2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Spurs

They replaced one player on a team that wasn't good enough, that doesn't make a team that is ready to compete. It was clear as day at the time and the proof is in the results after the fact.

The media being idiots and dead wrong doesn't change reality. These are the same guys that largely picked the Oilers to get to or even win the Cup this year.

The team won the division the year before, finished 6th overall, won a playoff round, and all the underlying stats to suggest it wasn't a fluke at all.

They lost two key players, but added three back.

The assumption across the hockey world was they were different but even potentially better.

If someone (you or others) had the vision to know that Huberdeau and Kadri would come up hugely short in replacing Tkachuk and Gaudreau to the point that adding Weegar to the defense core had them net worse ... then good on you.

But there was nothing clear as day about a needed rebuild other than the other impending contracts two years out, and the worry for signing too many players into their mid 30s (or later)

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Spurs

They replaced one player on a team that wasn't good enough, that doesn't make a team that is ready to compete. It was clear as day at the time and the proof is in the results after the fact.

They were already competing. Teams choke in the playoffs pretty much every year. It doesn't mean they aren't ready to compete. It just means they went into a slump at the worst time.

[Ped]

So you’re saying if you had the chance you would not unwind everything that resulted in the current debacle? Mmm, not buying it.

Not saying that at all. Just pointing out that as great as Tkachuk was last year, it resulted in the same place for the Panthers as the Flames no Cup. And this year, injured or not, he is struggling.


A trade usually can't be properly judged until years after. It is entirely likely that this one ends terribly for the Flames - but that isn't written in stone, yet.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Flames go into last season with a very strong team on paper and a Jack Adams winning coach with multiple cups wins as well.

Goalie goes from 2nd in vezina voting to worst save percentage in the league among starters and their star forward goes from 115 points to 50 points and the Flames barely miss the playoffs.

All of a sudden a bunch of posters around here turn into kreskin with 20/20 hindsight

And furthermore if they had taken the Carolina trade, and then “things didn’t work out” (what’s the bar / expectation here- win a Cup?), we’d be having this same thread about how they should have taken the Florida deal.

This is pure hindsighty stuff. Florida deal was superior by far. At the time, and even now.

In fact of all the things that are Grey / debatable, this isn’t really one of them so it’s a weird hill to take a stand on.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not to a majority of people commenting on the trade. I guess they didn't see something that was "clear as day".

Those people were wrong, which is not surprising.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

And furthermore if they had taken the Carolina trade, and then “things didn’t work out” (what’s the bar / expectation here- win a Cup?), we’d be having this same thread about how they should have taken the Florida deal.

This is pure hindsighty stuff. Florida deal was superior by far. At the time, and even now.

In fact of all the things that are Grey / debatable, this isn’t really one of them so it’s a weird hill to take a stand on.

It isn't hindsighty at all, there were people who were calling for a rebuild when it was clear that Johnny and Tkachuk were leaving. That is not hindsight.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The team won the division the year before, finished 6th overall, won a playoff round, and all the underlying stats to suggest it wasn't a fluke at all.

They lost two key players, but added three back.

The assumption across the hockey world was they were different but even potentially better.

If someone (you or others) had the vision to know that Huberdeau and Kadri would come up hugely short in replacing Tkachuk and Gaudreau to the point that adding Weegar to the defense core had them net worse ... then good on you.

But there was nothing clear as day about a needed rebuild other than the other impending contracts two years out, and the worry for signing too many players into their mid 30s (or later)

I don't think it took much insight at all to know they wouldn't replace them it was clear as day as I said.

This team had shown it wasn't close to good enough to compete, then downgraded in talent. There was no reason at all to think this team was coming back stronger or even as good as a team that was entirely mediocre already.

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Things didn't work out.

Most of the hockey world thought the Flames did very well in a bad situation with the Tkachuk trade including a large majority on this site.

A lot of hindsight jockeying in this discussion.

Having said that, I'm with those that think they had a huge opportunity with the trade and then trade both Huberdeau and Weegar right after. I think that would have saved them a lot of pain with the other UFAs on the horizon.

But would I expect that from most teams? Not really. You don't see many tear downs happening before they're necessary, and that would have been pretty bold (potentially not even allowed from ownership)

It's true. People thought the Flames made out alright in a bad situation and things didn't work out. Sometimes you swing and you miss. However i feel there's more to it than that.

I remember after the whole Johnny/Chucky situation played out there was an interview where Treliving talked about how just because the team had some cap room now and could spend some money, didn't mean they should. They had to be careful. Everyone was all emotional still. If the right opportunity came along of course they are going to look at it, but they needed to make sure they spent wisely otherwise or the team could really be handcuffed going forward.

He of course followed that up by attaching a 1st to Mony, who only had 1 year left on his deal, so that they could move him to make room to sign 32 year old Kadri to a 7 year deal. Then they signed Huberdeau to a 8 year extension, largest contract in Flames history, before he had ever played a game in the Flaming C. Treliving then had a front row seat for the implosion that followed and then decided to peace out.

Yes, it was a bad situation but it was basically one that Treliving created by signing Tkachuk to a bridge deal in 2019. In an era where the best teams sign their best young players to long term deals, the Flames decided that they should sign their best young player to a 3 year bridge so they could keep Michael Frolik and his 4.3 million contract. This was of course followed up by Frolik putting up 10 points in 38 games. Being benched. Having his agent cry about it on social media then asking for a trade and ultimately only playing 27 more games in the NHL before going back to Europe in 2021.

Had they signed Chucky to an 8 year deal, even if he still requested a trade in 2022, he would have been signed for 5 more years still. The team could have taken their time and not have been rushed into making the "best of a bad situation". His moves set this team back pretty far and there was more than a few people who pointed how needlessly risky all this was when it went down.

I feel like I'm rambling now but I guess my point is that Treliving sucked. Arguably one of the worst GMs in Flames history. And that's saying something because the Flames have quite a history of bad GMs.

Booo Treliving. Booooooooooooo.

[Monahammer]

I don't want to agree with Spurs, but he is not incorrect in saying there were those advocating to trade Johnny and rebuild even before he pulled the last minute won't resign.

Going back to the Eichel trade. It was viewed as a way to maybe keep Johnny and or Tkachuk.

I had some inside info on the johnny talks that led me to believe he was not resigning and I was publicly roasted over my subsequent position to trade him for whatever and focus hard on signing Tkachuk. I will admit that I was also taken in by the Tkachuk trade and thought it was the best we could possibly hope for!! I am sure there are many others who were of the same mind as me. Elated. Now, it turned out poorly, but I don't think it was wrong to have hope after that trade was made.

I still think trading Monahan + 1st for Kadri is where we really dug the hole. But, I understand why we did it in light of trying to continue being a contender.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Spurs

It isn't hindsighty at all, there were people who were calling for a rebuild when it was clear that Johnny and Tkachuk were leaving. That is not hindsight.

Sure that may be true but that doesn’t mean you don’t do the Florida trade, because it was the best trade available. You could still rebuild after the Florida trade was done. Like Bingo said.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

And furthermore if they had taken the Carolina trade, and then “things didn’t work out” (what’s the bar / expectation here- win a Cup?), we’d be having this same thread about how they should have taken the Florida deal.

This is pure hindsighty stuff. Florida deal was superior by far. At the time, and even now.

In fact of all the things that are Grey / debatable, this isn’t really one of them so it’s a weird hill to take a stand on.

100%

The Florida deal was so much better than even if you wanted to rebuild, like someone is trying desperately to claim the need for was as clear as day, you’d take it because you could get more by flipping Huberdeau and Weegar than you did for Tkachuk individually.

Anyone who says they preferred the Necas trade based on trade value alone is a fool. The only reason to prefer that trade is because it would have avoided what happened after, like butterfly said, but what happened after wasn’t inevitable, so it’s position based purely on hindsight.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

100%

The Florida deal was so much better than even if you wanted to rebuild, like someone is trying desperately to claim the need for was as clear as day, you’d take it because you could get more by flipping Huberdeau and Weegar than you did for Tkachuk individually.

And…you are already starting with a 1st and a B/C prospect in your pocket.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Sure that may be true but that doesn’t mean you don’t do the Florida trade, because it was the best trade available. You could still rebuild after the Florida trade was done. Like Bingo said.

Not sure it was the best deal, but I guess that would depend on what you could get for Hubredeau as an upcoming UFA, not sure I trust that we would get good value back for that.

But I agree the bigger problem was the moves after the deal rather than the deal itself. I still like the Carolina deal because I think (at the time not just with hindsight) that Necas looks better than any piece you are likely to get back from moving Hubredeau.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Spurs

They also lost their two best players, I think that is a key part of it as well. Even with those two players we saw that the team wasn't good enough to compete with the top teams and didn't have a path to get there.

And saying that saying a rebuild is easy is true, I think the way the NHL is set up that rebuild is often better than continuing on in mediocrity. Again I am not claiming to have some sort of insider or special knowledge here so the rebuild being the best option for many situations is why it was so clear.

Don't have skin in the game? Are you saying fans shouldn't comment on how the team rebuilds because they don't have skin in the game? or did I misread that last part?

The team wasn’t good enough to compete with the top teams? Between 18/19 and 21/22 I think you could make the case they were good enough to compete with the top teams.

I don’t think it’s quite as easy to predict who’s going to fall where when it’s all said and done. How many were picking Pittsburgh in 16 and 17, what about the Caps and the Blues? What about the Golden Knights? On the other hand how many ‘cup favourites’ never even get to the quarter finals or bounced in the first round? It happens ever year.

I think the margin between the top teams and this who aren’t, aside from the fringes, is much closer than you’re willing to acknowledge. The Flanes were a good team, even a very good team, but choosing to ignore that doesn’t make you ‘right’.

As for skin in the game, I was referring to the people who have dough on the line, namely the owners. What small market team has successfully, and intentionally, tore it down to the studs after one of their best ever seasons?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Sure that may be true but that doesn’t mean you don’t do the Florida trade, because it was the best trade available. You could still rebuild after the Florida trade was done. Like Bingo said.

Two days into 2024, with everyone healthy, this roster is currently the 8th worst team in the NHL

When they trade their best centre half their opening night blue line, and possibly their starting goaltender, they can’t possibly be better in the short term.

And it’ll be impossible to fill those gaps via UFA/trade this summer - the best players available are the ones we’re trading.

The rebuild is upon them, whether they would risk it or not.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Spurs

Not sure it was the best deal, but I guess that would depend on what you could get for Hubredeau as an upcoming UFA, not sure I trust that we would get good value back for that.

But I agree the bigger problem was the moves after the deal rather than the deal itself. I still like the Carolina deal because I think (at the time not just with hindsight) that Necas looks better than any piece you are likely to get back from moving Hubredeau.

Huberdeau at 1x$5.8 coming off a 115 point season had a ton of value. Every contender in the league would have been calling.

We turned that opportunity into one of the most negative valued assets in the league.

[Harry Lime]

I was going to drop into the Huberdeau thread to suggest that we make it the new Trades and Speculation thread, but they are actually talking about Huberdeau in there. I became confused and disoriented, and left.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by TOfan

The team wasn’t good enough to compete with the top teams? Between 18/19 and 21/22 I think you could make the case they were good enough to compete with the top teams.

How many play-off wins did they have in that time frame? Good teams win in the play-offs the Flames did not. It is a stretch to say they were among the best teams.

I don’t think it’s quite as easy to predict who’s going to fall where when it’s all said and done. How many were picking Pittsburgh in 16 and 17, what about the Caps and the Blues? What about the Golden Knights? On the other hand how many ‘cup favourites’ never even get to the quarter finals or bounced in the first round? It happens ever year.

The Caps and Pens were full of the best players in the world and had success for multiple seasons. Anyone who were surprised by them weren't paying attention. Vegas had multiple years of play-off success before winning.

The Blues are the one unicorn team, but are we going to expect unicorns to happen often or realize that was likely a one off fluke that is not likely to be re-created?

I think the margin between the top teams and this who aren’t, aside from the fringes, is much closer than you’re willing to acknowledge. The Flanes were a good team, even a very good team, but choosing to ignore that doesn’t make you ‘right’.

I don't think they are, we can see the results of successful teams and for the vast majority of them they have sustained success. The Flames did not have that.

As for skin in the game, I was referring to the people who have dough on the line, namely the owners. What small market team has successfully, and intentionally, tore it down to the studs after one of their best ever seasons?

If you consider that one of the best seasons ever that shows the problem, it was not a very successful season at all. And I think it is fair for fans to criticize the owners for making bad decisions. They should judge the team not going forward not based on the emotions of a supposedly successful season the year before, and more than that they should allow people who actually have knowledge/experience in the industry and let them decide not meddle yourself.

[dino7c]

Vegas missed the playoffs the year before they won the cup...I highly doubt the "Spurs" on Vegas puck wanted them to run it back with basically the same team after that season

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Spurs

I don't think it took much insight at all to know they wouldn't replace them it was clear as day as I said.

This team had shown it wasn't close to good enough to compete, then downgraded in talent. There was no reason at all to think this team was coming back stronger or even as good as a team that was entirely mediocre already.

It wasn't clear as day.

Teams that win a division and a playoff series don't show they're not close to good enough to compete.