2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Spurs

He would be an example of what I am talking about. I think the vast majority, maybe every team outside of Arizona, didn't really think about him at all because they have their own versions.

I don't think so. If Arizona doesn't claim Valimaki someone else certainly would have. That was a blunder by Tre.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I don't think so. If Arizona doesn't claim Valimaki someone else certainly would have. That was a blunder by Tre.

I preferred to keep him as I liked him a lot more than Mackey especially, but I think a lot of teams have tweener guys like Valimaki (or in this case Ruzicka) and it is unlikely that they are taking a guy like that over the guy they already have.

[musth]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I don't think so. If Arizona doesn't claim Valimaki someone else certainly would have. That was a blunder by Tre.

Thought it'd been stated by Treliving that Arizona was only one to put in claim

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I don't think so. If Arizona doesn't claim Valimaki someone else certainly would have. That was a blunder by Tre.

I don’t think it was Treliving’s blunder alone. By more than one account Sutter all but ran the kid out of town.

It’s unusual for a GM to do that to a first round pick he made himself. Treliving, and hockey ops, probably thought he would get through waivers.

[Sandman]

While I hate the fact that we lost a first-rounder in Valimaki, I can still admit that he STUNK last year in the pre-season. He didn't even look like an NHL player, so he made it impossible for the coaches to keep him.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Sandman

While I hate the fact that we lost a first-rounder in Valimaki, I can still admit that he STUNK last year in the pre-season. He didn't even look like an NHL player, so he made it impossible for the coaches to keep him.

Disagree. The upside was always going to be better than Mackey. They should have had more patience with him. D men already take longer to develop, combine that with man games lost to injury and it was just a blunder.

[RedHawk12]

I don't think losing Valimaki matters that much at the end of the day. Young players with upside are available on waivers every year. Fans are just terrified of the idea of the one that got away and turn it into a huge deal. For Exhibit A, see the Matthew Phillips thread.

Ty Smith and Lassi Thomson are similar upside players. I'll bet a few more like them will be available before traning camp is done.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

I don't think losing Valimaki matters that much at the end of the day. Young players with upside are available on waivers every year. Fans are just terrified of the idea of the one that got away and turn it into a huge deal. For Exhibit A, see the Matthew Phillips thread.

Ty Smith and Lassi Thomson are similar upside players. I'll bet a few more like them will be available before traning camp is done.

Phillips is yet to be decided but Valimaki is coming off a 34 point season on a crappy Coyotes team. He is definitely one that got away.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

There most definitely aren't Valimakis available on waivers every year.

We might be overeating Phillips in the other thread but we're underrating Juuso here.

Just take the L. It sucks, but time to admit the misstep. A lot of that can be chalked up to his relationship with Sutter and Sutter's lack of patience or belief in the kid.

[PaperBagger'14]

It would have been real nice to get Valimaki some NHL games in with Kylingtons absence. That alone could have given Juuso enough time to prove he was a gamer.

[PepsiFree]

Losing Valimaki might be taking the “L” but it’s not like we didn’t give him a chance. He’s still played more NHL games for Calgary than Arizona and got progressively worse as time went on, resulting in a bad stint in the AHL and a horrible training camp.

That’s just facts. Valimaki is on Arizona because Valimaki played himself off the Flames and had to clear waivers and didn’t. There’s nothing else to write about it.

[SeanCharles]

I think the problem with Valimaki was he needed a confidence boost after everything he had been through to derail his progress.

Sutter’s approach was not conducive in providing that.

At the end of the day you don’t cut a young 1st round pick in favor of an undrafted college FA that is years older and only playing marginally better.

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

I think the problem with Valimaki was he needed a confidence boost after everything he had been through to derail his progress.

Sutter’s approach was not conducive in providing that.

At the end of the day you don’t cut a young 1st round pick in favor of an undrafted college FA that is years older and only playing marginally better.

By that logic, you shouldn't have cut Matt Pelech in favour of Mark Giordano.

Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.

[Redrum]

He would still have to improve this year to be an L at all. So far it was still worth getting rid of the salary. He did force the Flames hand because he was too bad to even risk throwing him in as a 7th defencemen. He would've been Brennan Evans back there.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

By that logic, you shouldn't have cut Matt Pelech in favour of Mark Giordano.

Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.

Haha I get that it’s not a perfect rationale but cherry picking a random bit of history to rub in my face doesn’t disprove my point IMO.

Gio had a 58pt season in the AHL, a 15pt, in 48 games, season in the NHL, and a strong season in the Russian Elite League (the KHL before it was called such) under his belt by the time Pelech had only played a single, 9pt in 77 games, season in the AHL.

It’s not a great comparison.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

By that logic, you shouldn't have cut Matt Pelech in favour of Mark Giordano.

Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.

At what point do we stop accepting this ridiculous narrative that it’s okay that things just don’t work out sometimes so it’s fine to let players go for free/pennies on the dollar only for them to perform elsewhere?

This team has had a development problem in the past. Hopefully with Conroy and Huska, we finally have a GM and a Coach on the same page and we’ll stop having to let our 1st round picks wall get diminished on Saddledome ice only to flourish elsewhere.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Hear what you are saying, but I don't think the leverage is as asymmetric as you describe.

The fair thing for both sides is to get a contract that represents what Lindholm brings. If he has another 60 point year, then Lindholm, Flames and any other team out there knows his value. And its not 8.5mm x 8 or whatever. Lindholm stands to lose massively.

For the flames, a slow start by Lindholm might be the best outcome for the long term.

If he doesn't sign and has a meh year, then his trade value goes down a bit, but he still isn't worthless in the final year of a ~$5mm contract.

Lindholm doesn’t have to sign. Calgary stands to lose way more if he doesn’t sign. Do they walk him to UFA?

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

At what point do we stop accepting this ridiculous narrative that it’s okay that things just don’t work out sometimes so it’s fine to let players go for free/pennies on the dollar only for them to perform elsewhere?

This team has had a development problem in the past. Hopefully with Conroy and Huska, we finally have a GM and a Coach on the same page and we’ll stop having to let our 1st round picks wall get diminished on Saddledome ice only to flourish elsewhere.

This is fine, but what else were we supposed to do with him? Hand him a roster spot even though he looked awful and just hope he turns it around, on the basis that he was a 1st round pick?

Sometimes very promising players don't work out in a city and flourish on another team. It's happened to every team. Many of them you could literally see from a mile away. Tolvanen is a very recent example. Basically the entire Vegas expansion team is another example. Almost every NHL team contributed to that. It's just the way things go. I don't really feel like it's a crazy narrative, but it is something that happens and is therefore something we just have to accept when it happens to our team.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

At what point do we stop accepting this ridiculous narrative that it’s okay that things just don’t work out sometimes so it’s fine to let players go for free/pennies on the dollar only for them to perform elsewhere?

This team has had a development problem in the past. Hopefully with Conroy and Huska, we finally have a GM and a Coach on the same page and we’ll stop having to let our 1st round picks wall get diminished on Saddledome ice only to flourish elsewhere.

When it stops happening to every team, every year, forever.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Sandman

While I hate the fact that we lost a first-rounder in Valimaki, I can still admit that he STUNK last year in the pre-season. He didn't even look like an NHL player, so he made it impossible for the coaches to keep him.

Plus he stunk in the AHL. He was thoroughly outplayed by guys drafted after him.

We can hate the outcome, but the decision itself was a sound one.