[News] Flames and Treliving agree to part ways. Maloney promoted to PoHO and interim GM

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Or you could make a trade for some schmuck that could fill the gap to be exposed. Take the two 2nds and lose a 7th. Better than getting sweet #### all.

I'd have to go back and look but with Giordano traded for futures you'd lose one of Kylington or Bennett.

Picking up another player to be exposed wouldn't have helped.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by TOfan

It has also been rumoured that the Flames like Keller. If Tkachuck had gone earlier, Keller may have been the next guy on their list.

I got it from a pretty connected source at the time that it was Tkachuk all the way.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Or you could make a trade for some schmuck that could fill the gap to be exposed. Take the two 2nds and lose a 7th. Better than getting sweet #### all.

That makes no sense.
They had a shmuck. Alex Petrovic (amongst others).
They had the quota filled.
But why would someone take that player instead of Kylington?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I got it from a pretty connected source at the time that it was Tkachuk all the way.

Right, what I’m saying if Tkachuck doesn’t get to 6, the Flames had interest in Keller.

….or at least that is what was discussed on a 32 Thoughts podcast a few years back.

[dustygoon]

I think it's more interesting that we protected Dube, left Bennett unprotected, and they chose Gio.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

I think it's more interesting that we protected Dube, left Bennett unprotected, and they chose Gio.

Bennett was already gone by the expansion draft was he not?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

That makes no sense.
They had a shmuck. Alex Petrovic (amongst others).
They had the quota filled.
But why would someone take that player instead of Kylington?

Work a side deal then. It's not like Kylington was on anyone's radar at that time. He was considered a failing prospect before the expansion draft, so there was no real incentive to take him other than a gamble. If you offered Seattle a 2nd or a 3rd to take Petrovic they probably would have bit hard on that. So move Giordano for two seconds, use one (or a lesser pick) to protect Kylington, and you still profit. You're still up a 2nd round pick which is more than we got for our troubles.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Or you could make a trade for some schmuck that could fill the gap to be exposed. Take the two 2nds and lose a 7th. Better than getting sweet #### all.

That is not how the expansion draft works. You only have so many players you can protect.

Trading for all the shmucks in the world doesn't help you in this case.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Bennett was already gone by the expansion draft was he not?

Yup.

I wondered at the time if it would have been better asset management to have kept Bennett just to use as expansion fodder, thereby being able to protect Gio (either to keep on the roster or trade for something better than what Bennett could get us at the time). I think Gio was worth more on the trade market and we needed the cap space as well. So if you were going to lose both anyway, that is the way I would have done it.

The return for Bennett was pretty inconsequential. The prospect ended up thrown in to the package to get Toffoli. I doubt it was the piece that got the deal done. Any lower tier prospect likely would have done it. The 2nd rounder we got, was coincidentally sent to the Krakken as part of the Jarnkrok trade. It basically ended up being Bennet for a few weeks of Jarnkrok and generously like 20% of acquiring Toffoli.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Bennett was already gone by the expansion draft was he not?

Oh ya. Man....i remember that so differently because of the talk of leaving Bennet unprotected which contributed to him being traded obviously. My bad.

[camm13]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yup.

I wondered at the time if it would have been better asset management to have kept Bennett just to use as expansion fodder, thereby being able to protect Gio (either to keep on the roster or trade for something better than what Bennett could get us at the time). I think Gio was worth more on the trade market and we needed the cap space as well. So if you were going to lose both anyway, that is the way I would have done it.

The main issue at the time was other teams trading for Gio before the draft would have also needed to protect him AND have the cap space for it. There were tons of chatter around here at the time going through other teams, and there wasn't really one that could do both. Lots of teams had their own players to protect.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is not how the expansion draft works. You only have so many players you can protect.

Trading for all the shmucks in the world doesn't help you in this case.

That's actually only partially right. You had so many slots you could protect, but you also had to have so many bodies to expose. Having a schmuck to expose and then offer a side deal with is better than losing a good player.

[dustygoon]

Also caught on 32 thoughts....EF heard that Flames aren't letting Treliving talk to potential landing spot teams until July 1st.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Work a side deal then. It's not like Kylington was on anyone's radar at that time. He was considered a failing prospect before the expansion draft, so there was no real incentive to take him other than a gamble. If you offered Seattle a 2nd or a 3rd to take Petrovic they probably would have bit hard on that. So move Giordano for two seconds, use one (or a lesser pick) to protect Kylington, and you still profit. You're still up a 2nd round pick which is more than we got for our troubles.

Got it. So we are now firmly in the world of make believe.
They may not have taken Kylington but the rest of the available players from the Flames would have been quite poor.

Forwards: Milan Lucic, Derek Ryan, Josh Leivo, Matthew Phillips, Byron Froese, Glenn Gawdin, Zac Rinaldo, Justin Kirkland, Brett Ritchie, Buddy Robinson and Dominik Simon
Defensemen: Mark Giordano, Michael Stone, Oliver Kylington, Nikita Nesterov and Alex Petrovic
Goaltenders: Tyler Parsons and Louis Domingue

So I guess yes that could have worked if:
- The Flames could have found a taker for Gio at 2 seconds
- The Flames could have convinced Seattle to take a chump over Kylington in exchange for a 2nd.

Given all that, seems like this is far down the list of thing BT did wrong.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yup.

I wondered at the time if it would have been better asset management to have kept Bennett just to use as expansion fodder, thereby being able to protect Gio (either to keep on the roster or trade for something better than what Bennett could get us at the time). I think Gio was worth more on the trade market and we needed the cap space as well. So if you were going to lose both anyway, that is the way I would have done it.

The return for Bennett was pretty inconsequential. The prospect ended up thrown in to the package to get Toffoli. I doubt it was the piece that got the deal done. Any lower tier prospect likely would have done it. The 2nd rounder we got, was coincidentally sent to the Krakken as part of the Jarnkrok trade. It basically ended up being Bennet for a few weeks of Jarnkrok and generously like 20% of acquiring Toffoli.

The return for Sam was fine. The equivalent of two 2nds which at the time, some very vocal posters stated that they wouldn't be able to get a 2nd, and that the most was a single 3rd.

What they did with those acquired assets can be challenged more. But the trade itself seemed like a decent return.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Also caught on 32 thoughts....EF heard that Flames aren't letting Treliving talk to potential landing spot teams until July 1st.

Did they say someone actually asked permission?

He shouldn't be allowed to approach other teams until his contract expires, or at least until after the draft.

If a team wants to ask for permission, it should come with some heavy stipulations and compensation if they do hire him. When the Flames hired Craig Button away from the Stars, I remember that he was not allowed to participate in the early rounds of the draft because he had all the Stars inside knowledge.

I thought he was taking time off anyway.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

That's actually only partially right. You had so many slots you could protect, but you also had to have so many bodies to expose. Having a schmuck to expose and then offer a side deal with is better than losing a good player.

You’re not getting it. The Flames had all the required players exposed.

If you want to trade then something to not pick Giordano, fine. That’s going to cost you far more than a shmuck.

[Yamer]

If I recall, didn't the Flames sign goalie Tom McCullom in 2017 for the express purpose of being able to expose him in the Vegas draft? I suppose that was because they didn't reach the required field of available players, so not really comparable to the Seattle draft.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Yamer

If I recall, didn't the Flames sign goalie Tom McCullom in 2017 for the express purpose of being able to expose him in the Vegas draft? I suppose that was because they didn't reach the required field of available players, so not really comparable to the Seattle draft.

That had to do with the Flames needing to expose a goaltender, specifically.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Yamer

If I recall, didn't the Flames sign goalie Tom McCullom in 2017 for the express purpose of being able to expose him in the Vegas draft? I suppose that was because they didn't reach the required field of available players, so not really comparable to the Seattle draft.

Exactly. That didn’t help them protect anyone.