We will see. If it happens it might not be until the last year of his deal.
He has said multiple times he wants to win now and doesn't have a lot of years left. The Flames sold him on being competitive now, they aren't. If they are going to re-tool why would he want to stay?
The Following User Says Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
He has said multiple times he wants to win now and doesn't have a lot of years left. The Flames sold him on being competitive now, they aren't. If they are going to re-tool why would he want to stay?
Maybe he doesn't want to be known as that schmuck who bailed on his team right after being made captain.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
He has said multiple times he wants to win now and doesn't have a lot of years left. The Flames sold him on being competitive now, they aren't. If they are going to re-tool why would he want to stay?
Because he’s the captain and being a Calgary Flame means something to him.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
He has said multiple times he wants to win now and doesn't have a lot of years left. The Flames sold him on being competitive now, they aren't. If they are going to re-tool why would he want to stay?
I think his family was a huge reason he decided to stay that and the legacy piece. He did say chasing a cup is hard to predict. After he gets the captaincy he leaves in less than a season? He would be easier to move in the summer or future anyway.
The Following User Says Thank You to Vinny01 For This Useful Post:
How long do any of you think it will take until we hear from Conroy? After the first trade? Will he speak soon?
A lot of talk of a change of direction but not sure on how deep the rebuild will go or if they are looking for more of a retool like the Blues have undergone.
I think his family was a huge reason he decided to stay that and the legacy piece. He did say chasing a cup is hard to predict. After he gets the captaincy he leaves in less than a season? He would be easier to move in the summer or future anyway.
Are there any other NHL teams besides Calgary (also Vegas) who have never had a top-three pick?
Those are the only ones.
(The Atlanta Flames picked 2nd overall in 1972 and 1973, taking Jacques Richard and Tom Lysiak, respectively. For reasons we know too well, it didn't do them much good.)
I took the time just now to whomp up a spreadsheet of teams that have drafted top-3 since the Entry Draft was established in 1979 (and in the Amateur Draft before that). Here, for each year's Stanley Cup winner in the cap era, is a list of the times they picked top 3 in the preceding 15 seasons:
That's 40 top-3 picks by the last 18 Stanley Cup champions, or 2.22 per team. In the league as a whole, in any given year, there are 45 players who have been drafted with a top-3 pick in the last 15 years, or (at the moment) 1.41 per team.
If you eliminate duplicates (multiple Cup winners), only 22 players remain on the list, divided among 12 franchises – 1.78 per team. It's a difference, but not a huge one, and the range goes from zero to four.
One thing that leaps to the eye is that all the teams to win multiple championships in this span have had at least three top-3 picks in the preceding 15 years, except Los Angeles. It would appear that you can get yourself a dynasty by sucking hard enough for long enough. But we need to be careful here.
At this moment, here is the number of times each team in the NHL has drafted top-3 in the 15 drafts from 2008 to 2022. (I leave off 2023 because nobody from that draft was in the league last time the Stanley Cup was awarded.) The last 5 Cup winners are marked with asterisks.
If sucking hard and drafting top-3 were the way to win championships, Edmonton and Buffalo would be the class of the league right now. Florida would have squashed Vegas like a bug in last year's finals, and presumably their highest scorer would not have been a 6th-overall pick acquired in a trade. As it is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of correlation. The last few champions either sucked a bit more than average during their latest rebuilds, or else never sucked at all and built their teams a different way. And the majority of the teams near the top of the list haven't won a thing.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
But cool stat that has nothing to do with what I posted !
Many other posters have specified top-3 picks, which is why I had that number ready. Get over yourself; you're not that important.
Quote:
You win cups by drafting superstars with your top 2 picks. 13 of the last 15 teams meet this criteria , and one was an expansion team
The majority of the teams in the league meet the same criterion, and have won bupkis. Whereas two of the small number of teams that don't meet it have won championships. The correlation isn't there.
Quote:
It is how you win a cup , hands down
Or else you don't. How many championships have Edmonton, Buffalo, Florida, and Columbus won lately?
Quote:
Teams don’t let those 1st and 2nd superstars leave (unless they demand a trade like Eichel who then ….. won the cup )
So you're saying Eichel counts as a drafted superstar.
Quote:
Having a traded top 3 pick in your team isn’t the same . There’s a reason they are allowed to leave their teams. Cause they aren’t superstars
So now you're saying that Eichel doesn't count because he wasn't a superstar, since superstars don't get traded. I suggest you pick a lane.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
This would be a good time to trade Markstrom as he has been playing well. What team could use a good goalie?
Nobody is touching that contract. We'd have to throw in a couple of first round picks to get him off the books. We're stuck with him for this season and two more after that.
Many other posters have specified top-3 picks, which is why I had that number ready. Get over yourself; you're not that important.
The majority of the teams in the league meet the same criterion, and have won bupkis. Whereas two of the small number of teams that don't meet it have won championships. The correlation isn't there.
Or else you don't. How many championships have Edmonton, Buffalo, Florida, and Columbus won lately?
So you're saying Eichel counts as a drafted superstar.
So now you're saying that Eichel doesn't count because he wasn't a superstar, since superstars don't get traded. I suggest you pick a lane.
I'm not really part of whatever conversation is happening here... but I will say that the answer is yes to the part I bolded.
The argument is (or at least I think it should be) about top-2 or top-3 picks, not who picked them but who has them. Just because Vegas didn't draft him, it doesn't change the fact they have Jack Eichel (second overall draft pick) on their team... and that he played a substantial role in them winning the Cup.
Essentially, you don't win without high-end talent up and down the lineup. You need 2-3 forwards and at 1-2 defence and a goalie. Becuase players of that quality very rarely (damn you, Tree) change teams, most teams acquire them by way of drafting... but some by way of trade or signing (damn you, Tree).
And if a team like Edmonton happens to suck at drafting (drafting McDavid and Draisaitl wasn't exactly rocket surgery), it doesn't mean the above isn't true. You still have to have competent management that's capable of building these teams.
Nobody is touching that contract. We'd have to throw in a couple of first round picks to get him off the books. We're stuck with him for this season and two more after that.
That's not true at all. Markstrom has looked like his old self again this year, and there are plenty of teams that will take him on. He only has three years left, and if we retain 2M... lots of suitors for him at 4M.
Don't think Conroy talks until we make trades, no need really.
He doesn't have to come out and say "oh hey were selling" I cant think of a GM ever doing that.
That's not true at all. Markstrom has looked like his old self again this year, and there are plenty of teams that will take him on. He only has three years left, and if we retain 2M... lots of suitors for him at 4M.
Tough to say. On one hand I agree with you that he looks way better. On the other, he was a sub 900 until the Montreal game and statistically one of the worst starters in the NHL
I think if he can string together a few solid starts there maybe there is a taker. Even then, moving a 33 year old goalie with term left on a 6 million dollar contract is going to be tough early season.
