2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Chonger]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I have no idea what you just said there. It's either because English is not my first language, or because I'm getting too old to understand that dielect. I'd be greatful if you could clarify what you meant.



If I understood you right, though I suggest you take a day away from CP. You won't be convincing anyone of anything, especially when you're angry. Such posts only take away from arguments you have made previously.

This team is not good enough to ever compete for a Stanley cup. Disagree with reality aĺl you want

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Bongsong]

Really people

[AustinL_NHL]

Always fun seeing opinions pounded down everyone's throats as cold hard facts

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Chonger

Swap out my "fact" for reality or common sense and the answer is the same. "Fact" you are not capable of understanding what this team really is.

The reality is that nobody can say what the Flames would have done in the 2023 playoffs, because nobody will ever see it. Common sense says that it is foolish to pretend to be certain about it.

Fact is, I said absolutely nothing about ‘what this team really is’, but stepped in because it bothers me when know-nothing blowhards blather about ‘facts’ when they are talking about anything and everything except the facts.

But since I'm here now, let's have some facts: Last year's Flames missed the playoffs by three points. The team had a save percentage in all situations of .890. The league average was .899. The Flames gave up 2,240 shots on goal, third fewest in the league, but 247 goals against, which was 13th fewest. They were 19th in goals for, with 258.

Beyond this, we go into the realm of interpretation of data. A team that faced 2,240 shots against, and received .899 goaltending, would have given up 226 goals against.

A number of years ago, Kevin J. Dayaratna and Steven J. Miller did a study comparing NHL regular-season standings with the predictions of the ‘Pythagorean expectation’ model that has proved highly accurate in baseball. They concluded:

Our results provide statistical justification for applying the Pythagorean Won-Loss formula to hockey. We estimate γ via maximum likelihood estimation to be slightly above 2. Our tests of statistical independence and goodness of fit are quite strong, illustrating that the Pythagorean Won-Loss formula is just as applicable to hockey as it is to baseball.

Let us round off γ to 2 (because they did not give a precise optimum value), and apply the formula:

WP ≈ (GF^γ)/(GF^γ+GA^γ)

For the Flames' actual GF and GA, we get this result:

WP ≈ (258^2)/(258^2+247^2) ≈ 0.522

In baseball there are no loser points, and the average WP is 0.500 exactly. The average WP in the NHL last year was 0.558. No team in either system can have a WP greater than 1.000, so that represents an upper limit.

To adjust for loser points, we note that the Flames' 0.522 was 4.4% of the way from 0.500 to the upper limit. We therefore calculate that the Pythagorean expectation would put the Flames 4.4% of the way from 0.558 (the ‘real 0.500’ of the NHL) to the upper limit. This gives us an expected winning percentage of 0.577. (The team's actual WP was 0.567. They did poorly, given their GF to GA ratio. Their bad performance in 3-on-3 OT and the shootout more than accounts for the difference.)

Let's run the formula again with 226 GA:

WP ≈ (258^2)/(258^2+226^2) ≈ 0.566

Adjusted for loser points in the same way, we get an expected winning percentage of 0.623. If the team underperformed that number by 0.010, as the actual team did, it would have a winning percentage of 0.613, which rounds off to 101 points – good enough for the first wild card spot in the West.

Now, it may be that some of the poor goaltending numbers resulted from coaching decisions, since both goalies suffered compared to the previous year. But that coach is gone now. Here we go back into straight facts again:

For this year's Flames to have league-average goaltending, they need one of these things to happen:

a) Markstrom recovers, not to his Vezina-nominee numbers, but to the .909 that he averaged over his three seasons in Calgary.
b) Vladar recovers from .894 to the .906 that he recorded his first year in Calgary, and takes over the starter's job.
c) Wolf comes in and plays regularly with a save percentage of .905 or better.
d) Huska adjusts the system to give up fewer breakaways and other ten-bell scoring chances against.
e) Some combination of the above.

Any one of those would be sufficient, and it seems to me that the chances of at least one happening are pretty good. That alone would make the Flames (on expectation) eight points better in the standings than last year.

Now, the team did lose its highest scorer in Toffoli; but it also lost several players who were performing below replacement level, most notably Lucic (who was played for far too many minutes, including his time on the second line). Sharangovich is not as good offensively as Toffoli, but the team has about half a dozen young players who stand to be much better than Lucic. Also, Kylington is back. The overall talent level doesn't look much different. (Of course future trades may change that, but we can't be expected to predict those.)

Conclusion: Middle-of-the-pack goaltending would be enough to give this team about 100 points and a playoff berth. It would also help if they didn't piss away several points by not practising OT/SO. This is not a great team, and not an obvious contender, but it is far from being ‘garbage’ and appears likely to improve over last year's performance.

That's the sort of answer you get when you start from real facts, and not from ‘This team sucks because I say so and everyone who disagrees is stupid’.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The reality is that nobody can say what the Flames would have done in the 2023 playoffs, because nobody will ever see it. Common sense says that it is foolish to pretend to be certain about it.

Fact is, I said absolutely nothing about ‘what this team really is’, but stepped in because it bothers me when know-nothing blowhards blather about ‘facts’ when they are talking about anything and everything except the facts.

But since I'm here now, let's have some facts: Last year's Flames missed the playoffs by three points. The team had a save percentage in all situations of .890. The league average was .899. The Flames gave up 2,240 shots on goal, third fewest in the league, but 247 goals against, which was 13th fewest. They were 19th in goals for, with 258.

Beyond this, we go into the realm of interpretation of data. A team that faced 2,240 shots against, and received .899 goaltending, would have given up 226 goals against.

A number of years ago, Kevin J. Dayaratna and Steven J. Miller did a study comparing NHL regular-season standings with the predictions of the ‘Pythagorean expectation’ model that has proved highly accurate in baseball. They concluded:



Let us round off γ to 2 (because they did not give a precise optimum value), and apply the formula:

For the Flames' actual GF and GA, we get this result:

In baseball there are no loser points, and the average WP is 0.500 exactly. The average WP in the NHL last year was 0.558. No team in either system can have a WP greater than 1.000, so that represents an upper limit.

To adjust for loser points, we note that the Flames' 0.522 was 4.4% of the way from 0.500 to the upper limit. We therefore calculate that the Pythagorean expectation would put the Flames 4.4% of the way from 0.558 (the ‘real 0.500’ of the NHL) to the upper limit. This gives us an expected winning percentage of 0.577. (The team's actual WP was 0.567. They did poorly, given their GF to GA ratio. Their bad performance in 3-on-3 OT and the shootout more than accounts for the difference.)

Let's run the formula again with 226 GA:

Adjusted for loser points in the same way, we get an expected winning percentage of 0.623. If the team underperformed that number by 0.010, as the actual team did, it would have a winning percentage of 0.613, which rounds off to 101 points – good enough for the first wild card spot in the West.

Now, it may be that some of the poor goaltending numbers resulted from coaching decisions, since both goalies suffered compared to the previous year. But that coach is gone now. Here we go back into straight facts again:

For this year's Flames to have league-average goaltending, they need one of these things to happen:

a) Markstrom recovers, not to his Vezina-nominee numbers, but to the .909 that he averaged over his three seasons in Calgary.
b) Vladar recovers from .894 to the .906 that he recorded his first year in Calgary, and takes over the starter's job.
c) Wolf comes in and plays regularly with a save percentage of .905 or better.
d) Huska adjusts the system to give up fewer breakaways and other ten-bell scoring chances against.
e) Some combination of the above.

Any one of those would be sufficient, and it seems to me that the chances of at least one happening are pretty good. That alone would make the Flames (on expectation) eight points better in the standings than last year.

Now, the team did lose its highest scorer in Toffoli; but it also lost several players who were performing below replacement level, most notably Lucic (who was played for far too many minutes, including his time on the second line). Sharangovich is not as good offensively as Toffoli, but the team has about half a dozen young players who stand to be much better than Lucic. Also, Kylington is back. The overall talent level doesn't look much different. (Of course future trades may change that, but we can't be expected to predict those.)

Conclusion: Middle-of-the-pack goaltending would be enough to give this team about 100 points and a playoff berth. It would also help if they didn't piss away several points by not practising OT/SO. This is not a great team, and not an obvious contender, but it is far from being ‘garbage’ and appears likely to improve over last year's performance.

That's the sort of answer you get when you start from real facts, and not from ‘This team sucks because I say so and everyone who disagrees is stupid’.

Nice post.

The eye test tells us that with even a reasonable improvement in goaltending, this teams should be a playoff team.

The biggest challenge will occur if some of the better UFA’s are moved.

[Freeway]

With the only aspect of their game consistently performing well being their penalty kill, the Flames still managed to only miss the playoffs by three points. And that's with, again, everything but their PK actively fighting it for big chunks of the season and historically bad 5v5 save and shooting percentages.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The reality is that nobody can say what the Flames would have done in the 2023 playoffs, because nobody will ever see it. Common sense says that it is foolish to pretend to be certain about it.

Fact is, I said absolutely nothing about ‘what this team really is’, but stepped in because it bothers me when know-nothing blowhards blather about ‘facts’ when they are talking about anything and everything except the facts.

But since I'm here now, let's have some facts: Last year's Flames missed the playoffs by three points. The team had a save percentage in all situations of .890. The league average was .899. The Flames gave up 2,240 shots on goal, third fewest in the league, but 247 goals against, which was 13th fewest. They were 19th in goals for, with 258.

Beyond this, we go into the realm of interpretation of data. A team that faced 2,240 shots against, and received .899 goaltending, would have given up 226 goals against.

A number of years ago, Kevin J. Dayaratna and Steven J. Miller did a study comparing NHL regular-season standings with the predictions of the ‘Pythagorean expectation’ model that has proved highly accurate in baseball. They concluded:



Let us round off γ to 2 (because they did not give a precise optimum value), and apply the formula:

For the Flames' actual GF and GA, we get this result:

In baseball there are no loser points, and the average WP is 0.500 exactly. The average WP in the NHL last year was 0.558. No team in either system can have a WP greater than 1.000, so that represents an upper limit.

To adjust for loser points, we note that the Flames' 0.522 was 4.4% of the way from 0.500 to the upper limit. We therefore calculate that the Pythagorean expectation would put the Flames 4.4% of the way from 0.558 (the ‘real 0.500’ of the NHL) to the upper limit. This gives us an expected winning percentage of 0.577. (The team's actual WP was 0.567. They did poorly, given their GF to GA ratio. Their bad performance in 3-on-3 OT and the shootout more than accounts for the difference.)

Let's run the formula again with 226 GA:

Adjusted for loser points in the same way, we get an expected winning percentage of 0.623. If the team underperformed that number by 0.010, as the actual team did, it would have a winning percentage of 0.613, which rounds off to 101 points – good enough for the first wild card spot in the West.

Now, it may be that some of the poor goaltending numbers resulted from coaching decisions, since both goalies suffered compared to the previous year. But that coach is gone now. Here we go back into straight facts again:

For this year's Flames to have league-average goaltending, they need one of these things to happen:

a) Markstrom recovers, not to his Vezina-nominee numbers, but to the .909 that he averaged over his three seasons in Calgary.
b) Vladar recovers from .894 to the .906 that he recorded his first year in Calgary, and takes over the starter's job.
c) Wolf comes in and plays regularly with a save percentage of .905 or better.
d) Huska adjusts the system to give up fewer breakaways and other ten-bell scoring chances against.
e) Some combination of the above.

Any one of those would be sufficient, and it seems to me that the chances of at least one happening are pretty good. That alone would make the Flames (on expectation) eight points better in the standings than last year.

Now, the team did lose its highest scorer in Toffoli; but it also lost several players who were performing below replacement level, most notably Lucic (who was played for far too many minutes, including his time on the second line). Sharangovich is not as good offensively as Toffoli, but the team has about half a dozen young players who stand to be much better than Lucic. Also, Kylington is back. The overall talent level doesn't look much different. (Of course future trades may change that, but we can't be expected to predict those.)

Conclusion: Middle-of-the-pack goaltending would be enough to give this team about 100 points and a playoff berth. It would also help if they didn't piss away several points by not practising OT/SO. This is not a great team, and not an obvious contender, but it is far from being ‘garbage’ and appears likely to improve over last year's performance.

That's the sort of answer you get when you start from real facts, and not from ‘This team sucks because I say so and everyone who disagrees is stupid’.

Where’s the ‘stop, stop, he’s already dead’ gif?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

You're making it like the following argument: "You can't completely rule this out; therefore, it must be true". You're also calling another opinion smug, which seems smug in itself(pot calling cattle black I know).

Let's make it about odds instead of absolutes then. What odds would you want in order to place a bet on the Flames making it to the cup final this season? Would it be 1:5? 1:10? 1:16? 1:20? 1:32? Lower than that? I'm asking you because I would feel pretty confident even at 1:32 odds betting against them. If odds are hard to gauge, then how about a simple question of how many playoff rounds do you expect the Flames to win in the next 5 years? My money is on 2 or less.

Obviously there is a chance the Flames win the cup this season, but it would be a pleasant surprise. However, I don't see too many people in the organization or on the outside thinking this is the year. I'm still going to enjoy the hockey, but I won't be getting my hopes up until this team proves me wrong.

-----

In the Vegas argument you're also forgetting that they got Stone right before the playoffs, effectively circumventing the cap the way Tampa did with Kucherov. That gave them a huge boost at the right time. They had a $96.5M cap last year. MTL was a true surprise, but they fell apart in the finals just as quickly. You also convinemtly forget that Tampa made the finals 3 times in the last 4 years, and that Colorado was a favorite to win last year.

No, I’m making the argument that “no hope” is incorrect. And in my Vegas argument, their first year they never had Stone, and last year the’d had him for a few years.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Chonger

This team is not good enough to ever compete for a Stanley cup. Disagree with reality aĺl you want

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

The same thing Blues fans said when they won. Same with LA. You are not a prophet, stop pretending you are.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The same thing Blues fans said when they won. Same with LA. You are not a prophet, stop pretending you are.

LA was on a decidedly different trajectory. They had been building, and were a younger team loaded with Olympic/star quality players.

Justin Williams, Marian Gaborik, Dustin Brown, Jeff Carter, Drew Doughty, Mike Richards, Anze Kopitar, Jonathan Quick, then supported by Jake Muzzin, Alec Martinez, Slava Voynov, and Tyler Toffoli. I think we forget that the Kings were no mistake. They were a young team breaking out, and were built to do so (and they had to make a coaching change to have it go that way). The Flames don't have anywhere near that type of roster at that point of their careers.

But yeah...the Blues are closer to what the Flames are within arms reach of. Binnington exploding the way he did was effectively Kiprusoff exploding onto the scene though, so for the Flames to fit this mould Jacob Markstrom is 100% the most important cog in the machine (or not to be silly with hope, Wolf...).

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

DeBrusk is younger, but Backlund is the better player, and plays a more important, two-way game. And while DeBrusk is a little cheaper this year, he will be looking for a big raise.

Almost ten years younger. Backlund will be 35 when his new contract kicks in, DeBrusk is turning 27 and looks primed for a goal scoring breakout.

[Chonger]

Looks like I got drunk and stirred some poo last night. Just want to apologize to anyone I offeneded or was rude to.
I hate the off season! As a fan ive never had less faith going into a season. So Im unhappy about it. But I didn't need to vent my frustration that way! Sorry!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by Chonger

Looks like I got drunk and stirred some poo last night. Just want to apologize to anyone I offeneded or was rude to.
I hate the off season! As a fan ive never had less faith going into a season. So Im unhappy about it. But I didn't need to vent my frustration that way! Sorry!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

While i get your frustration like a lot of people i think our prospects are being undervalued. Coronnato, Pelletier, Zary, Rucicka in my mind all have middle pairing skills. coronnato maybe even top six( opinion varies on Pelettier)

An injection of middle to top six talent could utterly change how the team looks. My worry is is in the trade process we limit the spaces available.

[The Original FFIV]

Save us Sec/Dis!

Hive of activity on Monday and now Steinberg says trade interest is low/weak.

Did all the talk from Monday die down or just die?

Is what you see what you get for training camp?

[Flames1217]

Originally Posted by Fan69

While i get your frustration like a lot of people i think our prospects are being undervalued. Coronnato, Pelletier, Zary, Rucicka in my mind all have middle pairing skills. coronnato maybe even top six( opinion varies on Pelettier)

An injection of middle to top six talent could utterly change how the team looks. My worry is is in the trade process we limit the spaces available.

In my opinion both Honzek and Coronato have top 6 potential.

On defence Morin has the most potential but Poirier isn't far

Pelletier has key role player potential as a guy you can move all over the lineup and he will be very effective. Zary will likely turn into a solid third line centre. After this players get harder to gauge.

As for Rosey, If he ever figures out a way to work on his effort and consistency he could easily turn into a top 6 player. He has the size, the speed and all the tools. He could be a real X factor and turn into a very solid player but it is all on him. Whether he ends up being a centre or winger is also a key question.

[Heavy Jack]

Backlund 25% retained for Debrusk and a 3rd would be pretty solid asset retention IMO. For craps and giggles around the Elkund rumour (I know, I know) let’s say the Boston 3rd was attached to Hanifin 25% retained for Nylander (obviously other pieces would be required here to make this work).

Huberdeau - Lindholm - Nylander
Debrusk - Kadri - Sharangovich
Mangiapane - Dube - Coronato
Pelletier - Ruzicka - Coleman
Duehr

Weegar - Andersson
Kylington - Tanev
Oesterle - Zadorov
Gilbert

Not sure about cap implications here and I don’t like Duehr sitting but man I’m still dreaming about a first line like that.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

Backlund 25% retained for Debrusk and a 3rd would be pretty solid asset retention IMO. For craps and giggles around the Elkund rumour (I know, I know) let’s say the Boston 3rd was attached to Hanifin 25% retained for Nylander (obviously other pieces would be required here to make this work).

Huberdeau - Lindholm - Nylander
Debrusk - Kadri - Sharangovich
Mangiapane - Dube - Coronato
Pelletier - Ruzicka - Coleman
Duehr

Weegar - Andersson
Kylington - Tanev
Oesterle - Zadorov
Gilbert

Not sure about cap implications here and I don’t like Duehr sitting but man I’m still dreaming about a first line like that.

Nylander is a game changer.

We lack a top line winger, and we really need one. Landing Nylander with the biggest subtraction being Hanifin, would be massive. I still hope we end up with Willy or Laf. Willy is a top talent, and I believe Laf can be a pretty dang good one.

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by Flames1217

In my opinion both Honzek and Coronato have top 6 potential.

On defence Morin has the most potential but Poirier isn't far

Pelletier has key role player potential as a guy you can move all over the lineup and he will be very effective. Zary will likely turn into a solid third line centre. After this players get harder to gauge.

As for Rosey, If he ever figures out a way to work on his effort and consistency he could easily turn into a top 6 player. He has the size, the speed and all the tools. He could be a real X factor and turn into a very solid player but it is all on him. Whether he ends up being a centre or winger is also a key question.

Agree on Honzek as well. Also agree on Rucicka, i have stated multiple times maybe the most frustrating of our young guys.

As far as trades go have to state again if another established player is traded for we really are only adding one more young player if Rosy and Pelts are already in the line up.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Almost ten years younger. Backlund will be 35 when his new contract kicks in, DeBrusk is turning 27 and looks primed for a goal scoring breakout.

Seven.

But he isn't as good of a player. And will cost more, after this season.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Seven.

But he isn't as good of a player. And will cost more, after this season.

But if Debrusk will sign an extension with us sooner rather than later, I’d take the player who will commit to be here vs the player who wants to see how things play out.