2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by New Era

Why would Barzal sign an offersheet with the Flames if they just dumped 2/3 of the top line? Guy is a few games from a possible Stanley Cup final and is on a good team. Why would he chuck that to come to a rebuilding team? And yes, a team that dumps its first line for futures is rebuilding.

If you offer Barzal 7 x $11 million AAV there is no way he is NOT signing it. I don't care what team it is.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

If you offer Barzal 7 x $11 million AAV there is no way he is NOT signing it. I don't care what team it is.

And what happens when the Islanders match? They lost Tavares, they aren't letting Barzal get away.

[1qqaaz]

Then the Flames lose nothing.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by New Era

And what happens when the Islanders match? They lost Tavares, they aren't letting Barzal get away.

Yeah, they'd more than likely match but that's not the point I was arguing.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Fleury scares the hell out of me ... has the feeling of the Don Edwards acquisition from the 80s

Goalie with a name in a good system that isn't as good as his reputation.

Last year in GSAA Fleury was ranked 46th, one spot behind David Rittich.

At $7M per year for the next two years you'd hope you'd be getting an upgrade!

for sure

I wouldn't go near Fleury.

The flames need an upgrade in goal but not as badly as they need an upgrade up front and adequate replacements on d.

Talbot and Rittich ain't great but they probably outplay their contract values.

Fleury is yeesh

Though if you were rebuilding the roster and Fleury is attached to anything significant....

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Imagine if the flames had just drafted barzal(16th overall) with the 15th overall pick, had the return from Ferland the return from Fox with 10+ million in cap space ...

I've said it a lot this offseason but the 14-15 season was the worst thing that happened to the Flames re-build.

They went from being focused on building through the draft to making moves that were more "win now" moves.

In the end that trade tree still turns into Hanifin and Lindholm which isn't the worst but yeah Barzal and Monahan at center ice would have been a great combination for sure. Really though I might still make that trade again with the knowledge we had at the time of the deal because really Barzal should have never been there at 16 and Hamilton was a sure thing who was only 22 years old.

The trades that hurt more are the ones that followed (Hamonic/Elliott/Smith/Stone)

Originally Posted by New Era

And what happens when the Islanders match? They lost Tavares, they aren't letting Barzal get away.

My post was mean to be tongue in cheek due to the team needing a center if they trade Monahan.

However I think the threat of an offer sheet could be real for Barzal and the Islanders this offseason.

NYI don't really have the cap to match a huge offer sheet with the cap being flat. They don't have a lot of easily movable contracts, and only have $8M of cap space for next season with Pulock and Barzal needing to be re-signed.

I honestly see somebody throwing 5 years and $10.5M at Barzal this off-season. It would only cost 2 1sts, 2nd, 3rd at that level of compensation and would put NYI in a really tough spot cap hit wise.

If they match that one then maybe you throw an offer sheet at Pulock for 5 years at $4M..which would only cost you a 2nd. But no way could they afford $15M in salary for those two players.

Montreal for example has $14M in cap space and a lot of draft picks. I think they'd be crazy not to throw a 5 year $10M offer sheet Barzal's way to gauge his interest.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Yeah, they'd more than likely match but that's not the point I was arguing.

I would use the Islanders' cap issues to try and force a trade where you can pick up an asset or two they have to resign but don't have the scratch to fit in. I'm thinking Pulock, Beauvillier, and Pageau. Lean on them for those players and see if you can work a hockey deal that works for both teams.

[Vinny01]

Far from a lock the Flames draft Barzal. Names I heard them attached to were Chabot and Konecny.

I still think the Hamilton trade was a good one and would make deals where you trade a mid 1st and 2 2nds for a proven 22 year old every time.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

for sure

I wouldn't go near Fleury.

The flames need an upgrade in goal but not as badly as they need an upgrade up front and adequate replacements on d.

Talbot and Rittich ain't great but they probably outplay their contract values.

Fleury is yeesh

Though if you were rebuilding the roster and Fleury is attached to anything significant....

Yessss. The only way we should alleviate them of Fleury is with Glass/Krebs/Dugan attached. I don't think they would do that but we shouldn't either.

I would almost rather target Pulock than Barzal. One i think that Barzal will be the one the isles are desperate to retain, and two there were pretty convincing stats that Pulock was extremely important play driver from the back end for that team. Not to mention he's a prairie boy with a rocket right handed shot.

[really?]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Context is king. In the post you replied to, the continuing argument largely surrounds whether trading Monahan and Gaudreau would constitute a full rebuild, not necessarily whether a full rebuild is the right path forward.

By your identification of the core players, I would surmise that you believe we could trade one or both of Monahan and Gaudreau while remaining competitive. I agree with you. I disagree strongly with Flash that we should use these players to target middling pieces that can play now. That is how we wind up with Phaneuf trades and look like idiots.

Very reasonable observation. What the Flames currently lack is pace and drive up front, and simply adding more serviceable components is unlikely to fill the gap. If the Flames were to deal Gaudreau and/or Monahan they really need to have the fortitude to accept some risk and look for higher picks and prospects with high ceilings. It's easy to understand why some managers tend to pursue the known commodity, as the risk of absolute failure is negated, but that type of thinking generally lends itself to mediocrity. It would be counterproductive to deal either of these players if you don't have the potential to obtain potential game changers in return, and that is unlikely to happen in a classic "hockey trade".

Given his history I would say it is quite unlikely Treliving would embrace a risk aggresive philosophy, so hopefully the Flames stick with the known quantity and avoid merely flipping some deck chairs.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

I see no reason to believe that a Gaudreau trade will work out. Who did Buffalo get for O’Reilly?, Toronto for Kessel? Boston for Seguin? no one even remembers the return on these trades. If anything these trades show that the Flames should be trading spare parts for other teams disgruntled stars.

I think a lot of people around here remember the return on those trades. ‘Team who gets the best player wins’ is not always the case.

The Pacioretty deal is starting to look pretty good for Montreal.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I've said it a lot this offseason but the 14-15 season was the worst thing that happened to the Flames re-build.

They went from being focused on building through the draft to making moves that were more "win now" moves.

In the end that trade tree still turns into Hanifin and Lindholm which isn't the worst but yeah Barzal and Monahan at center ice would have been a great combination for sure. Really though I might still make that trade again with the knowledge we had at the time of the deal because really Barzal should have never been there at 16 and Hamilton was a sure thing who was only 22 years old.

The trades that hurt more are the ones that followed (Hamonic/Elliott/Smith/Stone)



My post was mean to be tongue in cheek due to the team needing a center if they trade Monahan.

However I think the threat of an offer sheet could be real for Barzal and the Islanders this offseason.

NYI don't really have the cap to match a huge offer sheet with the cap being flat. They don't have a lot of easily movable contracts, and only have $8M of cap space for next season with Pulock and Barzal needing to be re-signed.

I honestly see somebody throwing 5 years and $10.5M at Barzal this off-season. It would only cost 2 1sts, 2nd, 3rd at that level of compensation and would put NYI in a really tough spot cap hit wise.

If they match that one then maybe you throw an offer sheet at Pulock for 5 years at $4M..which would only cost you a 2nd. But no way could they afford $15M in salary for those two players.

Montreal for example has $14M in cap space and a lot of draft picks. I think they'd be crazy not to throw a 5 year $10M offer sheet Barzal's way to gauge his interest.

I think Montreal Barzal offer sheet is an excellent call. Really really excellent speculation.

[Monahammer]

Montreal also did the same thing with Aho just last season so they're not afraid of making that type of move. All the better if that kerfuffle exposes Pulock a bit more.

[Roof-Daddy]

Where the Islanders will be hard pressed to match is if they have multiple players receive offer sheets.

They are in an unenviable position of having just $8 million of cap space and still needing to sign their #1 center (Barzal) and #1 dman (Pulock).

They also have roughly their #4 dman in Toews also needing a contract.

I mean if a GM really wants to make it hard on them he can offer sheet Pulock, and if they match then go and offer sheet Barzal. Would be really hard for Lou to match both.

It also just so happens that the Flames biggest needs are a #1 Dman (especially a right shooting #1 Dman) and a #1 center.

Hmmmmmmmmm....

[Flash Walken]

Trading the future for now isn't always a bad idea.

When you're a legitimate contender I think you push as hard as you can to put yourself over the top. Vegas had the surplus of assets and the age range of their core group to go out and supplement it with ready made talent looking to sign on for a competitive window.

Same with Stone.

Same with Lehner.

Trades can be great for both teams. This is one of them.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by JTech780

I am fine with a rework/retool, I just think we should be looking for picks and prospects for Gaudreau and Monahan and not look to make sideways moves.

This team needs at the bare minimum a number 1 center and a number 1 defenseman before they are contenders.

I also don't think you cam go forward with Gaudreau or Monahan as part of your top line.

That is a pretty big retool, and I don’t disagree with what they should be targeting in return.

Also, there is a good chance you take a roster player back, like it or not, to make the cap work for your trading partner. It’s also a way to maximize the prospects / picks you are receiving from them. So I agree with you there.

I do think the Flames can be a playoff team without Johnny, I don’t think they can be a playoff team without Johnny and Monny...

Maybe wishful thinking, but I would like to make the playoffs next year without JG on my roster.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Trading the future for now isn't always a bad idea.

When you're a legitimate contender I think you push as hard as you can to put yourself over the top. Vegas had the surplus of assets and the age range of their core group to go out and supplement it with ready made talent looking to sign on for a competitive window.

Same with Stone.

Same with Lehner.

Trades can be great for both teams. This is one of them.

At least Vegas is trading future for "high end" now pieces.

Tampa, despite having a top 2 or 3 team in the league, still had themselves two 1st round picks in this very deep draft coming up. I still can't believe they traded those picks for Goodrow and Coleman. I mean both players are playing a lot, and playing well in their current run, but it still seems to me like they overpaid when they didn't really have to.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by really?

Very reasonable observation. What the Flames currently lack is pace and drive up front, and simply adding more serviceable components is unlikely to fill the gap. If the Flames were to deal Gaudreau and/or Monahan they really need to have the fortitude to accept some risk and look for higher picks and prospects with high ceilings. It's easy to understand why some managers tend to pursue the known commodity, as the risk of absolute failure is negated, but that type of thinking generally lends itself to mediocrity. It would be counterproductive to deal either of these players if you don't have the potential to obtain potential game changers in return, and that is unlikely to happen in a classic "hockey trade".

Given his history I would say it is quite unlikely Treliving would embrace a risk aggresive philosophy, so hopefully the Flames stick with the known quantity and avoid merely flipping some deck chairs.

Yes.
It’s also not a bad time to be acquiring assets that you do not have to protect in the expansion draft.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

At least Vegas is trading future for "high end" now pieces.

Tampa, despite having a top 2 or 3 team in the league, still had themselves two 1st round picks in this very deep draft coming up. I still can't believe they traded those picks for Goodrow and Coleman. I mean both players are playing a lot, and playing well in their current run, but it still seems to me like they overpaid when they didn't really have to.

The time is now for that team more than any team in the league.

Like you said, they had 2 firsts still. How is that even possible?

I think when you're the best team in the league, there is no better time to waste future assets to get the player you want.

Getting 2 specific guys who really do two specific things in order to push 2 other lesser guys down the lineup is a reasonable cost to pay. Coleman is giving them 13-18 solid minutes every night and being able to promote him up the lineup will be invaluable compared with a replacement like Stephens or Maroon.

[blender]

I spent last weekend with a friend who is a high-level executive at a major corporation and also a Flames fan.
We talked about processes and systems, and about building a business or organization in general.

It was interesting to me that we agreed without reservation that there is only one way forward for the Flames. Continue building on what they have, which by any measure is above average. Now, above average doesn't sound all that great, but when you consider the age of the core pieces and upside, you realize that there is a lot to like.

So the question is how do the Flames get better?

With the parity in the league today, as well as the flat cap for the next 3 seasons, and the randomness of the draft lottery system, rebuilding is not a viable option, at least not for a team with a young core showing above average results. If you want a scorched earth rebuild with draft picks better find another team to cheer for because it won't happen. And it shouldn't happen.

There are a lot of absolutes thrown about in these discussions:
You can't win without an elite number one center.
You can't trade for a number one center.
Your number one center must be a play-driver.
You can't win without an elite coach
An elite coach is always an elite coach (anyone remember Todd McClellan?)
Flames ownership is/has always been ________.

These are examples, and they have one common theme: magic bullet solutions.

The reality is you put the best roster and coaching staff together that you can and you take your shot. There is a tremendous amount of luck involved in pro sports, but you can't win anything if you are rebuilding. Conversely, you can do everything right and still not win. Look at Boston the last 2 seasons.

I still believe the Flames have the best team they have had in at least 10 years. There is only one path forward in my mind. Improve the roster however you can.

The means of improvement are up for debate and that is what this thread is for, so fair play to all that contribute. Just remember that there are no certainties, only plays and results.