Friedman's Nov 1st 32 thoughts update on Flames

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by dino7c

proving my point

"but trade him for a massive haul or else!"

How did that prove your point? LOL. we wouldn't get a massive haul for him if other teams are paying attention. I would be happy with a 2nd and 4th.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

How did that prove your point? LOL. we wouldn't get a massive haul for him if other teams are paying attention. I would be happy with a 2nd and 4th.

I think most Flames fans expect a massive haul

we shall see

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I think most Flames fans expect a massive haul

we shall see

They will be more disappointed than a Regher for Butler and Byron trade! hahaha

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

They will be more disappointed than a Regher for Butler and Byron trade! hahaha

We gave up a 2nd in that trade. Truly awful.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

We gave up a 2nd in that trade. Truly awful.

All so we could make a pitch at Brad Richards and offer him a ridiculous deal.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Yes, again, Lindholm and Hanifin are great value on their current contracts, and if the Flames are willing to retain salary (as they should), there is no excuse for a poor return. I won't accept "poor market" as an excuse for the value these players provide on these contracts.

It's not like moving these players is coming out of left field. We aren't rushing out and trading them at this point.

Making excuses for poor returns reminds me of the Feaster days.

Forcing a trade just to get it done is how you end up with a Phaneuf type trade. The Flames will get more value if there are multiple teams in the mix and it is still early in the season to have a lot of buyers. It also depends on if Lindholm and Hanifin are open to signing long term to wherever they are traded or want to test free agency. Their value won’t decrease as the deadline approaches. Injuries are a risk but that’s true for every rental that gets traded.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, etc. - these are all good players. However, in a cap world, the bigger your gap between production and cap hit, the better chance you have to win in this league. Close that gap completely, and you better manage your team exceptionally well to stay competitive. Overpay on a number of deals, and your team will suck, since now you have to make tougher decisions, and nobody wants your 'problems'.


Hanifin at his current deal is good value. Hanifin at 10 million a year is terrible value, and he will suddenly suck, no? If the rumours were true about it being 7.5, I think it will cross that threshold for me. Lindholm is a tricky one, since he hasn't put up 1st line centre numbers since Gaudreau left town, but that's also tough to gauge since the entire team has played poorly. How much of that is on him? How much of that is on the team? Will he return to being a legitimate 1st line centre that you can win with? He certainly isn't that right now.


That's the issue with trying to re-sign guys. Conroy signs these players who are on value deals today to what they should be paid, or what they have showed at times in the past, or what you think the market will be at in the future, but then you have to make tougher decisions on your next players. That's ok if this is your core that you can win with. It won't be ok if it becomes a bunch of overpriced players that force you bridge your future core because you don't have the flexibility.


In a cap world, you have an advantage by having a lot of bargain deals. You make things tougher on yourself when you have dead space (buy outs, bonus overages) and players that have cap hits that vastly exceed their contributions.



in my opinion, adding Lindholm and Tanev to Huberdeau, Kadri and Weegar is the wrong move because 'this core' (if you can call it a core) isn't winning anything, and they are not a young core that you can realistically build around. By the time you draft and develop enough good players to build around them, most of them will be in their mid-30's, and unless they are Pavelski, Chelios, Chara, Jagr and other notable players who were positive contributors well into their mid 30's, you have to look at rebuilding with the intent that those contracts are off the books by the time your new core needs new contracts.


I feel sorry for Conroy. Those are some big decisions. The easy decision is to just burn it down and sell everything at the trade deadline that is older than 24 that you get legitimate offers for. Trying to figure out who to sign and for how much, and how much the cap is really likely to grow in the next 5 years (tough to predict in today's world - just look at what inflation is doing in the world), and what chances this core has at realistically competing.


This team has shown itself in spurts of being a really good team. An excellent team, in fact. They just haven't shown it consistently enough, and for me, that's where I would draw the line and start over. Easy for me to say as I am not the guy in charge, but that's where I would go. Resigning these guys removes all the cap flexibility you would otherwise gain, and that means players coming up may end up having to be traded away, as nobody is going to give you value for expensive deals.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

We gave up a 2nd in that trade. Truly awful.

That was the downfall of the Flames right then and there! Going from the Tunnel of Death to It's a Small a World in one damn trade!

[Flamesfan05]

Hanifin is solid but nothing elite about him except those mistakes when it matters

Let somebody else pay him

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

We gave up a 2nd in that trade. Truly awful.

2nd was to dump the salary of flames legend Kotalik . Iirc.

[Tkachukwagon]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

2nd was to dump the salary of flames legend Kotalik . Iirc.

I think I hear Kotalik's song!

http://kotes.ytmnd.com/

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Yeah because he sucks no matter how many times Timbit defends him. ZERO offensive upside, butter soft, oh but he eats up minutes!! lol

11th in xGF60
14th in xGF%

For all defenseman for the last three years.

He doesn't have a great shot.
I don't think he has great offensive instincts.

But he contributes to offence through transition and keeping the cycle alive.

You can't just fake numbers like the above.

But you said he sucks so I guess there's that!

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Yes, again, Lindholm and Hanifin are great value on their current contracts, and if the Flames are willing to retain salary (as they should), there is no excuse for a poor return. I won't accept "poor market" as an excuse for the value these players provide on these contracts.

It's not like moving these players is coming out of left field. We aren't rushing out and trading them at this point.

Making excuses for poor returns reminds me of the Feaster days.

Conroy doesn’t control the market. Even at their modest cap hits, there may only be a couple teams looking for a C or a D that can fit them into their cap structure mid-season. And if they don’t have the cap next season to extend them, their offers will reflect that. Also, there’s no guarantee Edwards is wiling to retain.

There’s a reason mid-season trades almost never happen in the NHL any more. It’s a very different league than it was even 4 or 5 years ago.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Bingo

11th in xGF60
14th in xGF%

For all defenseman for the last three years.

He doesn't have a great shot.
I don't think he has great offensive instincts.

But he contributes to offence through transition and keeping the cycle alive.

You can't just fake numbers like the above.

But you said he sucks so I guess there's that!

Well hopefully all the GMs in the league use those stats because he definitely does not pass the eye test.

I mean just look at that garbage play he did last night in 2nd period with 10 seconds left. If we are down by 1 going to the 3rd we might have had a chance. Down by 2 deflating the bench. Yeah no chance.

[PepsiFree]

A “poor return” is also completely subjective. It’d be helpful to know what people think a “good return” is before trades actually get made to determine if those expectations are even in line with reality or not.

Saying “trade them now!” and “I won’t accept a bad return” are both fine things that could in theory both be satisfied at the same time, but not if the definition of a “good” return is a haul that they’d never get at the best of times.

There are more trade proposals that overestimate what these players could get than underestimate it. So, chances are, people are going to be unhappy.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

We gave up a 2nd in that trade. Truly awful.

I remember I was pissed off all day, and that's after reading the thread title quickly and assuming the 2nd was coming this way.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

A “poor return” is also completely subjective. It’d be helpful to know what people think a “good return” is before trades actually get made to determine if those expectations are even in line with reality or not.

Saying “trade them now!” and “I won’t accept a bad return” are both fine things that could in theory both be satisfied at the same time, but not if the definition of a “good” return is a haul that they’d never get at the best of times.

There are more trade proposals that overestimate what these players could get than underestimate it. So, chances are, people are going to be unhappy.

Yup. The only way I’ll be really annoyed is if they trade them in hockey trades and tread water instead of getting the 1st + b prospect deadline return. Flames are cooked without a #1C and they aren’t getting one back in a trade unless they get lucky with a younger guy like Sillinger.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yeah, the D depth-chart looks grim in 2024/25

Weegar/Anderson
??? / ???
Solovyov / ???

They’ll have to go to the UFA market for a 2nd pairing guy, and probably a 3rd pairing guy too. Welcome Matthew Dumba and Jani Hakanpaa.

Or we just continue to rebuild and ignore dumb ufa's

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Or we just continue to rebuild and ignore dumb ufa's

Teams that rebuild still sign UFAs.

If they did decide to rebuild they aren't just going to give the spots to someone from the Wranglers if they don't think they're ready.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Forcing a trade just to get it done is how you end up with a Phaneuf type trade. The Flames will get more value if there are multiple teams in the mix and it is still early in the season to have a lot of buyers. It also depends on if Lindholm and Hanifin are open to signing long term to wherever they are traded or want to test free agency. Their value won’t decrease as the deadline approaches. Injuries are a risk but that’s true for every rental that gets traded.

I think comparing it to a Phaneuf trade if an oversimplification of what happened there when Darryl talked to no other teams besides the Leafs.

I'm not asking for that or anything like that. I'm also not saying they'll get the best value right now, but I do believe they should and will get good value whenever it is they are traded. You could have non-playoff teams from last year that have gotten off to good starts this year in the mix. You could also have teams that have gotten off to bad starts looking for a shake-up.

I'm not actually sure players like Hanifin and Lindholm will get much more value closer to the deadline, but I appreciate it is possible. It's also possible the pool of interested teams is smaller come the deadline.

It also depends on whether the acquiring team intends to use the player as a rental or if they plan to re-sign.

With all of this, I think it would be smart to trade the players soon because I think the potential of them getting injured exceeds the potential of getting a slightly better trade in 4 months.