2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[Roof-Daddy]

I know they say to be careful what you wish for, but there is not a player on this Flames roster that is a "must keep" in my mind. Two more weeks and we get the expansion draft, followed by the entry draft and then free agency.

Personally I cannot wait to see what I hope will be some very large changes to this roster, and after what feels like an eternity, we are hopefully very close now to seeing those much needed changes.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

Hanifin is one of the only Flames that I thought lived up to expectations last year I think the forward coming back for him would have to be significant

Which then creates another protection issue. Risk losing Giordano and move on. The team is not getting better with Giordano as a protected asset.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I know they say to be careful what you wish for, but there is not a player on this Flames roster that is a "must keep" in my mind. Two more weeks and we get the expansion draft, followed by the entry draft and then free agency.

Personally I cannot wait to see what I hope will be some very large changes to this roster, and after what feels like an eternity, we are hopefully very close now to seeing those much needed changes.

I agree. I can’t wait to talk about what happened not what everyone thinks we should do. IMO if I was running this team factoring in contracts , where the team is at overall and the lack of elite talent anyone and everyone could be on the block for the right price. Lindholm probably ranks as the least likely player I would trade. After that I’m ok to see anyone else move if I like the return

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

The only way they should be coughing up an asset to protect Giordano is if that asset leads to Seattle taking a bad contract off their hands. A 2022 2nd should have them take either Lucic or Backlund with their pick.

I just think from an asset equation it works out.

You should be able to get at least a 2nd for Gio at the trade deadline, and if you’re looking to make the playoffs this season it’s going to cost you more than a 2nd to replace what Gio brings on the blueline.

Not my preferred outcome either, but I think that’s the most likely outcome here. If Seattle is willing to do that for only a 3rd then great, but my gut is it will cost the 2nd and that Treliving will do that.

It’s costing at least a first to get them to take Lucic and I wouldn’t want any part of that. And if Seattle is asking for more than a second to not take Gio then you just let him go.

[DSIM420]

I think Seattle signs Derek Ryan as he is from Spokane, and taking Giordano or Lucic helps us out by freeing up a bunch of cap space. Why would Seattle want to help out a division rival. I think we would have to give up a pick for them to take Giordano or Lucic IMO.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DSIM420

I think Seattle signs Derek Ryan as he is from Spokane, and taking Giordano or Lucic helps us out by freeing up a bunch of cap space. Why would Seattle want to help out a division rival. I think we would have to give up a pick for them to take Giordano or Lucic IMO.

There is no way you have to pay them to take Gio because of his TDL value. You have to pay them not to, in fact. You have to pay them to take Lucic - probably a high pick or a good player.

They can sign Ryan as a UFA anyway, if he wants to go there. They don’t have to use an expansion pick.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by DSIM420

I think Seattle signs Derek Ryan as he is from Spokane, and taking Giordano or Lucic helps us out by freeing up a bunch of cap space. Why would Seattle want to help out a division rival. I think we would have to give up a pick for them to take Giordano or Lucic IMO.

Agreed. I think its fanciful that some think gio would easily be selected if left available.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Agreed. I think its fanciful that some think gio would easily be selected if left available.

I think it’s 50-50 that he gets taken if he’s exposed. The main reason Seattle takes him is as a “name” to start the season who is also a leader and a decent trade asset at the deadline. But he’s not cheap (considering how much cash they’ve had to put out already) and there may be better options for them that meet those categories.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Agreed. I think its fanciful that some think gio would easily be selected if left available.

If Gio is there he will be taken unless there is a side deal

[GioforPM]

If Seattle wants a first to not take Gio I say no. If they want a third I say yes. If they want a second, it’s a tough decision. All because I think Gio’s value at the TDL is a first or maybe a second+ (but from a contender so late first or second). Look at what TBL paid for Savard.

Of course the gamble is that Gio maintains his play from the coaching change onward, which was easily top 4 quality.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by dino7c

If Gio is there he will be taken unless there is a side deal

Good. Let him go and move on. Keep your known assets and get better with the cap space available.

[Cantrader]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Good. Let him go and move on. Keep your known assets and get better with the cap space available.

That is one way to change the leadership and cap space.

[Toonage]

Gio's play in the back half of the season was good. My concern is that when the pressure is on, Gio performs with all the grace and skill of a teen hopped up on Monster energy.

Sorry.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I just think from an asset equation it works out.

You should be able to get at least a 2nd for Gio at the trade deadline, and if you’re looking to make the playoffs this season it’s going to cost you more than a 2nd to replace what Gio brings on the blueline.

Not my preferred outcome either, but I think that’s the most likely outcome here. If Seattle is willing to do that for only a 3rd then great, but my gut is it will cost the 2nd and that Treliving will do that.

It’s costing at least a first to get them to take Lucic and I wouldn’t want any part of that. And if Seattle is asking for more than a second to not take Gio then you just let him go.

Like I said before, if BT spends a second round pick to protect a declining old D man with one year left at an almost $7M cap hit he should be fired immediately. That is inexcusable bad asset management.

[Scroopy Noopers]

“Should be able to get a second” should be all you need to hear to realize that we should just straight up accept that we’re losing Giordano or Kylington.

If someone told me the most we’d lose is the equivalent of a 2nd round pick in the expansion draft, I’d call that a win. Accept that a player is going; and only one. No other assets. No trades to avoid a particular expansion scenario.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Like I said before, if BT spends a second round pick to protect a declining old D man with one year left at an almost $7M cap hit he should be fired immediately. That is inexcusable bad asset management.

Matt is arguing that if Gio returns more than a 2nd at the deadline, the cost is worth it. That's a fair assessment.

[SuperMatt18]

And considering David Savard returned a first this year then I think it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that Gio could get you at least a 2nd next year, and maybe even a 1st.

Once he was separated from Andersson he looked good this year, and was good the second half of the season.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Agreed. I think its fanciful that some think gio would easily be selected if left available.

I think it is funny that some people think Seattle will sign a UFA who is 50-50 to stay in the league instead of taking the proven top 4 Dman who has a single year left on his deal.

Gio @ 50% retained will guaranteed return more assets in a deal for Seattle than Derek Ryan will.

The fact Gio comes with just the single year left has me thinking he is truly the only target that makes sense unless Francis thinks there is really something there in Phillips or Kylington.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Matt is arguing that if Gio returns more than a 2nd at the deadline, the cost is worth it. That's a fair assessment.

But it's not. We'll use next draft as an example, but with the same result for the Flames (picking 12th). So we trade the 44th pick in this draft for Giordano to not get picked. We sit on him for a year and hope we can get a 1st out of him at the deadline if he performs, which is a complete unknown. If Giordano has another year like this past one, he may only get you a 2nd or 3rd, or maybe a combination of lesser picks from a contender. That means likely a pick in the 25-32 range at best, or 57th or later if he doesn't perform. While we may pickup 12-19 spots in the draft, for having the honor of having $6.75M count against our cap. Are those spots worth $6.75M? What happens if Gio continues his trip down Old Man river and we only get a 2nd at the deadline? We would actually have dropped 13 or more spots, just to protect an aging player. There is risk associated with giving up assets to protect that 38 year old player. Understand both sides of the risk. Personally, I don't see there being any way the Flames should expend assets to protect a player. Expend assets to guarantee a negative asset leaves town, sure. But do NOT spend resources on keeping a player that may be about to fall off the proverbial cliff.

[Erick Estrada]

Will the Kraken not have the first shot at waiver wire at the start of the season? Why wouldn't they just take Kylington then?