2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Well, it is pretty idiotic to speak on what a GM would or wouldn't do when you possibly cannot know. History shows GM's sometimes do mind boggling things at trade deadlines.

Sure. And then we make fun of them for making absolutely stupid trades. The norm and average GM looks at that deal and says "Lolno"

I am assuming Jim Nill would look at that deal and say "Two possible rentals for one of our top prospects and two years worth of firsts, plus a scattering of other other assets. Sure why not."

[Ped]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Well, it is pretty idiotic to speak on what a GM would or wouldn't do when you possibly cannot know.

Agreed.

Dallas doesn't trade their top prospects.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Sure. And then we make fun of them for making absolutely stupid trades. The norm and average GM looks at that deal and says "Lolno"

I am assuming Jim Nill would look at that deal and say "Two possible rentals for one of our top prospects and two years worth of firsts, plus a scattering of other other assets. Sure why not."

The trade proposal included an extended Hanifin. Only Lindholm would be the possible rental.

It’s also a copy-cat league. The latest team to win the cup did so by going all in on trading picks/prospects to win during their window with veteran players. I think it’s possible some teams are going to follow suit… especially teams like Dallas that could see their window as the next 3-4 years.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Sure. And then we make fun of them for making absolutely stupid trades. The norm and average GM looks at that deal and says "Lolno"

I am assuming Jim Nill would look at that deal and say "Two possible rentals for one of our top prospects and two years worth of firsts, plus a scattering of other other assets. Sure why not."

Guy probably wants to win a cup...2 firsts isn't that much for a contending team

Again look at the Panthers, they traded 3 straight even though you said "nobody does that"

So did the Rangers a few years back, just off the top of my head. Oilers probably trade their 1st for the second straight year, ect.

any contending team that adds Hanifin and Lindholm without taking anything major off their rosters immediately becomes cup favourites

"fine you don't like the deal? It's more of a Colorado idea anyway...."

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Guy probably wants to win a cup...2 firsts isn't that much for a contending team

Again look at the Panthers, they traded 3 straight even though you said "nobody does that"

So did the Rangers a few years back, just off the top of my head. Oilers probably trade their 1st for the second straight year, ect.

any contending team that adds Hanifin and Lindholm without taking anything major off their rosters immediately becomes cup favourites

"fine you don't like the deal? It's more of a Colorado idea anyway...."

I like that move in a negotiation for the flames this trade deadline. Try to play teams against each other.

[ForeverFlameFan]

It’s not out of question that Bourque or Stankoven made available… we just wouldn’t get as big of a return with the quality given. In my opinion, with Hintz and Johnston already taking the top 6 C spots, I think Bourque is more expendable than Stankoven.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by stemit14

You’re probably right. I am including an extension for Hanifin though so, in this proposal, only Lindholm is a possible rental. I have not seen many consecutive first round pick trades in the past but it could happen. Many teams have gone multiple years without first round picks by making separate trades though… this is a single trade for a 1a/1b center and a top 2/3 defenceman.

I have no idea if you’re right about Stankoven. It might be impossible to get him. I’m trying to come up with a scenario where the flames could get an A-level prospect from trading these pieces. Combining them seems like a way to potentially do it. The picks could possibly be altered to make it look better for Dallas. Also, what if Lindholm was extended (although, my understanding is that he wants to test free agency):

To Dallas:
Hanifin (50% retained for the rest of the year and extended)
Lindholm (50% retained for the rest of the year and extended)
2025 3rd round pick

To Calgary:
2024 1st round pick (lottery protected)
2025 2nd round pick (becomes a first round pick if Dallas makes it past the 1st round)
Stankoven
Dadonov (salary dump)

That is a bad deal for Calgary.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

That is a bad deal for Calgary.

I think I agree. So the hope would be that there is something between the original trade proposal and this last trade proposal that should work.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by stemit14

I think I agree. So the hope would be that there is something between the original trade proposal and this last trade proposal that should work.

Or just trade them separately and maximize value.

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Sucks that while we need to unload a goaltender, the team most desperate for one is Edmonton.

Hypothetical. Would you guys do this or is giving them Markstrom absolutely forbidden:

To EDM
Markstrom (CGY retains 1M)

To CGY
Campbell
Broberg
2 x 1st round picks
1 x 2nd round pick

Add Holloway and Flames think about it.

[GioforPM]

Why would Markstrom agree to that?

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Why would Markstrom agree to that?

To join a team that might be a contender for the next 2–3 years. I think EDM with a good goalie is a contender. They're pretty deep, but are underperforming, mostly due to goal-tending.

[Hockey_Ninja]

I'm honesty prepared to be underwhelmed with the returns for Lindholm, Tanev and Hanifin and I think others should also brace themselves too. I'm sure we'll still get something decent for those guys but nothing earth shattering. I just want more 1sts than anything at this point

[Flames1217]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

It’s not out of question that Bourque or Stankoven made available… we just wouldn’t get as big of a return with the quality given. In my opinion, with Hintz and Johnston already taking the top 6 C spots, I think Bourque is more expendable than Stankoven.

I completely agree and think that he should be among the top targets for the Flames.

He shares many of the same strengths that Zary has and would add a player with insane vision and high hockey IQ.

Even if the package includes a lesser pick, it's really a no brainier.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

That is a bad deal for Calgary.

No it isn't, I'd be over the moon with that package for two expiring UFA's. Basically look at it as a 1st and 2nd (with an easy chance for it to be two firsts as Dallas is a great team) for one UFA and a grade A prospect for the other. I'd be all over that and I suspect Dallas wouldn't.

But bad deal for Calgary? Like c'mon, some of you guys are going to very disappointed in the returns if you can't even like that proposal.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This idea that good prospects don't get traded is crazy. Of course they do, when it makes sense for the team giving them up (Forsberg says hi, and he is far from alone).

It's not that they don't get traded ever it's that it is very, very uncommon, and that's only growing stronger as teams learn the ever growing importance of holding onto young talent.

Young prospects get traded every year, for sure, but A grade, blue chip prospects? I mean even your example says it all - The Forsberg trade (that was seen as crazy almost right away) from over 10 years ago and "he's far from alone" isn't the most compelling argument that people are crazy for thinking it rarely happens, lol.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

To join a team that might be a contender for the next 2–3 years. I think EDM with a good goalie is a contender. They're pretty deep, but are underperforming, mostly due to goal-tending.

They might not have problem scoring goals, they have a boat load of problems preventing them, and it's not all on the goalie. A good goalie behind that defense will automatically become mediocre to bad.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

To join a team that might be a contender for the next 2–3 years. I think EDM with a good goalie is a contender.They're pretty deep, but are underperforming, mostly due to goal-tending.

Lmao

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

I'm honesty prepared to be underwhelmed with the returns for Lindholm, Tanev and Hanifin and I think others should also brace themselves too. I'm sure we'll still get something decent for those guys but nothing earth shattering. I just want more 1sts than anything at this point

My expectations at this point for the Lindholm and Hanifin trades are pretty much just a 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + B-level prospect for each one when they are traded separately. That’s the typical return for these type of players in the past when traded as rentals. The proposal to trade them together was simply to see if doing that could return an A-level prospect as I don’t see the flames getting any A-level prospects in their trades otherwise.

It might be too complicated of a trade to pull off anyways due to salary and the weight of putting two quality NHLers going one way in the deal. It would have to yield a higher quality prospect in return for it to be worth it… especially if it meant only getting one (guaranteed) first round pick in the return instead of two that could be acquired by trading them separately.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

To join a team that might be a contender for the next 2–3 years. I think EDM with a good goalie is a contender. They're pretty deep, but are underperforming, mostly due to goal-tending.

Nah, Edmonton makes goalies look bad.