2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0 - Page 315 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Bingo · 09-16-2020, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The chasm is just so big. The play driving, physical force and point producer from the playoffs (smaller sample size) vs. the guy that had 12 points in the regular season or couldn't crack 27 points in any of last three.

I'm curious to see how it plays out. It would be a rather rare jump in production if he can pull it off.

Absolutely.

I'm far from booking anything as certain.

But being physical, and getting some production in previous playoffs is certainly different from the eye test in the ten games we saw this year.

Does it translate? Is it just odd circumstance with August and a bubble? Or a move to center where he felt more at ease in going back to his OHL style?

Certainly an interesting thing to see play out.

Monahammer · 09-16-2020, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

You don't find reactions like yours to be equally challenged as a timepiece?

It is hard being a wristwatch, but I am a casio so I'm never broken just out of batteries.

But seriously, I think we are missing a huge opportunity to finally cash out on a reasonable return for this franchise's highest ever draft pick. Only 9 months ago I thought that possibility was gone forever; we have been gifted a second (or third, or forth) chance, and yet here we are being duped into keeping him around again.

Crown Royal · 09-16-2020, 09:59 AM

Yeah Bennett was considerably better, but why do people always ignore the regular season for a tiny sample size? Yeah Bennett was very good for 10 games, but that doesn't change that he was garbage for 52 in the regular season. Nor does it change even when he was playing well, his line bled chances against because in part because he is simply not a very good centerman.

Also, the trade that was suggest is for a defenseman that has been a better offensive player through his NHL career than Bennett has.

FlamesAreOne · 09-16-2020, 09:59 AM

Haynes just threw out a proposal of Monahan for Dumba. Similar years left, age and aav.

Crown Royal · 09-16-2020, 10:02 AM

Haynes is a good writer, but he has some really really terrible opinions.

Bingo · 09-16-2020, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

Yeah Bennett was considerably better, but why do people always ignore the regular season for a tiny sample size? Yeah Bennett was very good for 10 games, but that doesn't change that he was garbage for 52 in the regular season. Nor does it change even when he was playing well, his line bled chances against because in part because he is simply not a very good centerman.

Also, the trade that was suggest is for a defenseman that has been a better offensive player through his NHL career than Bennett has.

Whose ignoring the regular season or sample sizes? Referred to both in my post.

Plus I don't like the term garbage. Too many penalties and not enough production ... easy to see facts. But he's also 2nd in the last three years for forwards in Calgary with 500 or more minutes in individual expected goals and 5th for individual high danger chances.

If the change in position has spurred some finish you had better get paid for that if you're moving him.

Monahammer · 09-16-2020, 10:06 AM

Would any of the people who really didn't want to trade Bennett for Dumba instead trade Monahan for Dumba?

If so you need help.

Jiri Hrdina · 09-16-2020, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monahammer

It is hard being a wristwatch, but I am a casio so I'm never broken just out of batteries.

But seriously, I think we are missing a huge opportunity to finally cash out on a reasonable return for this franchise's highest ever draft pick. Only 9 months ago I thought that possibility was gone forever; we have been gifted a second (or third, or forth) chance, and yet here we are being duped into keeping him around again.

I suspect anyone targeting Sam would still be doing so based on the belief they can "buy low" on him. I'm doubtful that his playoffs would have significantly altered what teams would be offering.
So what is being weighed is that return (which is unknown to us) v. his known contribution to the team based on historics + potential unrealized upside and confidence level in that upside.

That's the math.

You are assuming that the trade value has significantly altered based on his playoffs. That simply may not be true.

Crown Royal · 09-16-2020, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

Whose ignoring the regular season or sample sizes? Referred to both in my post.

Plus I don't like the term garbage. Too many penalties and not enough production ... easy to see facts. But he's also 2nd in the last three years for forwards in Calgary with 500 or more minutes in individual expected goals and 5th for individual high danger chances.

If the change in position has spurred some finish you had better get paid for that if you're moving him.

Did I single you out? Nope.

Sam Bennett's hockey career is like dating. The playoffs are like this amazing first date, then get your hopes up, and then the regular season comes around and you realize he's all flair and no substance.

Jiri Hrdina · 09-16-2020, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Would any of the people who really didn't want to trade Bennett for Dumba instead trade Monahan for Dumba?

If so you need help.

I don't think having a different view means you "need help".
But I would trade Sam for Dumba.
Salaries don't work though.

GioforPM · 09-16-2020, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Haynes just threw out a proposal of Monahan for Dumba. Similar years left, age and aav.

I don’t understand how this improves the team. Even those who criticize Monahan just think the Flames need a better 1C. Not that he’s a liability. So you fill a hole at 2RD but create a bigger one at 1C - Lindholm, Backlund and Bennett just aren’t going to improve the position. So you are getting weaker down the middle, not saving money or increasing contract certainty with more term.

Now if you say Bennett+ for Dumba, then I can see it. Trading a lower C who still has potential for a pretty established RHS on D. The issue then is the add - Kylington and the Edmonton 3rd?

Vinny01 · 09-16-2020, 10:14 AM

Just heard on the Rintool show on the FAN that they are confirmed the Flames are in on Markstrom along with the Canucks and Avs

Toonage · 09-16-2020, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Just heard on the Rintool show on the FAN that they are confirmed the Flames are in on Markstrom along with the Canucks and Avs

Well then. Things just got interesting.

Crown Royal · 09-16-2020, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don't think having a different view means you "need help".
But I would trade Sam for Dumba.
Salaries don't work though.

Salaries don't have to be 1:1, if we don't trade for a defenseman, we're going to have to spend at least the difference between Bennett & Dumba's salaries on a defenseman anyways.

Flamenspiel · 09-16-2020, 10:15 AM

I don’t like the Monohan deal being proposed at all. The Flames are going to have to take a chance on these young defensemen. At least until the expansion draft.

Dumba is a good player, but you have to be predatory about it, and not rob Peter to pay Paul. Clearly the Wild are making a big mistake, you don’t let them off the hook.

GioforPM · 09-16-2020, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Just heard on the Rintool show on the FAN that they are confirmed the Flames are in on Markstrom along with the Canucks and Avs

Are they even allowed to talk to him yet?

Toonage · 09-16-2020, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Are they even allowed to talk to him yet?

They could talk to the team about trading for his rights

Crown Royal · 09-16-2020, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Just heard on the Rintool show on the FAN that they are confirmed the Flames are in on Markstrom along with the Canucks and Avs

So they are accusing the Flames and Avs of tampering? Because if the Canucks are trying to re-sign Markstrom, they won't be trying to trade him and these teams cannot talk to him until free agency opens.

ComixZone · 09-16-2020, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Just heard on the Rintool show on the FAN that they are confirmed the Flames are in on Markstrom along with the Canucks and Avs

Yeah there's no "being in on" at this stage.

Clearly the Flames are after a goalie upgrade - but there's no way the Flames or the Ads are "in on" Markstrom at this stage as he belongs to Vancouver. Perhaps he knows the Flames will be in on him if he hits free agency, but as of today that's not possible.

PepsiFree · 09-16-2020, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Yeah there's no "being in on" at this stage.

Clearly the Flames are after a goalie upgrade - but there's no way the Flames or the Ads are "in on" Markstrom at this stage as he belongs to Vancouver. Perhaps he knows the Flames will be in on him if he hits free agency, but as of today that's not possible.

As already noted, they could be talking to Vancouver about acquiring his rights.