2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The Toffoli trade is the example and that is what Sharongovich is. Teams don’t trade good young players for older players (guys like Tanev and Zadorov)

While there is certainly part of me that can see the Flames really trying to fast track this thing I also believe they are not looking for more Toffoli like trades and will make the best moves for the long term health of the franchise.

I'd assume they also don't trade 1st round picks for guys like Tanev and Zadorov also. So aren't we just debating what flavour of Mediocre we want to get back?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Like I said I don't have an issue with trading for a few of this type of player but they really need to bring in some early round picks as well. I sure hope they aren't turning down some good draft pick offers just because they have have the mindset of players or bust. Most teams would rather part with draft picks to not interrupt their current pipeline which is why teams mostly move draft picks at the trade deadline.

In regards to the bolded lets not forget that's how the Flames ended up trading for guys like Shinkaruk and Lazar from that 2013 draft class. Not sure that's a great road to go back down.

I just keep going back to the Conroy interview when he discussed how involved Iginla is, and had the example of Iginla asking "how many picks is too many picks in a draft year Craig?"

That speaks to moving assets for picks as part of a strategy in my mind.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

According to the media that's not what the Flames are asking for.

Media gets bits and pieces right and wrong all the time.

Even Friedman had the Backlund contract wrong, the day it was breaking.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The Toffoli trade is the example and that is what Sharongovich is. Teams don’t trade good young players for older players (guys like Tanev and Zadorov)

While there is certainly part of me that can see the Flames really trying to fast track this thing I also believe they are not looking for more Toffoli like trades and will make the best moves for the long term health of the franchise.

I am sure Conroy wanted a 1st for Toffoli. The market clearly dictated he wasn't worth that at the time.


It certainly makes sense why he'd prefer Sharangovich and a 3rd, to a lone 2nd for example.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I hope not. They'd have to hit lightning in a bottle and get a #1C and and two #2/3 dmen in the trades.

I hope not too. But given what we know about this franchise and ownership, I’m going to assume the plan doesn’t go beyond giving up on the season and turning pending UFAs into assets. I’ll believe it’s a full rebuild when they start moving non-UFA veteran players.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I hope not too. But given what we know about this franchise and ownership, I’m going to assume the plan doesn’t go beyond giving up on the season and turning pending UFAs into assets. I’ll believe it’s a full rebuild when they start moving non-UFA veteran players.

That is not what they did when the Iggy era ended

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Why not is because our pro scouts suck, the chances that they can find a diamond in the rough are close to zero.

Did you miss where the team hired new pro scouts last summer?

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Re-Shape.

Re-born. Let's get God on our side this time.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I hope not too. But given what we know about this franchise and ownership, I’m going to assume the plan doesn’t go beyond giving up on the season and turning pending UFAs into assets. I’ll believe it’s a full rebuild when they start moving non-UFA veteran players.

They don't have alot of those guys; Backlund's on a two year retirement contract, Kadri and Hubereau are basically not movable nor worth the cost to move them, and Coleman with three more years left is basically in the same hoar.

Anderson, Dube and Mangiapane are all 27 and younger, and while I'm not against moving any for the right deal you don't need to turn over an entire roster to rebuild a team. The blue line will have Weegar and Anderson back. Hanifin, Tanev, Zadorov are gone.

A team with those remaining vets, with Wolf, Pelletier, Coronato, Zary, Pospisil, Ruzicka, Jeremie Poirier, and maybe a few young players we trade for filling out the roster is fine.

[D as in David]

I'm wondering how successful are re-builds when teams completely dismantle their team of all decent vets and leave it to all these young hopefuls to try to develop in the NHL as a group? Does getting caved in regularly in your own zone to the point where you're not able to develop an offensive game work long-term?

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by D as in David

I'm wondering how successful are re-builds when teams completely dismantle their team of all decent vets and leave it to all these young hopefuls to try to develop in the NHL as a group? Does getting caved in regularly in your own zone to the point where you're not able to develop an offensive game work long-term?

That is what Backlund, Coleman, Weegar and Rasmus are for. I doubt these 4 get traded this year.

Huberdeau and Kadri will be here too. We will have enough vets on the team

[Sandman]

CBJ put Emil Bemstrom on waivers.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Did you miss where the team hired new pro scouts last summer?

I did miss that. I would still have way more faith in picks (where Button has hit at around a 33% rate since Sutter left) than I would with pro scouting.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

That is what Backlund, Coleman, Weegar and Rasmus are for. I doubt these 4 get traded this year.

Huberdeau and Kadri will be here too. We will have enough vets on the team

There's the odd poster or two here that seems to be pushing for every quality veteran to be gone in the next year or two. I think keeping Weegar and Andersson would be very beneficial for developing the youth on both the back end and forwards. The problem is Andersson's expiring deal next year.

[Blaster86]

Not sure if this has been covered other than the Hoglander stuff but Dhaliwal has said the Canucks have pushed Garland and Beauvilier as part of the package for Tanev or Zadorov (Or Zardov if you ask Dhaliwal).

I just don't think a deal for either of those guys is in Vancouver's future...

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Not sure if this has been covered other than the Hoglander stuff but Dhaliwal has said the Canucks have pushed Garland and Beauvilier as part of the package for Tanev or Zadorov (Or Zardov if you ask Dhaliwal).

I just don't think a deal for either of those guys is in Vancouver's future...

With a strong pick I am fine with Beauvillier

I still think my Dube+Tanev (50%) for Garland + 1st makes sense and could happen

[SuperMatt18]

Yeah you are going to have to attach a lot more for Garland than you do for Beauvillier.

1 year of Monahan cost a 1st to move...Garland has 2.5 years left.

Personally I don't think Garland+1st for Dube+Tanev is nearly enough value for the Flames. I'm not sure I'd do it for Tanev along TBH.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

With a strong pick I am fine with Beauvillier

I still think my Dube+Tanev (50%) for Garland + 1st makes sense and could happen

I would be legitimately and unhappily shocked if this deal happened. Everything that the Canucks have done since Rutherford and Allvin have taken over is avoiding moves that they pay a premium on. They've said any Garland move won't include a sweetener on their end. I could maybe see a 2nd or a Raty but a 1st? They have not made any moves up to this point that make me think a move like this is the one they are going to make. More likely a Garland deal with cap retained and then signing Ethan Bear.

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Yeah you are going to have to attach a lot more for Garland than you do for Beauvillier.

1 year of Monahan cost a 1st to move...Garland has 2.5 years left.

Monahan looked cooked. Garland does not. While Monahan has rebounded, at the time that was no guarantee.

[Jetfire]

Bad contract aside I really like Garland to begin with, so 2.5 years as the "bad" return contract wouldn't bother me plus he's young enough that if he's any good here you could renegotiate something new.

[Blaster86]

Garland's contract isn't bad. 5 million for a 2nd line play driver is a really good amount. The issue in Vancouver is there's not room on the second line.