2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Top KHL player's NHL rights are available. Because Chmelevski already has signed a NHL contract previously with the Sharks, he is not limited to the ELC system.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1746235617829126505

Perfect, I look forward to never seeing him in a Flames jersey.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Spurs

Yes I think they were and they are a good example of the difference between a team having one good regular season and nothing else and a team that had a bad play-off performance.

Looking at the Flames seasons before the supposed contending year they had:

Lost in First Round 4-1
Lost in the First Round 4-2
No Play-offs

Bruins:

Lost in Second Round to SC Champions
Lost in the Second Round
Lost in first Round 4-3

To me you can see the Bruins had more seasons where they were closer to the top, not amazing but the success they had last year wasn't a one off they had more sustained success. Where the Flames had been ok or bad in the 3 seasons before the great regular season.

After the season the Flames followed it up missing the play-offs and the Bruins followed it up by leading the East. So again more reason to think that the success they had was sustainable not just a good regular season.

If the Bruins go out in the first round or even second again I think it is fair to ask questions likely around if their forward group is good enough to get it done in the play-offs or maybe if the goaltending as good as it is has the mentality of the play-offs depending on what happens, but you can clearly see the two teams have much different results when looking at them.

How many fourth overall teams in the recent history of the league not been widely considered contenders?

Pekkerhead has it right. Claiming teams were not contenders in retrospect is a flimsy position to take.

The Flames, unfortunately, were a much different team in 22/23 than they were in 21/22. Had Gaudreau resigned as well as Tkachuckwho knows what happens. They could have maintained their status as a contender or perhaps they would have still tuned out Sutter and missed the playoffs.no one knows.

[Pekkerhead]

Originally Posted by Spurs

But even at the time the results showed that they weren't a contender. The hindsight just helps to show us that is clear.

I think you are being very hopeful with Markstrom and Hubredeau being at that level. Especially going forward as this season we clearly are not contenders.

I think it is very early to consider to be contenders, but if you do I would say Winnipeg has Hellybuyck who has shown to be more consistent and arguably better at his peak that Markstrom. They have Scheifle and Connors producing at a PPG we do not have anyone close, they have Ehlers who would be tied for top scorer on our team, Perfetti who would be near the top for us as well. Morrisey as a defenseman is likely better than what we have. Not necessarily a massive gap between the two sides but I also don't expect that Winnipeg will threaten much in the play-offs.

All fair points. Maybe we’ll get lucky with a trade like the jets did with dumping Dubois.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

All fair points. Maybe we’ll get lucky with a trade like the jets did with dumping Dubois.

Feels like the Flyers just made that trade.

[Pekkerhead]

I really don’t want them to do a full rebuild and suck for 5-10 years with no guarantees of ever winning. It would be horrible to watch and depressing. I’m hoping for a Blues type win out of nowhere (wolf bring our binnington). I’m 55 years old and I’m running out of decades to wait for our second one!!

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

All fair points. Maybe we’ll get lucky with a trade like the jets did with dumping Dubois.

Luck doesn’t count according to Spurs.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by TOfan

How many fourth overall teams in the recent history of the league not been widely considered contenders?

Pekkerhead has it right. Claiming teams were not contenders in retrospect is a flimsy position to take.

The Flames, unfortunately, were a much different team in 22/23 than they were in 21/22. Had Gaudreau resigned as well as Tkachuckwho knows what happens. They could have maintained their status as a contender or perhaps they would have still tuned out Sutter and missed the playoffs.no one knows.

Except it isn't in hindsight, at the time it was clear they weren't contenders, their play in the play-offs both round one and two showed that. The "hindsight" confirms the things that were clear at the time.

What is flimsy is to ignore the result over multiple seasons because they contradict what you want to be true.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Luck doesn’t count according to Spurs.

Not true, luck isn't a way to build a team.

Saying that going forward we might get lucky is a horrible plan for building a contending team.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

All fair points. Maybe we’ll get lucky with a trade like the jets did with dumping Dubois.

Yes that would be great and is probably needed for us if we want to compete and win a Cup, but what we should do is plan for us not getting lucky because there is no way to guarantee that happens. If we build a team that is competitive on its own and then get that luck, great.

[Flames1217]

Originally Posted by Spurs

Not true, luck isn't a way to build a team.

Saying that going forward we might get lucky is a horrible plan for building a contending team.

You don't think Tampa lucked out with Point and Kucherov ?

Or Boston with Marchand and Bergeron.

Almost all the contenders got lucky at some point and get players in later rounds who turn into absolute beauts.

Luck is absolutely part of it.

[Pekkerhead]

Originally Posted by Spurs

Yes that would be great and is probably needed for us if we want to compete and win a Cup, but what we should do is plan for us not getting lucky because there is no way to guarantee that happens. If we build a team that is competitive on its own and then get that luck, great.

Ok. But isn’t drafting players largely luck (with a few exceptions). Look at Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Pastrnak and JG in the later rounds and countless high pick busts. Sorry about any misspelling of names.

[Bonded]

If drafting was purely luck then every team would have the same hit rate over a long period of time.

The athletic did an article on it and the the Flames were the second best drafting team behind the Stars from 2007-2018.



https://flamesnation.ca/news/the-ath...-drafting-team

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Flames1217

You don't think Tampa lucked out with Point and Kucherov ?

Or Boston with Marchand and Bergeron.

Almost all the contenders got lucky at some point and get players in later rounds who turn into absolute beauts.

Luck is absolutely part of it.

Luck being part of it and luck being planned is the difference.

I don't think Tampa or Boston said "you know what lets not make moves that make sense for the team because we might get lucky." They built up the best teams they could so if they got lucky the could take advantage and use that to compete.

Reading here helps, nobody is saying that luck isn't a part of it, it 100% is. But saying lets keep Hanifin because we might get lucky and get a better defenseman is not a solid way to build a team. The team should be planning on ways they can get the players they need without luck.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

Ok. But isn’t drafting players largely luck (with a few exceptions). Look at Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Pastrnak and JG in the later rounds and countless high pick busts. Sorry about any misspelling of names.

To a certain extent there is some luck involved for sure. If any of those teams thought that those players would turn out to be who they were no chance they wait that long.

But I am not sure there is a team out there that is built on that. That is the difference here.

As mentioned above the plan to get an elite defenseman cannot be let's hope we get lucky, if you do great, but that can't be the plan. If you are building a team and trying to figure out what pieces you need, if part of that plan is hoping to get a Datsyuk, Zetterberg or JG in the later rounds you are likely going to fail.

Even hoping that your mid-late first or 2nd rounder turns out to be a Point or Patrnak is not the way that any GM should be looking to build a team.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Bonded

If drafting was purely luck then every team would have the same hit rate over a long period of time.

The athletic did an article on it and the the Flames were the second best drafting team behind the Stars from 2007-2018.



https://flamesnation.ca/news/the-ath...-drafting-team

And with all that drafting success how much did it result in success versus teams that had worst drafting ability but picking at spots that almost, teams still eff it up, always give you elite talent?

[Pekkerhead]

Originally Posted by Spurs

And with all that drafting success how much did it result in success versus teams that had worst drafting ability but picking at spots that almost, teams still eff it up, always give you elite talent?

Fox, JG and Tkachuk. Pretty good drafting and a great trio to build on, so crappy that they all decided they didn’t want to be in Calgary.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Spurs

Not true, luck isn't a way to build a team.

Saying that going forward we might get lucky is a horrible plan for building a contending team.

Yet luck seems to be a common factor in building winning teams.

Makar going after Hischer, Nolan, and Hieskanen. Kucherov and Point in round 2 and 3 respectively. Off the top of my head for two recent cup winning teams.

If you consider the Stars as a contender you can probably attribute some luck in the draft that nested them Hieskanen, Robertson, and Ottenger.

Wherever you decide to draw the line between luck and talent is debatable but I don’t think you can dismiss luck entirely. I’m pretty sure ‘we’re lucky to have got him where we did’ is said at every draft.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Flames were also lucky to draft Tkachuk because Vancouver was stupid

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Bonded

If drafting was purely luck then every team would have the same hit rate over a long period of time.

The athletic did an article on it and the the Flames were the second best drafting team behind the Stars from 2007-2018.



https://flamesnation.ca/news/the-ath...-drafting-team

This is probably all coming from the ‘hack journalists’ Spurs was referring to earlier.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Yet luck seems to be a common factor in building winning teams.

Makar going after Hischer, Nolan, and Hieskanen. Kucherov and Point in round 2 and 3 respectively. Off the top of my head for two recent cup winning teams.

If you consider the Stars as a contender you can probably attribute some luck in the draft that nested them Hieskanen, Robertson, and Ottenger.

Wherever you decide to draw the line between luck and talent is debatable but I don’t think you can dismiss luck entirely. I’m pretty sure ‘we’re lucky to have got him where we did’ is said at every draft.

Makar was the 4th overall pick, that isn't luck so much as being in a high draft position to draft an elite player. They also had McKinnon at 1 which likely takes them from being a very good team with Makar to a Cup winner with MacKinnon.

The Dallas draft is much better with Heiskanen at 3rd overall versus 7,8,9 and getting Anderson, Middelstat and Rasmussen.

As many examples there are for getting lucky and it working out there are 10x (if not more) examples of that luck not happening at all.