[Trade] Flames trade Zadorov to Canucks for 24 5th and 26 3rd

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I never understood why people expect players to have any loyalty to a team when we all know the team would sell a player, any player, for a bag of pucks if it was of the slightest advantage to the team, on top of that every last one of us would take a better job with better prospects if it was offered, hockey is just a business, being a player is just a job, a job with a very short term uncertain earning potential and a high potential for long term health problems, the guys have to earn what they can when they can

Most of the time when a player stays with one team for their entire career they’re a HOF level talent or someone with good longevity (Like Backs, but it’s possible Backlund could end up somewhere else before his career is up). Most players will play for more than one team in their careers

[browna]

Good interview with Zadorov on TSN with the game day press scrum. The usual questions, him talking about how he is an emotional person how it was such a great first year under Sutter, and last year was tough and he was so emotionally invested that it hurt. But the best part of his time here was teammates and will be friends for life.

Then someone asking how, since he is so emotional, how he "feels" leaving Calgary. Besides his answer about loving the city and not meeting one bad person here, he says that it's business and "no one gives a #### about my feelings, so not going to cry about it".

Asked if he wished the agent wouldn't have made his demands public, the first abrupt answer "I'm happy with where I am at".

When then asked what changed between saying wanting to be a Flame for life in April to now: "I didn't get a contract offer" and again abruptly ended it at that.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by browna

When then asked what changed between saying wanting to be a Flame for life in April to now: "I didn't get a contract offer" and again abruptly ended it at that.

Sounds like the same thing that happened with Toffoli. Players that wanted to leverage the team for big paydays and then wanted to ply their trade somewhere else once it became apparent that they weren't in the long term plans.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Hanifin is 26. Backlund’s short term deal ends when he’s 36. The longest contract Hanifin could sign takes him to 36. Would an 8 year deal be better if he was 24? Sure. But find another Dman as good who will be in his prime when all these 22 year old kids are in theirs.

Agreed. But just to correct - an 8 year deal would take him to 35.

And the way he skates, I have no doubt he will continue to be effective, well into his 30s. Whoever signs Hanifin, be it the Flames now, or someone else in the summer, they are getting pretty much all prime years.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I never understood why people expect players to have any loyalty to a team when we all know the team would sell a player, any player, for a bag of pucks if it was of the slightest advantage to the team, on top of that every last one of us would take a better job with better prospects if it was offered, hockey is just a business, being a player is just a job, a job with a very short term uncertain earning potential and a high potential for long term health problems, the guys have to earn what they can when they can

I don’t think it’s as black and white as you’re saying and it’s not unreasonable to expect players to have at least some amount of loyalty in some situations.

In the “real world” loyalty is a thing just as it is/should be in pro sports - people feel loyal to their co-workers, companies who have treated them well in the past, bosses who they like, projects they’ve put a lot of work into, etc etc. Some people have zero loyalty others have lots of it. Lots of people I know wouldn’t just pack up and go to a new company for a “slight advantage” ie a bit more money. Some would.

Not speaking to the Zadorov situation. If he feels slighted by the team, then by all means exercise his rights. Just talking about in general.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Agreed. But just to correct - an 8 year deal would take him to 35.

And the way he skates, I have no doubt he will continue to be effective, well into his 30s. Whoever signs Hanifin, be it the Flames now, or someone else in the summer, they are getting pretty much all prime years.

Hanifin turns 27 next month. Prime is pretty much over at the age Hanifin is approaching. You will likely get a couple near-prime years afterward.

ELC, max term deal, trade in final year, rinse and repeat. Augment the team with 1-year or 2-year veteran signings.

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/wh...poorly-so-fast

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by AC

We traded a 3rd for him originally, so he only improved his value by a 5th since then?

Really disappointing return.

Technically, we acquired Zadorov twice. The first time, for a 3rd rounder and then he became a free agent and tested the market. Then we signed him as an unrestricted free agent. Maybe he never signs as a free agent if we didn't trade for him the first time, but the trade tree ended when he left briefly as a free agent. So really, it's a 3rd and a 5th for a player that had no acquisition cost.

[browna]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Sounds like the same thing that happened with Toffoli. Players that wanted to leverage the team for big paydays and then wanted to ply their trade somewhere else once it became apparent that they weren't in the long term plans.

In Zadorov's case, I think he was legitimately interested in staying, moreso than the other UFAs we still have. Toffoli knew straight out in the spring he wasn't going to be back here and got moved.

For Zadorov, he was patient but the waiting to see what the Flames would offer never came in the offseason, and then his hope for a early extension ended with the alledged decree from Edwards to pull any extension talk from any player, at the outdoor game, given the way the Flames were playing the first 3 weeks. With that uncertainty his agent can't bite his tounge any more and lets loose with the public demand less than 2 weeks later.

Ironically, the Flames, outside of maybe 1 or 2 games, have looked far better as a team since the outdoor game.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Hanifin turns 27 next month. Prime is pretty much over at the age Hanifin is approaching. You will likely get a couple near-prime years afterward.

ELC, max term deal, trade in final year, rinse and repeat. Augment the team with 1-year or 2-year veteran signings.

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/wh...poorly-so-fast

Anyone signing Hanafin to anything longer than 5 years is getting a Suter-to-minnesota deal

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

Let's not be the franchise that craps on players when they leave.

But that’s part of the fun of sports! I’ll crap on him all day, every day because he’s not a Flame—and more to the point, he is a Canuck. He deserves my scorn and all the ill will I can muster. The only former Flame I can root for is Chucky because he’s such an SOB and pest it’s fun.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Anyone signing Hanafin to anything longer than 5 years is getting a Suter-to-minnesota deal

The only way these two signings would be remotely comparable is if Hanifin's next deal is worth over $10 m per season. Suter signed for 12.56% of the salary cap.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Anyone signing Hanafin to anything longer than 5 years is getting a Suter-to-minnesota deal

Is that a bad thing?

Suter was 27 in his first season in Minnesota.

In the 8th year of that deal he had 48 points in 69 games and was still a top pairing dman. Suter had Norris or end of season all star team votes in all of the first 8 years of that deal.

If Ryan Suter's deal was 8 years then Minnesota would have been ecstatic with that signing, the problem is it was 13 years. And even then Minnesota was stupid to buy it out when they did IMO.

If you could sign a Ryan Suter comparable for 8 years starting at 27 years old then you would actually be stupid not to do that. And as mentioned this is a much lower % of the cap than Suter's deal was.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Hanifin turns 27 next month. Prime is pretty much over at the age Hanifin is approaching. You will likely get a couple near-prime years afterward.

ELC, max term deal, trade in final year, rinse and repeat. Augment the team with 1-year or 2-year veteran signings.

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/wh...poorly-so-fast

Prime is pretty much over for forwards at that age. Most defenseman don't start even hitting their stride until 25-26, goalies sometimes not until 29-30.

[Samonadreau]

Prime for a defenseman is not over at 28. Or any player

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Prime is pretty much over for forwards at that age. Most defenseman don't start even hitting their stride until 25-26, goalies sometimes not until 29-30.

Speaking of which, the best player in the world now has 7 goals and 34 points in the first 22 games of the season. He just turned 25 years old.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Prime is pretty much over for forwards at that age. Most defenseman don't start even hitting their stride until 25-26, goalies sometimes not until 29-30.

What metric are you using for their defensive performance, or I guess, overall performance at the position?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by butterfly

What metric are you using for their defensive performance, or I guess, overall performance at the position?

I am using past history that shows D men take longer to develop as well as play at a higher level longer than most forwards do. This is pretty common knowledge.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I am using past history that shows D men take longer to develop as well as play at a higher level longer than most forwards do. This is pretty common knowledge.

I'd kind of like to look into it if you have some (preferably agreeable) way that we can quantify the performance of a D.

I'm not of the mind that 'we've always thought this is the case, so it must be the case'.

I enjoyed this article but in my opinion there is some work to be done better define performance than creation and suppression of shot volume. I agree that it's an important component but the quality of the shots allowed and attempted are also quite important.

https://hockeyviz.com/txt/age22

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Anyone signing Hanafin to anything longer than 5 years is getting a Suter-to-minnesota deal

yikes on this take

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by dino7c

yikes on this take

Yeah, Hanifin is playing the best hockey of his career right now.

I, while firmly in the “trade ‘em all” camp, wouldn’t hate it if Hanifin was the one guy we keep out of this pending UFA group.

Dude has been all over it this season.

(…trade em all)