2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by AC

I just don't see a player making that gamble on a short term deal if a competitive long term deal is out there.

If the Flames are offering Hall $7.5M x 7 years for example would he really sign a 1 year deal for $9M and risk a serious injury given his history?

I just can't see it personally.

There is a precedent.

Marian Hossa signed a 1 year deal with the Red Wings to chase a cup. Then signed a massive deal with Chicago.

edit: The Oilers were reportedly offering him stupid money too IIRC.
https://www.si.com/hockey/news/top-f...%20Wings%20for

Marian Hossa, meanwhile, turned down a lucrative deal from the Edmonton Oilers believed to be worth between $70 million to $80 million over eight or nine years and a $49-million, seven-year offer to stay with the Pittsburgh Penguins and instead chose to accept a one-year job assigment with the Detroit Red Wings for $7.45 million.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by AC

I just don't see a player making that gamble on a short term deal if a competitive long term deal is out there.

If the Flames are offering Hall $7.5M x 7 years for example would he really sign a 1 year deal for $9M and risk a serious injury given his history?

I just can't see it personally.

I think he'll listen to it.

I don't think he'll choose it in the end though. I think Taylor is going to be a Flame or a Bruin - and both will offer 7 year deals.

[AC]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

There is a precedent.

Marian Hossa signed a 1 year deal with the Red Wings to chase a cup. Then signed a massive deal with Chicago.

But at that point the fewest games Hossa played in a season was 72 (not counting his rookie year).

As I mentioned, Hall does have an injury history. As recently as 2018-19, he had a 33 game season due to injury.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Kind of funny if Hall ends up in Boston.


They were well-known to be more interested in Hall than in Seguin, as Hall was rated slightly higher and Boston already had their centres.


Now with their centres essentially aging, and arguably their best players on the wing, it would be funny if Hall ends up there now.


If I am Hall, and I want to win, I think long-term that Calgary gives him a better chance of that over the duration of his deal. Aging centres, Chara taking a step back, Krug leaving... Pastrnak and Marchand are elite pieces, and they have some other really good pieces, but the 'bones' of that team is definitely aging. Will be interesting to see who he ends up picking, and I do hope that we get to hear some of the competing contract offers as we did with the Brad Richards 'sweepstakes' (or in that case, Russian Roulette, and the Rangers died!).

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by AC

But at that point the fewest games Hossa played in a season was 72 (not counting his rookie year).

As I mentioned, Hall does have an injury history. As recently as 2018-19, he had a 33 game season due to injury.

Some players just bet on themselves.

I remember there were a lot of people adamant that Gaudreau wouldn't play in the World Cup without a contract because of the risk of career ending injury. He did.

Hall already has an estimated $45 million in career earnings. Maybe he is comfortable taking the risk.

[1qqaaz]

Calgary Flames offered Noah Hanifin, Sam Bennett to New Jersey Devils for Taylor Hall and Sami Vatanen

The fact that the Flames offered those assets for two short term rentals is kind of horrifying.
It seems the Flames have no interest whatsoever in stockpiling assets and are completely going for it. This is despite the fact that they barely made the playoffs and up to four of the defensemen may be walking away as UFAs.

Trading Gaudreau for youth would be going the other way. It doesn't seem like the Flames have this rationale in mind.
Although maybe losing in round 1 made them change their minds.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Calgary Flames offered Noah Hanifin, Sam Bennett to New Jersey Devils for Taylor Hall and Sami Vatanen

The fact that the Flames offered those assets for two short term rentals is kind of horrifying.
It seems the Flames have no interest whatsoever in stockpiling assets and are completely going for it. This is despite the fact that they barely made the playoffs.

Trading Gaudreau for youth would be going the other way. It doesn't seem like the Flames have this rationale in mind.

Whoa! How do you know that?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Calgary Flames offered Noah Hanifin, Sam Bennett to New Jersey Devils for Taylor Hall and Sami Vatanen

The fact that the Flames offered those assets for two short term rentals is kind of horrifying.
It seems the Flames have no interest whatsoever in stockpiling assets and are completely going for it. This is despite the fact that they barely made the playoffs and up to four of the defensemen may be walking away as UFAs.

Trading Gaudreau for youth would be going the other way. It doesn't seem like the Flames have this rationale in mind.

I think it's probably pretty safe to assume the Flames would have worked on re-signing at least Hall, if not both Hall and Vatanen. I'm pretty happy we didn't end up with Vatanen. I don't like the player much.

...still hoping we land Hall on October 9th.

[dino7c]

If that offer is true it was likely contingent on one or both of them signing extensions. There is a reason it didn't happen.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by timbit

Whoa! How do you know that?

Elliotte Friedman on 31 Thoughts says "when the Calgary #Flames were talking about a Taylor Hall deal with the #NJDevils, it was him and Sami Vatanen for Sam Bennett and Noah Hanifin.”

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I think it's probably pretty safe to assume the Flames would have worked on re-signing at least Hall, if not both Hall and Vatanen.

Was just going to say the same thing. Obviously risk involved but it wasn't made with just short term goals in mind.

One bonus though is they still have both Bennett and Hanifin and can possibly still sign Hall and Vatanen as UFAs. If they do, missing out on that trade will have been better long term asset-wise.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Was just going to say the same thing. Obviously risk involved but it wasn't made with just short term goals in mind.

One bonus though is they still have both Bennett and Hanifin and can possibly still sign Hall and Vatanen as UFAs. If they do, missing out on that trade will have been better long term asset-wise.

Yep, exactly. If we can land Hall on the 9th then our "misfortune" in losing out on that trade worked out great for us in the end.

[AC]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Some players just bet on themselves.

I remember there were a lot of people adamant that Gaudreau wouldn't play in the World Cup without a contract because of the risk of career ending injury. He did.

Hall already has an estimated $45 million in career earnings. Maybe he is comfortable taking the risk.

Yep, maybe.

Though Gaudreau had never suffered an injury in his entire life at that point IIRC, I believe his broken hand was the first injury he's ever had. He was also 22/23 at that point I believe compared to Hall who is about to turn 29, and maybe about to sign his last NHL contract depending how things play out.

It'll certainly be interesting regardless of how things play out.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I would say that signing Hall and trading Gaudreau for futures is basically spinning the wheels for today. I have said this a couple of times already, but I just don't see Treliving selling anyone for futures, unless he is going to turn around and deal those futures for someone else.


Yeah, people are down on Gaudreau and his playoff performances. He does need to produce more on 5on5, but I thought he played defence well (even backtracked hard - with Monahan) and essentially saved a goal against), and his PP points definitely help. A team with Hall and Gaudreau has a much higher shot at winning the cup than a team with Hall and futures, right?


Obviously the cap needs to work. Yes, trading Gaudreau and 're-balancing' the team makes sense too. My point is that if the Flames are trying to win the cup with THIS core, then trading core players for futures will make little organizational sense right now. I just can't see Treliving doing so.


Giordano is getting older with 2 years remaining.
Gaudreau - 2 years.
Monahan - 3 years
Tkachuk - 2 years (and then QO 9 million arbitration-eligible)


That's the 'window' for this team to win. That is when most of the players are in their prime. You can make trades and extend that window, but you aren't going to make your chances of legitimately competing for a cup in the next couple of years by removing any of these contracts in exchange for futures, IMO.


Now, if you don't believe that this core can win, well, then it is time to sell and start over. That's a different argument, and as I said previously, one that I am fine with too. Do one thing or the other. You try to win, or you rebuild. Don't do both at the same time, as it just keeps you in the middle for a longer period of time, unless you get really lucky.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by timbit

Whoa! How do you know that?

Tweeted by FlamesNation

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I think it's probably pretty safe to assume the Flames would have worked on re-signing at least Hall, if not both Hall and Vatanen. I'm pretty happy we didn't end up with Vatanen. I don't like the player much.
...still hoping we land Hall on October 9th.

Fair. Really, it was similar to the offer for Mark Stone. I believe the Flames probably would have been successful in extended either of them. But still, there's uncertainty.
It's just that a huge trade like that, for UFAs, would have been a gigantic risk for a team that was barely in a playoff spot. Credit to Treliving for having guts.

I wonder how good of a player Gaudreau + Hanafin could fetch.
Seems like the Flames might be willing to trade both of them.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by dino7c

If that offer is true it was likely contingent on one or both of them signing extensions. There is a reason it didn't happen.

At the time it was reported that the Flames and Coyotes made very different offers...that the Flames deal was more of a hockey trade and the devils went with the Coyotes offer
This seems to back that up
Glad it didn’t happen

[Vinny01]

My understanding was the deal with Hall the Flames needed to have an extension in place or at least discussing an extension as a condition for the trade to go through.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

My understanding was the deal with Hall the Flames needed to have an extension in place or at least discussing an extension as a condition for the trade to go through.

Makes sense. Do we know if the Flames ever had a chance to discuss at all?

[David Struch]

Gaudreau, Hanifin, Bennett

for

7th, 18th, Palmieri

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I would say that signing Hall and trading Gaudreau for futures is basically spinning the wheels for today. I have said this a couple of times already, but I just don't see Treliving selling anyone for futures, unless he is going to turn around and deal those futures for someone else.

.

The key for me is that this season is the last good opportunity to get assets for Gaudreau, and he is very likely not to re-sign.