2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Toonage

How is this different than re-signing Kuemper at the end of his deal for another 3? Would the money be all that different at that point? At least with Kuemper you save at least a million or so, probably more for those first few years.

Even still, the acquisition cost for Kuemper would make Markstrom a more enviable target.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Toonage

The difference though with Markstrom vs. Kuemper in this instance is that Kuemper would be guaranteed at the rate he is now for 2 years at the cost of your 1st. Markstrom would be sought after and could run you more than just the $1M over Kuemper's cost.

The 1st buys cost certainty in this case. Not insignificant with the cap being what it is.

Not advocating for the trade, though cynically I believe it will happen and likely be worse than just a 1st for a goaltender.

The cost of that cost certainty is that his contract is only two years, then will go up.

So the total difference in cap hit between the two goalies, over the next 5 years or so, is negligible - no where near different enough to justify a 1st going out the door.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Rangers want Monahan now? Yuck. They don't really have anything I would consider interesting in exchange for Monahan. Unless we're adding something small to get Zibanejad?
Kakko is a bit interesting, but a winger and i'd want an add from NY. Not sure they could stomach that.

Chytil meh.

Its Eklund best to just ignore. He was right about one thing like a decade ago. I cant believe it still gets posted on here.

[Monahammer]

Thought about it more, if we're rebuilding tear down style and trading both Johnny and Mony then I would be ok with a trade of Mony to NYR for Chytil, Kakko, and Andersson or their 2nd this year.
NYR would be lit with Panarin-Zibanejad, Laf-Monahan on their top two lines.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I want them to trade picks for actual long term solutions that will contribute to the team for more than 1-2 seasons.

Hamilton Trade: That's fine you're adding a 21 year old d-man that should have been a piece here long term, and you had made other trades that had us in a pick surplus but that's not the issue of the last three-four seasons and moving out picks.

But the picks moved out in the last three drafts have done little to move the team forward IMO.

1st, 2 2nds for Hamonic was an overpayment from day 1 and in the end he wasn't worth even just the 1st IMO.

3rd (could have been a second) for Smith....actually not the worst value considering the rumors of Kuemper costing a 1st for two seasons, so this one was actually pretty good value.

Lazar for a 2nd...bad trade as there was no indication Lazar was going to be an NHLer.

Stone for a 3rd & 5th...once again bad value as Stone was a contract liability right away.

Elliott for a 2nd and 3rd...overpayment for a guy that lasted one season here.

Let's look at the net sum of those trades:

Hamonic - 193 games (5 playoff games)
Stone - 148 games ( 4 playoff games)
Lazar- 70 games (1 playoff game)
Elliott - 49 games (4 playoff games, single handedly lost that Anaheim series)

for

Dobson
Bolduc
Iskhakov
Nordgren
Formenton
Kyrou (or who knows...the Flames seemed to want to draft a goalie in round 2 that year, maybe they take Hart with this pick since he was still on the board at the time)

So yeah maybe they were trades because we were made to help open a "window" but personally I'd much rather have Dobson, Formenton, Bolduc, and Kyrou as pieces still in the organization coming up to add to our core, opposed to having nothing in the organization from those trades.

The best way to win a cup is to be good long term and continually build a team, not to just go all in for a "window". The trades above have nothing to do with the Flames being competitive for the next year or two, because none of those pieces are on the roster anymore.



Treliving was on the job for a month before the 2014 draft, based on everything out of the organization that was very much Burke in charge of that draft.

Smith for a 3rd was unfairly included there for sure, that was actually decent value. Hamonic trade was horrible though, he honestly added nothing to the team that they couldn't have gotten from a mid-tier free agent signing, and we paid a huge premium to get him. Honestly I don't care if we made the playoffs with those guys just to lose in the first round, I want this team to win a cup and be a contender long term, not waste assets just to get in.

And great on Treliving for signing those free agents, but teams can never have enough assets, doesn't give him a pass for making bad trades of draft picks.

Agree with a lot of what you are saying here but, if I had to bet, Treliving’s direction was the ‘rebuild’ was going to be a V, not a U. I also bet that came from ownership. He acquired picks earlier and supplemented them with veterans quickly afterwards. When Treliving was spending draft capital to acquire Hamonic, Flames hockey ops likely had Sam Bennett as a top two C. They made an organizational decision to push early and they may now be left trying to reconcile where they go next.

I bet if you were to sit down with Treliving over a team pitcher or two he would acknowledge that was a risky way to go about it, but that’s not unique to the Flames. All teams have to manage risk.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Knut

Its Eklund best to just ignore. He was right about one thing like a decade ago. I cant believe it still gets posted on here.

Would rather baselessly speculate about an old quack's theory than be subjected to pointless rehashing of our organizations colossal failures in the last decade.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Would rather baselessly speculate about an old quack's theory than be subjected to pointless rehashing of our organizations colossal failures in the last decade.

That's fair.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Toonage

How is this different than re-signing Kuemper at the end of his deal for another 3? Would the money be all that different at that point? At least with Kuemper you save at least a million or so, probably more for those first few years.

Is that worth the 19th pick? I don’t think so

[sureLoss]

Russo saying that the Wild wouldn't be interested in trading Dumba to the Flames, even if Monahan was on the table.

https://theathletic.com/2104772/2020...season-so-far/

Calgary has shown interest, but I don’t get the impression that the Wild are really interested even if the Flames were willing to trade Sean Monahan.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Is that worth the 19th pick? I don’t think so

To me? No. To Treliving? As part of a larger deal (or catalyst for other deals), probably.

Look at his track record. If he feels the deal is worth it, that 1st will be gone.

[getoverit]

That’s a good thing lol

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Russo saying that the Wild wouldn't be interested in trading Dumba to the Flames, even if Monahan was on the table.

https://theathletic.com/2104772/2020...season-so-far/

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Russo saying that the Wild wouldn't be interested in trading Dumba to the Flames, even if Monahan was on the table.

https://theathletic.com/2104772/2020...season-so-far/

Boring Sean Monahan on the Minnesota Wild? This feels like a missed opportunity for the world's best/worst marketing gimmick.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Toonage

How is this different than re-signing Kuemper at the end of his deal for another 3? Would the money be all that different at that point? At least with Kuemper you save at least a million or so, probably more for those first few years.

You're contradicting yourself here.

Kuemper's deal is only 2 years, at which point he will need to be resigned at a price that is likely to be at least as high as what Markstrom signs for.

So the difference in salary only applies for 2 years, which is NOT worth a 1stround pick.

Conversely, if you don't re-sign him, then the 1st round pick was a COMPLETE waste, as you only got 2 years of him.

Markstrom makes way more sense than Kuemper from an asset management point of view. If you prefer one goalie over the other, that is a different conversation.

[TOfan]

An interesting fact was brought up on yesterday’s hockey central at noon (590) podcast yesterday. Of the lightning forwards, only one is a first round selection.

As Treliving has said ‘every pick counts’. If they deal their first this year, I definitely don’t think it in and of itself is going to be a disaster.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Even still, the acquisition cost for Kuemper would make Markstrom a more enviable target.

Then we have to give up assets to fill a different hole. Everyone want the team to improve, but we don't have that much cap space and have 2 pretty big holes to fill. I think in a Kuemper deal you can get AZ to take Ryan which means we aren't adding much cap this year and the cost to replace Ryan is significantly lower than keeping him and signing a goalie.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The cost of that cost certainty is that his contract is only two years, then will go up.

So the total difference in cap hit between the two goalies, over the next 5 years or so, is negligible - no where near different enough to justify a 1st going out the door.

The draft pick is also the cost of securing the asset. GMs are playing musical chairs and it wouldn't take much to be the last one standing. Some people have criticized Treliving for not being able to get a number one goalie. I'd rather give the 19th pick for him rather than some of the other asks for when Bishop and Fleury were available.

Who are the legitimate long term options in net that are available? If Markstrom gets to UFA you will likely be over paying term and money. There are too many teams needing goalies for it to be a smooth acquisition.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Russo saying that the Wild wouldn't be interested in trading Dumba to the Flames, even if Monahan was on the table.

https://theathletic.com/2104772/2020...season-so-far/

I don't really understand the content of this tweet.

1. Monahan is vastly superior to Dumba, so the Wild would be patently stupid to turn down that trade if it were to be proposed
2. We aren't even divisional rivals with Minny? Are they seriously concerned about playing Dumba ~3 times a year? Do they actually think that Dumba's impact on the flames would outweight the boost they would receive from having an actual top-6 centre?
3. Is this spite against the flames organization? Or is this spite against Dumba, who is from the region and probably would like to play here?

Many questions, no answers forthcoming. Seems like a stupid position to take for the wild.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Russo saying that the Wild wouldn't be interested in trading Dumba to the Flames, even if Monahan was on the table.

https://theathletic.com/2104772/2020...season-so-far/

Well if they don't think Monahan is good trade value for Dumba, they are going to be watching Dumba get plucked to Seattle at the expansion draft.

They are in dreamland if they think they can get more back than that.

[dammage79]

I'll be so bold as to say almost any UFA goalie and the Flames keeping their 1st and using it is better than trading it for Kuemper.

Thats right, the Holtby's and Crawfords included.

At any rate, my POV is the Flames should not and can not trade their 1st this year. Thats it, that's all.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You're contradicting yourself here.

Kuemper's deal is only 2 years, at which point he will need to be resigned at a price that is likely to be at least as high as what Markstrom signs for.

So the difference in salary only applies for 2 years, which is NOT worth a 1stround pick.

Conversely, if you don't re-sign him, then the 1st round pick was a COMPLETE waste, as you only got 2 years of him.

Markstrom makes way more sense than Kuemper from an asset management point of view. If you prefer one goalie over the other, that is a different conversation.

Not sure how I'm contradicting myself here (not saying I'm not, I can be dense). But the 1st gives you that cost certainty for the 2 years left on his deal.

If you sign for Markstrom for say, $5.5M which was tossed out here, you have Kuemper for a million less for 2 years which allows you to possibly make other moves, afford other options. After that time, if you extend Kuemper at $5.5 for another 3 years you find yourself in the same spot as i you signed Markstrom but you used that additional salary in the first 2 years to make other moves.

That being said, Markstrom as a UFA could fetch more than $5.5 which makes Kuemper's 2 years at $4.5 potentially an even better deal.