott, Smith, etc. and whether those spent assets would have helped us reach the next level. It seems painfully clear to me that this group's ceiling is well short of the SCF, and with Chiarelli currently unemployed, there are no trades that are going to change that between now and '22.

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.

If we couldn't win with JG at 6.75, MT on ELC, and nearly everything possible going right for this team, why should we expect to win with those 2 players costing ~$18M instead of 8?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

Originally Posted by ComixZone

That’s a depressing truth. You could also argue it’s worse because at least we got “stuff” back for Iggy and Bouw. Hamonic and Brodie? Nothing.

Our 3rd and 4th round picks we spent on Gus and Forbort? Nothing.

Treliving’s last 2 years have been nothing but poor.

We should have Kadri in the line up for a few more years to show for Brodie.

And after that trade got blocked by Kadri, Valimaki got hurt while training and was lost for the whole season so holding onto Brodie became pretty important to a team that was supposed to be contending.

The whole Hamonic thing was a complete mis-step from start to finish though, I agree.

[Two Fivenagame]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

I wonder what assets we could have received at the trade deadline for those two?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

That’s a depressing truth. You could also argue it’s worse because at least we got “stuff” back for Iggy and Bouw. Hamonic and Brodie? Nothing.

Our 3rd and 4th round picks we spent on Gus and Forbort? Nothing.

Treliving’s last 2 years have been nothing but poor.

1st (hamonic), 2nd (hamonic) 2nd (hamonic), 2nd (Lazar), 2nd (Elliott), 3rd (Stone), 3rd (Smith), 5th(stone)

Have all evaporated into thin air.

Bouwmeester cost a 3rd to acquire and was turned into a 1st.

Frankly, it's a lot worse imo.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by 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.

Are we sure it's #28? won't it be 26 if both the Flyers and Avs get knocked out this round?

Originally Posted by 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

Maybe if it's top 30 protected? For just 2 years of Kuemper

[sa226]

This is not in defense of Treliving but I wonder how many GMs throughout the last 20 years have operated just like he has. The Flames are a team with its age and contract structure that are essentially in a position, however tenuous, to win now. There's no room to keep building only to retool.

So what do you do? Keep bleeding middling assets and cap space to give the team a chance however remote that chance may be, I guess. I wonder how much of that push comes from ownership.

How many franchises have done just that?
San Jose maybe? Though they've come close.

Pittsburgh is bleeding picks like crazy, but they already have their cups.

Winnipeg? 1st for Kevin Hayes? Yikes.

I'm sure there's more.

All I'm saying is that Treliving is not alone in his actions. I was actually content with how he managed the team when it was on the upswing. Hamonic, Hamilton trades were not used with 100% Flames draft pick capital. Some picks were obtained in other trades. The Hamonic trade in hindsight, hell even at the time was an overpay. But I didn't hate it. They needed a top 4 like him.

I don't know. Its just easy to throw stones without the pressure on you. How do you trade Hamonic and Brodie to recoup assets in the middle of a push? How do you have young exciting assets that were being compared to Toews and Kane, then add a Tkachuk and a 18 year old Sam Bennett and not try to add pieces to give them a chance to make a run?

We just have the current depressing realization that the "core" has been a playoff failure for too many post seasons.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

[dino7c]

Teams spend picks on players every year and only one team wins in the end.

Vancouver/Edmonton did way worse at the deadline

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

Well, technically we haven’t lost anything.. yet...

We likely will lose one, maybe both for nothing.

But the thing is, we were buyers at the deadline, not sellers. I agree it sucks to lose assets for nothing, but if the alternative is not being close to make the playoffs, I guess that is the price of making the playoffs.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Teams spend picks on players every year and only one team wins in the end.

Vancouver/Edmonton did way worse at the deadline

This. Look at St. Louis. Seemingly spinning their wheels in mediocrity for years. In the 10 years before last, they were out of the POs 3, out after 1 round 4 more. Then suddenly they click. It’s not science.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Well, technically we haven’t lost anything.. yet...

We likely will lose one, maybe both for nothing.

But the thing is, we were buyers at the deadline, not sellers. I agree it sucks to lose assets for nothing, but if the alternative is not being close to make the playoffs, I guess that is the price of making the playoffs.

Honestly, when you look at how many trades these days involves teams having to throw in assets to entice other teams to take on contracts, letting players on the wrong side of 30 go for nothing sometimes isn't the worst decision to make. I suspect it will be a buyers market before the next regular season starts, so I am all for taking the wait and see approach.

Of course, if the Flames were sellers at the deadline and failed to trade good players that eventually walk from the team, that would be bad.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by dammage79

I loved the end of the Treliving interview today.

I know the Flames saying this week has been "We arent making a move for the sake of making a move" on repeat ad nauseum. But the end of Trees interview you can clearly hear how much stuff is gonna go down once the floodgates open on this team.

Also, I'm predicting Ward will not be back, along with the other coaches.

"We left a few cards off the table and I'm still sour, I dont know if you ever stop being sour after watching the end of that series"

He is one angry papa.

To be fair, he did say something along the same lines last year only to have made one trade for Lucic. He pretty much kept everything status quo despite the colossal ass kicking from an 8th seed.

I do remember him saying last season that he and his staff re-watched the games again with a clear mind to analyze what exactly went down. Probably a good idea, don’t let the emotion blind you into making mistakes. I reckon he and his staff are doing the same thing this time around. Re-watch, take notes and make your decisions on what’s to come.

Hopefully he and staff actually make the right decisions this time around. I’m pretty skeptical myself, but we’ll see.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Cobra

Flames management has done the exact same thing with Hamonic and Brodie.

Which isn’t great and now what I would have done
But surely we agree that johnny is a more important asset?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Shhhh, new regime, things are better now...

There’s an interesting conversation going on here that you can choose to participate in or choose to make snarky one liners about

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Two Fivenagame

I wonder what assets we could have received at the trade deadline for those two?

With Hamonic injured nothing

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

1st (hamonic), 2nd (hamonic) 2nd (hamonic), 2nd (Lazar), 2nd (Elliott), 3rd (Stone), 3rd (Smith), 5th(stone)

Have all evaporated into thin air.

Bouwmeester cost a 3rd to acquire and was turned into a 1st.

Frankly, it's a lot worse imo.

Bouwmeester was a great opportunity to acquire a valuable asset but they mismanaged his trade and got nothing out of it. The first was late and was used on a player that did nothing. So at the end of the day that asset also evaporated

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

There’s an interesting conversation going on here that you can choose to participate in or choose to make snarky one liners about

Surely there's room for both, especially considering the point has long been made, established and confirmed.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

With Hamonic injured nothing

Hamonic being injured was a forecastable conclusion and when he let it be publicly known that he wasn't going to sign an extension through the year he should have been moved within a matter of weeks.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Bouwmeester was a great opportunity to acquire a valuable asset but they mismanaged his trade and got nothing out of it. The first was late and was used on a player that did nothing. So at the end of the day that asset also evaporated

While I agree that both the trade for him was bad and that the picks turned into nothing, it's a heck of a lot different than moving out a first and having a player walk away than gaining a 1st after trading a player away.

One asset petered out, the hamonic assets vanished.

Even if it's the same thing are you sure you want to be comparing Treliving and Feaster so directy?

Because if you are, I've got some pretty good one liners about how the regime has changed and things are different now.