2022/2023 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

So, after trading them all to get the draft picks and opening up cap space, then go out and sign some over price past their prime vets in FA?

You sign guys for 1-2 year deals.

[keratosis]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

You sign guys for 1-2 year deals.

And if they don't want to, then what?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

If you're trading Hanifin just for the sake of it or a late 1st/B prospect, that's awful asset management. He's young enough that you can sign him long-term and trade him later.

H Lindholm got the Ducks a late 1st and two 2nds (and a prospect trending towards bust). I don’t think Hanifin is quite as well regarded as H Lindholm was at the time, but that’s a decent comparable.

Here’s the sort of deal I think we’d be looking at:

To CBJ: Noah Hanifin

To CAL: Alexander Texier, Stanislav Svozil, 2023 2nd round pick.

Texier was on a 20g, 45 pt pace when he broke his hand in 2021-22. He has decent size, he’s fast, he can centre a third line (handy if Backlund is dealt) or play wing in the top six, and he kills penalties. He did have a season off from the NHL, but he played professionally in Switzerland, so he shouldn’t be too rusty. And he makes $1.5 mil next season, before reaching RFA in 2024-24.

Svozil would immediately become the Flames best D prospect. He can skate and make plays, and at 20 he’s close to being NHL-ready. Fills a big need in the system

The 2nd round pick is at the top of the round (34 OA).

The Flames could probably get CBJs second 1st round pick (22nd OA), but it would be the centrepiece of the deal, and the Flames don’t want to take a step back. Texier gives them something useful in the present, along with the futures.

[1qqaaz]

I just can't see Columbus giving up such a large haul for a pending UFA who probably won re-sign.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

I just can't see Columbus giving up such a large haul for a pending UFA who probably won re-sign.

Yeah, a deal like that would be contingent on Hanifin signing an extension. But they are highly motivated to get a minute-eating D this offseason. So they’d probably open the bank.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I totally disagree with lumping Lindholm in with those other players. He is 28 and will continue to be an effective two way point producer for another 7-8 years. How has 37 year old Patrice Bergeron looked the last couple of years? Lindholm is a guy you absolutely lock up long term if you can.

Following up on this, on the 32 Thoughts podcast Friedman thought he'd be getting around $8M x 8 years. Easy decision - walk. This team has enough older guys locked up. Flexibility is key, and signing an aging player that long, when he wouldn't be a franchise player is just wrong with so many GMs.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by keratosis

And if they don't want to, then what?

You sign guys who are only getting theses types of deals. You are already rebuilding, so sign guys you can potentially trade at the deadline.

[Monahammer]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...xis-lafreniere

Haha I would easily do toffoli for lafreniere. Don't think the rangers would.

[Lanny_McDonald]

To me, this is all asset management. You have to ask yourself if the player is replaceable from within the system or if their value is at such a point you’re getting maximum value. With that in mind I would make these decisions.

1) Backlund - TRADE --> Connor Zary is a replacement for Backlund and he is close to making the jump. Makes Backlund expendable and he is coming off a year that should means his value will never get better.

2) Lindholm - KEEP --> We have nothing in the system to replace him and he’s a number one center which Kadri is not. Lindholm, Kadri, Zary, and Schwindt should provide solid depth down the middle for the next few years while we draft and develop another center or three.

3) Toffoli - KEEP --> You have to sit on him until we find another scoring winger somewhere in the organization. If it were possible to snag another someplace for cheap, you move him while his value is at a peak. But I don’t see another scoring winger available for what Toffoli is being paid.

4) Hanifin - KEEP --> Another player we just don’t have a replacement for in the system. He can eat up the minutes and play the game anyway the coach demands. His flexibility makes him a tough player to trade away.

5) Tanev - TRADE --> Players not in the long term plan need to traded before they hit free agency. Taney is not in the long term plans. Time to move on. Might have a replacement in the minors in one of the Russian kids.

6) Kylington - TRADE --> Poirier can replace him IMO. His trade value is probably low, so he may have to start the year with the club to show he can still play. Once he re-establishes that fact, move him.

7) Zadorov - 50/50 --> Need to get a commitment out of him and signed to a decent deal. Can’t get that done, ship him out for the best return possible. It would be nice to have him work with the Russian kids and help bring them along, but it has to be at the right price.

8) Markstrom - TRADE —> Find a suitor and get what you can. We need the cap space and I don’t think he’s bouncing back. Would like to be wrong here, but he’s gone full Tommy Salo. It’s a gamble going with Vladar and Wolf, but so is sitting on a $6 million salary hoping he gets his head right.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...xis-lafreniere

Haha I would easily do toffoli for lafreniere. Don't think the rangers would.

I wouldn't bother. Lafrieniere doesn't have much going for him...if anything his upside these days seems to be Toffoli. I'm sure teams would line up for him given he was #1, but he doesn't have the speed or sense or skill for today's game, and when any guy goes this long without developing, I'm skeptical of him reaching his potential.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by bluejays

Following up on this, on the 32 Thoughts podcast Friedman thought he'd be getting around $8M x 8 years. Easy decision - walk. This team has enough older guys locked up. Flexibility is key, and signing an aging player that long, when he wouldn't be a franchise player is just wrong with so many GMs.

Again, the comparable is Patrice Bergeron. How has that worked out for Boston? With the cap rising significantly in the next few years if you can get Lindholm at 8x8 you do that all day long because he will still a very effective guy at 36-37 years old.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Again, the comparable is Patrice Bergeron. How has that worked out for Boston? With the cap rising significantly in the next few years if you can get Lindholm at 8x8 you do that all day long because he will still a very effective guy at 36-37 years old.

Completely disagree. Bergeron is better, but was always a crap shoot to limp his way there the past few years with concussion issues. The Bruins have had stable prospects coming up in the past few years as well (Pasternak, McAvoy come to mind specifically). This current Flames iteration has too many guys who will be locked into high priced senior contracts when they're over the age of 30. It's going to happen very soon as well. Why complicate things. He may get away, but this team can't take chances on yet another anchor over 30. In 3 or 4 years this team will regret it. Already they may be based on Kadri, Coleman, Huberdeau, and Markstrom. What happens when one of the emerging players need to be signed to a good contract at a young age and you have your money tied up in these guys? I think it's a terrible decision. Boston wasn't in the same situation as us.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Again, the comparable is Patrice Bergeron. How has that worked out for Boston? With the cap rising significantly in the next few years if you can get Lindholm at 8x8 you do that all day long because he will still a very effective guy at 36-37 years old.

If they are comparable, I guess Lindolm has a lot of catching up to do with Bergeron over the next 9 years. How many Selkes and Cups is he behind?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...xis-lafreniere

Haha I would easily do toffoli for lafreniere. Don't think the rangers would.

They would be trading him to save cap, so that doesn’t work.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Again, the comparable is Patrice Bergeron. How has that worked out for Boston? With the cap rising significantly in the next few years if you can get Lindholm at 8x8 you do that all day long because he will still a very effective guy at 36-37 years old.

Lindholm is a very good player, but he really doesn’t belong in the same conversation as a Bergeron.

[bluejays]

I can see the comparison given they're two way players who can score via just solid simple play vs. skill or size or speed, but expecting any player over say, 32, to be good past that age is a hope and a dream. Very very few are lucky, yes, lucky, enough to live up to expectations as they start approaching 35.

[Samonadreau]

The problem with Lindholm is theres no way he wants to aign this summer after the season he just had. And therein lies the problem for the Flames, they would need to sign him this summer... hence having to overpay a bit.

[Vinny01]

Portzline is smoking something but says if Lindholm was willing to sign an extension in a Columbus the Flames only need to add a 2023 2nd to Lindy in order to acquire the 3rd overall pick. For context this is an article Julien Mackenzie wrote which is a mailbag. A fan asked about moving Lindy for the 3rd pick and what the add would be and Portzline:

“ In order to say what the “+” needs to be worth, we’d first have to establish how the players mentioned in the trade compare. Certainly, with the No. 3 pick, there’s some uncertainty, even though this is regarded as a strong draft through the top four or five picks. But there’d be uncertainty for the club acquiring Lindholm, too, because he’s an unrestricted free agent after next season. He’s eligible to sign an extension, and that would be absolutely key for Columbus. If he’s not willing to sign an extension, I don’t think the Blue Jackets would trade the No. 3 pick straight up for Lindholm. In fact, I know they wouldn’t. If he does sign an extension, it’s a trade the Blue Jackets could get pretty excited about, as Lindholm is not only in his prime (28) but has shown previous success with Gaudreau. We’ve seen their chemistry. It’s pretty impressive. So, if Lindholm were to sign an extension, I don’t think the “+” would have to be that massive. Lindholm (with a multi-year extension) and a 2023 second-round pick for the No. 3? — Portzline”

https://theathletic.com/4529070/2023...shared_article

[FlamesAddiction]

Lindholm and Stuff for Kakko and Laf.

If the Ranger think they are in a window, maybe they do it.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Portzline is smoking something but says if Lindholm was willing to sign an extension in a Columbus the Flames only need to add a 2023 2nd to Lindy in order to acquire the 3rd overall pick. For context this is an article Julien Mackenzie wrote which is a mailbag. A fan asked about moving Lindy for the 3rd pick and what the add would be and Portzline:

“ In order to say what the “+” needs to be worth, we’d first have to establish how the players mentioned in the trade compare. Certainly, with the No. 3 pick, there’s some uncertainty, even though this is regarded as a strong draft through the top four or five picks. But there’d be uncertainty for the club acquiring Lindholm, too, because he’s an unrestricted free agent after next season. He’s eligible to sign an extension, and that would be absolutely key for Columbus. If he’s not willing to sign an extension, I don’t think the Blue Jackets would trade the No. 3 pick straight up for Lindholm. In fact, I know they wouldn’t. If he does sign an extension, it’s a trade the Blue Jackets could get pretty excited about, as Lindholm is not only in his prime (28) but has shown previous success with Gaudreau. We’ve seen their chemistry. It’s pretty impressive. So, if Lindholm were to sign an extension, I don’t think the “+” would have to be that massive. Lindholm (with a multi-year extension) and a 2023 second-round pick for the No. 3? — Portzline”

https://theathletic.com/4529070/2023...shared_article

That is absolutely bonkers and I love it. Let's go Conny!