2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by butterfly

It isn't just Adin Hill. Pick a random year and do a scatterplot of goaltender salary vs. however you choose to define goaltender skill. There's a negligible relationship.

It's much better to put the money toward 20-32 year old defense and forwards.

The question is, is there a goalie who can put up those top-10 numbers who is not currently under contract to an NHL team? It's not like these guys are just hanging around in free agency waiting for someone to sign them in mid-season.

[iloveicedhockey]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I wouldn't get too excited about the Flames "weaponizing" cap space until they make a deal where they retain significant salary on player. That was the sticking point in a deal with Toronto and could continue to be a problem. One thing we have learned over the years, the Flames ownership does not like paying players who are not on the team and contributing to the Calgary Flames. I hope this changes but it is the way of Flames ownership.

The sticking point with Toronto, that has been reliably reported anyway, is that the Flames were willing to retain but Toronto didn't meet the price to do so.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The question is, is there a goalie who can put up those top-10 numbers who is not currently under contract to an NHL team? It's not like these guys are just hanging around in free agency waiting for someone to sign them in mid-season.

I didn't follow the whole discussion, so I apologize for butting in, but to your point - no, there isn't, because as you said it's mid-season.

That said, goalies are definitely, like Pinder likes to call them, Voodoo. Which I think is the point the OP is trying to make. Quick is back to a .922sv%, Talbot is posting a .931sv%... they're both UFAs at the end of the season.

I think a team first calls BOS and takes a long look at one of Ullmark and Swayman. The next call would probably be to NYI to see if Varlamov is available, then I'm calling ANA about Gibson(nvm I thought he had less than 4 years left), before calling CGY about Markstrom.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The question is, is there a goalie who can put up those top-10 numbers who is not currently under contract to an NHL team? It's not like these guys are just hanging around in free agency waiting for someone to sign them in mid-season.

Are you sure?

I think they are hanging around all over the place. If you plucked a goalie with some experience out of the ECHL, paid him league minimum, and started him over, say, Jacob Markstrom for 10 games, what do you think the difference would be? No one has the guts to try it but I'd be quite interested.

My hypothesis is that there'd be hardly any difference over thousands of trials, and certainly not enough of a difference to give up a 1st round pick for.

I challenge anyone to predict who the top 10 NHL goalies will be even next year, let alone two years from now. Do you think there's something special about Adin Hill? Just because it worked with him certainly doesn't prove my point, but it's the quintessential example. Alex Lyon signed a two-way contract with Florida last year and got them to the playoffs. The same might happen with Detroit this year.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Marky is not a good goalie, so I hope we do.

I would usually agree with you, as I've never been a big Markstrom fan. I think he's bounced back this year though, despite his rather pedestrian stats. Scouts of other teams will see his numbers are a reflection of the team he plays for. A team like the Devils, for instance- with Lindy Ruff as their coach- will see the potential of getting Marky.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Sandman

I would usually agree with you, as I've never been a big Markstrom fan. I think he's bounced back this year though, despite his rather pedestrian stats. Scouts of other teams will see his numbers are a reflection of the team he plays for. A team like the Devils, for instance- with Lindy Ruff as their coach- will see the potential of getting Marky.

I really hope you're right because if you are, we all win. To me just trading Markstrom for a pack of hockey cards would be a huge win.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by iloveicedhockey

The sticking point with Toronto, that has been reliably reported anyway, is that the Flames were willing to retain but Toronto didn't meet the price to do so.

Were willing to retain if Toronto would meet their price, which they didn't. They still didn't get the deal done. The Flames have not retained any amount of significance to make a deal happen. Lets see the team make a deal with retention of significance before suggesting they will do so or eat significant salary to make deals or take on bad contracts for draft picks because they really haven't in the past. They've been the opposite in this regard. They should be doing this, but they've yet to pop that cherry and use the retention strategy with any meaning.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I didn't follow the whole discussion, so I apologize for butting in, but to your point - no, there isn't, because as you said it's mid-season.

That said, goalies are definitely, like Pinder likes to call them, Voodoo. Which I think is the point the OP is trying to make. Quick is back to a .922sv%, Talbot is posting a .931sv%... they're both UFAs at the end of the season.

I think a team first calls BOS and takes a long look at one of Ullmark and Swayman. The next call would probably be to NYI to see if Varlamov is available, then I'm calling ANA about Gibson(nvm I thought he had less than 4 years left), before calling CGY about Markstrom.

The problem with trying to get a goalie from Boston mid season is they probably don’t want futures . They will want someone of significance off of the other teams roster. I’m not sure what varlamovs contract status now is but a year or 2 ago there were rumours he wouldn’t waive to go anywhere.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I wouldn't get too excited about the Flames "weaponizing" cap space until they make a deal where they retain significant salary on player. That was the sticking point in a deal with Toronto and could continue to be a problem. One thing we have learned over the years, the Flames ownership does not like paying players who are not on the team and contributing to the Calgary Flames. I hope this changes but it is the way of Flames ownership.

But the Flames have shown that they will pay players not to pay for them. They’re also paying a coach $4M to farm at the moment. Burke and Feaster publicly spoke about weaponizing cap space about 10-12 years ago.

I think the sticking point with Toronto was they likely wanted retention on both Tanev and Zadorov. The Flames probably see more value if they use their 3 retention spots on Lindholm Hanifin and Tanev. Once they found a taker who would take Zadorov at full freight, Toronto would have had to pay a price they evidently weren’t prepared to pay.

I think the Flames are certainly open to retaining on guys whose contracts are done at the end of the year but Markstrom, Kadri and some of the other names with term that pop up here might be tougher sell.

[dissentowner]

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

Welp, Matthews it is then.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

Then they're out, because if you're talking about a good asset like Tanev, you have to include one of those.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

So in other words teams should just hang up when Treliving calls them? It's kind of hard to make a trade in today's NHL if all your trade assets are off the table. Treliving will crack and it's just a matter of when.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

Then bye bye to another coveted d-man. He already lost out on one, does he want to be the “almost had him” guy his whole career?

I’m all for it. Trade Tanev to Dallas instead.

[Ozy_Flame]

He wants the Flames to take Nylander and pay him a massive increase next year that TO can't afford. That's my theory.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

So in other words teams should just hang up when Treliving calls them? It's kind of hard to make a trade in today's NHL if all your trade assets are off the table. Treliving will crack and it's just a matter of when.

Ya that is just his starting point as a wizard. Eventually it will be Cowan and a 1st for some rugged dman who has snot.

[Tkachukwagon]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1734988380243435697

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Ya that is just his starting point as a wizard. Eventually it will be Cowan and a 1st for some rugged dman who has snot.

The one thing I will give Tre is that he never traded top prospects. If the Leafs had some seconds then I could see where his starting point would be. Must be trying to get Tanev for a very deferred second and a mediocre prospect. No thanks,

[Toast_Man]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have no idea what they think they can work with but I am hearing Cowan, Minten, Knies, and the Leafs first round pick this year are all non starters in any trade negotiations.

And they have no seconds.... So all they have to offer is junk!

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Were willing to retain if Toronto would meet their price, which they didn't. They still didn't get the deal done. The Flames have not retained any amount of significance to make a deal happen. Lets see the team make a deal with retention of significance before suggesting they will do so or eat significant salary to make deals or take on bad contracts for draft picks because they really haven't in the past. They've been the opposite in this regard. They should be doing this, but they've yet to pop that cherry and use the retention strategy with any meaning.

I think they've set a price for retaining and it has to be met.

Toronto certainly lacks many of the key assets to make that happen and get the player.

I don't think you walk the "we retained all three retention slots" comment after the Zadorov trade if ownership hasn't ok'd the use of retention for better returns.

Now did they set the value high enough to never use them? Or did they set them just higher than Toronto was willing to spend. That's what we're going to find out I guess.