[News] All-encompassing Bennett trade discussions thread

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

we will still have $1.5 million in cap for 21/22 for Brouwer's buyout

Still gets a massive shrug from me.

Only thing that potentially looks not so bueno to me is the last year or 2 of Backlund's deal

[Sandman]

Just getting back to the Bennett to Colorado rumors, here's a couple of young players of interest:

1)RW Martin Kaut: Mid-first rounder from a few years back. 6'2", with a bit of grit, can play a power game, moves well, above average skill. Best suited right now to being a third-liner, but still has potential of filling in on a second line. He is buried in Colorado, like many young players.

2)C Shane Bowers: Was drafted in the first round of 2017 by the Sens. Another player with size (6'2") and skating. Good two-way skills, great on face-offs. May not be a lot of room on our roster right now for him, with Backlund occupying the third-line C position, but perhaps could play LW there for now.

3)D Connor Timmins: 22yo right-shooting D-man, drafted early in the second round in 2017. Lost all of 18/19 to injury, but was thought of as having the skills to be an offensive guy. 6'2", had 5pts in 7 WJC games in 2018. I know we have a lot of d-men right now, but he could be a diamond in the rough.

Of course, these players aren't going to be the focal point in any trade for Bennett, but they may be guys to look at as secondary pieces.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by New Era

Gary Roberts who played with Nieuwendyk and Loob? He was 21 when that line first tasted success, then was only 22 when they won the cup and where he was a key player on the team. The next year he would score 39 goals, then two years later break the 50 goal barrier at age 25. When was he a bubble player?

Roberts was an energy guy/middleweight goon his first couple of years. He was a young guy doing anything he had to to stay in the lineup on a very stacked team (he was drafted in 84, then joined the team in 86/87, the year after the flames lost the cup).

He evolved pretty quickly when given the opportunity and I’m sure he was being made to earn it by his coaches; but was he an instant impact player/star? No. Except for the face punching. Lots of impact there .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by BigRed

Roberts was an energy guy/middleweight goon his first couple of years. He was a young guy doing anything he had to to stay in the lineup on a very stacked team (he was drafted in 86, the year the flames lost the cup).

He evolved pretty quickly when given the opportunity and I’m sure he was being made to earn it by his coaches; but was he an instant impact player/star? No. Except for the face punching. Lots of impact there .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very,very true-although I distinctly Roberts getting his clock cleaned badly a few times....

[RedHawk12]

Calgary is one of those markets where you have to overpay a little bit for most good free agents to consider playing here.

We overpaid Markstrom and Tanev (salary and term) and so far it's working out. We overpaid Brouwer and Neal and it didn't work out. That's the gamble you take with free agency. I don't think you can really blame Tre for going out and trying to improve the team. If this team never tried to make any free agent signings, we would still be middle of the pack team and the narrative would be why isn't Tre more active in trying to improve the team, etc.

Personally, I prefer the slow draft and develop route. But that requires some serious patience and it's difficult to do with this fanbase and ownership group.

[Rick M.]

When is the trade deadline this year? We might get more if we move Sam then. Who wouldn’t want playoff Sam Bennett on their roster?

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I agree that his cap management has not been good largely due to his free agency work. Though I maintain the Ryan deal is a fair one
But fleury is advocating off loading deals like Lucic. I just don’t see how that’s realistic.
The mistake isn’t not offloading Lucic. The mistake was signing James Neal

See, while I agree, I have a different take on it.

The Neal deal at the time was steeper than anticipated, but the length was very questionable. I still don’t think it’s been outed exactly why Neal was upset (ice time?) but regardless the Flames decided to offload him at his low point while he was being disruptive. I think we all agree on that. I think personally, and this part is debatable, that they handled it wrong. We’ve seen the organization handle the Bennett situation badly and only now come to the realization that you have to showcase him then deal him. I know it was the off season but I’d have liked to see them tell him the same thing - we’ll start the season on the top line and try and deal you. Bringing on a worse contract to solve the character issue and bad contract, was a terrible move where I estimate about 6% of your cap is tied up in. On top of that they feel the need to play the guy when generally he’s a hindrance. Anyway, it’s a cap discussion so I’ll leave it at that.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

- Backlund is not a third-line player.
- Mangiapane has given no indication at all to suggest that he has taken a step back.
- $3.0 m is the going rate for about 30-40 points production on the UFA market, which is precisely in line with what Ryan has provided.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

- Ryan at that price to me is, don’t bother, move a different direction or bring in someone from within. Has Ryan really shown that much potential to get a long term deal? The dollar value is one thing, but the length is you want this guy around for the long term. Why sign any bottom line guy for long term unless you think you’re getting him for future potential?
- When I say Backlund is a third line player I’d say it’s debatable for sure. Look at the championship contenders and tell me where he’d fit on the centre depth chart for Toronto, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, Dallas. Generally I’d argue he’d be third on most of those charts. Doesn’t sound that ridiculous to me.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by fleury

- Ryan at that price to me is, don’t bother, move a different direction or bring in someone from within. Has Ryan really shown that much potential to get a long term deal? The dollar value is one thing, but the length is you want this guy around for the long term. Why sign any bottom line guy for long term unless you think you’re getting him for future potential?
- When I say Backlund is a third line player I’d say it’s debatable for sure. Look at the championship contenders and tell me where he’d fit on the centre depth chart for Toronto, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, Dallas. Generally I’d argue he’d be third on most of those charts. Doesn’t sound that ridiculous to me.

- stability and depth at centre. Not every player needs upside. Some bring what they bring and are paid to do so.
- well yeah when you name the teams who are spoiled with multiple best centres in the game...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by fleury

See, while I agree, I have a different take on it.



The Neal deal at the time was steeper than anticipated, but the length was very questionable. I still don’t think it’s been outed exactly why Neal was upset (ice time?) but regardless the Flames decided to offload him at his low point while he was being disruptive. I think we all agree on that. I think personally, and this part is debatable, that they handled it wrong.

I knew a few things about the James Neal situation that were never made public, and suffice it to say that he was not moved just for his on-ice performance—as terrible as it was. The Flames had to get him out of their dressing room. It is nearly a miracle they got anything at all, and ridding themselves of a significant on- and off-ice problem, while also unloading some cap and getting a third round pick in return was practically a coup for how toxic things were.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is nearly a miracle they got anything at all

They would have much rather have gotten nothing for him though.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by MrMike

I love the guy and it may not be the worst, but Gio at 6.75 next year might be considered as well.

Gio at 6.75 this year has been a drag. Next year it will definitely be a drag. But gio at 6.75 two years ago was value, so I suppose we're just paying for it now.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I knew a few things about the James Neal situation that were never made public, and suffice it to say that he was not moved just for his on-ice performance—as terrible as it was. The Flames had to get him out of their dressing room. It is nearly a miracle they got anything at all, and ridding themselves of a significant on- and off-ice problem, while also unloading some cap and getting a third round pick in return was practically a coup for how toxic things were.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

The odd part of this is how that year he played for the Flames was their best season in years. However, they weren't nearly as dominant after the all-star break and completely wilted in the playoffs.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I knew a few things about the James Neal situation that were never made public, and suffice it to say that he was not moved just for his on-ice performance—as terrible as it was. The Flames had to get him out of their dressing room. It is nearly a miracle they got anything at all, and ridding themselves of a significant on- and off-ice problem, while also unloading some cap and getting a third round pick in return was practically a coup for how toxic things were.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I know a few things as well, and the biggest error Treliving ever made IMO was not doing enough background work. On paper, signing a big 20 goal scorer for RW made all kinds of sense. But Neal’s issues weren’t exactly impossible to find out. Or if he did, he made the fairly common GM mistake of thinking one more change of scenery would do the trick.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

They would have much rather have gotten nothing for him though.

If this is your way of saying that signing was a mistake, then I agree. In my mind there are two big blemishes on Treliving's record: the James Neal contract and the Hamonic acquisition.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If this is your way of saying that signing was a mistake, then I agree. In my mind there are two big blemishes on Treliving's record: the James Neal contract and the Hamonic acquisition.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

He’s trying to say they had to take on Lucic instead of just giving Neal away for free. But that’s irrelevant and all goes back to the signing and not the trade. I think the trade has worked out as well as could possibly be hoped (especially if a miracle happens and Seattle takes Lucic).

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I also know things that I'm not going to share with you guys.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by fleury

See, while I agree, I have a different take on it.

The Neal deal at the time was steeper than anticipated, but the length was very questionable. I still don’t think it’s been outed exactly why Neal was upset (ice time?) but regardless the Flames decided to offload him at his low point while he was being disruptive. I think we all agree on that. I think personally, and this part is debatable, that they handled it wrong. We’ve seen the organization handle the Bennett situation badly and only now come to the realization that you have to showcase him then deal him. I know it was the off season but I’d have liked to see them tell him the same thing - we’ll start the season on the top line and try and deal you. Bringing on a worse contract to solve the character issue and bad contract, was a terrible move where I estimate about 6% of your cap is tied up in. On top of that they feel the need to play the guy when generally he’s a hindrance. Anyway, it’s a cap discussion so I’ll leave it at that.

At this point though Lucic has proven to be a more effective player than Neal. You can't gift a guy who isn't putting forth any effort, like Neal was, and seemingly causing issues in the room top line minutes. You simply can't. You are trying to win games.
Every second that Neal is on the ice, he lowers the chance you win.

[GioforPM]

Wasn’t it the case that when a long view of Lucic’s possession stats, he’s overpaid sure, but generally a positive on the ice? I seem to recall that. Not sure about this year, but wasn’t he decent in that regard both here and in Edmonton?

[Bingo]

Positive xGF% in 8 of his last 11 seasons, and 49% in the years he wasn't.