[Trade] Habs trade Monahan to the Jets for a 2024 1st and cond 2027 3rd

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by traptor

It sounds like the flames viewed kuzmnko as a big positive asset.

It's possible that the Jets ponied up a big offer like a 1st+lambert+

But the flames preferred the canucks offer

What they say publically and what they think are two different things.

Vancouver was trying to move him with sweetners. Everyone knew that. Calgary got extra stuff for taking him.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

What they say publically and what they think are two different things.

Vancouver was trying to move him with sweetners. Everyone knew that. Calgary got extra stuff for taking him.

Maybe.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

What they say publically and what they think are two different things.

Vancouver was trying to move him with sweetners. Everyone knew that. Calgary got extra stuff for taking him.

If that was the case Conroy didn’t get too much ‘extra stuff’

I think he just like to gamble and see if they can turn around Kuzmenko like they did Sharangovich

[Roof-Daddy]

As a staunch Treliving supporter I understand why he did what he did here, but boy has it ever blown up in spectacular fashion.

Total disaster, no doubt about it.

[Jay Random]

Part of the ‘extra stuff’ was not having to retain salary on Lindholm.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Part of the ‘extra stuff’ was not having to retain salary on Lindholm.

But with kuzmenkos contract going back they didn't save any cap anyways so it's a moot point.

If it was all futures and lindholm being shed then you might have a point.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

As a staunch Treliving supporter I understand why he did what he did here, but boy has it ever blown up in spectacular fashion.

Total disaster, no doubt about it.

You're still a treliving supporter?

I didn't know that still existed.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

As a staunch Treliving supporter I understand why he did what he did here, but boy has it ever blown up in spectacular fashion.

Total disaster, no doubt about it.

I was not a Treliving fan for a number of years but ####ting on him now seems pointless. Glad that we have Conroy, I believe he has an actual plan. Whether or not ownership ever actually prevented a rebuild or Treliving was against a rebuild is pointless now, I am just glad that it definitely appears that Conroy has convinced ownership of the validity of it.

He has traded 3 guys who are going to be 29 or older next year and he has received back 9 assets, 7 of whom are 21 or younger and all of whom are younger than the youngest player traded.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Between the botching of Gaudreau and premature signing of Huberdeau I didn't think he could have supporters still.

For me his best best work was up until 2017 or 2018 (Hamilton acquisition then Hanifin & Lindholm, the subsequent contracts as well as some key draft picks) and it was downhill from there. Slowly at first, then quickly.

He cracked under the aftermath of Gaudreau & Tkachuk. He needed to take a vacation at that point, reassess and take it back to the white board.

They could've been in their 2nd year of their rebuild already and sitting on multiple good prospects from the 2023 draft if he managed the Tkachuk trade return properly (by flipping assets).

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

But with kuzmenkos contract going back they didn't save any cap anyways so it's a moot point.

If it was all futures and lindholm being shed then you might have a point.

That's precisely the point. Vancouver needed to shed cap to make the deal work. So they dumped Kuzmenko instead of having the Flames retain on Lindholm.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Between the botching of Gaudreau and premature signing of Huberdeau I didn't think he could have supporters still. \

Gaudreau botched Gaudreau. Treliving thought he had a deal. Gaudreau's agent even thought he had a deal. At the last minute, Gaudreau said, ‘No deal.’

As for Huberdeau, from the very minute the trade was announced, some posters on CP were crying about how Treliving had better not botch this one by walking him to free agency. Those people, at least, have no cause to complain about how it turned out.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Gaudreau botched Gaudreau. Treliving thought he had a deal. Gaudreau's agent even thought he had a deal. At the last minute, Gaudreau said, ‘No deal.’

As for Huberdeau, from the very minute the trade was announced, some posters on CP were crying about how Treliving had better not botch this one by walking him to free agency. Those people, at least, have no cause to complain about how it turned out.

I maintain Treliving needed to ink the extension with gaudreau the summer prior.

Letting it drag into the season was negligent of the potential risk and stupid. You don't #### around with your player that makes your whole offense go. And even if they signed him, his stock went way up at that point too.

Gaudreau botched his end of it by passing up more money and going to a terrible destination to whither away but Treluving botched his end too by letting it get to that point where the fate of the whole core's future in calgary is left up to an emotional decision at the last minute.

Treliving as the gm in that situation does NOT deserve any defense.

Play on the edge, you open yourself up to being burnt.

The outcome of that situation has resulted in potentially 5-6 years of a team that wont be able to compete for anything until it rebuilds through the draft.

You're putting it entirely on gaudreau for exercising his rights as a player when the Flames allowed him to remain unsigned until that point? Woof.

[bigrangy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That's precisely the point. Vancouver needed to shed cap to make the deal work. So they dumped Kuzmenko instead of having the Flames retain on Lindholm.

Which should have required the Canucks to pay appropriately to do so, which they didn’t. The Flames (if they were a well run hockey team) would have no problems retaining half of Lindholm to make it work, not taking on a cap dump for essentially free instead.

Where is the value Calgary got for helping Vancouver out of the Kuzmenko contract? It’s just not there. 1st+Bruzustewicz+depth pick/prospect was the absolute bare minimum for what Lindholm should have returned on his own.

So now we get the honor of having to deal with Kuzmenko and didn’t get paid a penny to deal with it. Better players have been dumped for more than it took to add Kuzmenko to this trade.

But Calgary is not a well run team, they need to “keep a competitive team on the ice”. And so management sees Kuzmenko as being a drop in replacement for Lindholm more or less, just like they (to some success, so far) saw Sharangovich as a drop in replacement for Toffoli. The mandate is not to get any worse on the ice while moving these players that don’t want to be here long term. The futures returns in these trades are secondary to management’s apparent need to have a fresh body take the place of the old one.

It’s not the worst strategy overall but it is one that keeps the team away from the ultimate goal. This team still needs two franchise players, every good team has 2. You get them at the draft, and you most often get them in the top 5. This team is never going to aim to pick top 5, as evidenced by these trades that are placing value on the return’s ability to contribute on the ice vs it’s ability to contribute in the future.

To use an analogy, the Flames are investing everything in a GIC. “It’s steady, safe, free money” they say, as they lose year over year to inflation. The team needs to gamble a little bit if they ever want to become a premier team.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I was not a Treliving fan for a number of years but ####ting on him now seems pointless. Glad that we have Conroy, I believe he has an actual plan. Whether or not ownership ever actually prevented a rebuild or Treliving was against a rebuild is pointless now, I am just glad that it definitely appears that Conroy has convinced ownership of the validity of it.

He has traded 3 guys who are going to be 29 or older next year and he has received back 9 assets, 7 of whom are 21 or younger and all of whom are younger than the youngest player traded.

All three players either requested trades or refused to sign though. I'm glad they got mostly futures back, but I'm still not convinced they will commit to a rebuild over any extended period of time. Are they willing to bottom out for a few seasons? Are they willing to be patient with building things back up? Will they be willing to try and maximize their assets with retention or trading guys with term? It's easy to trade UFA's when youre not in a playoff spot. I'm very curious to see how they go about handling everything else.

[saillias]

Don't really like this for the Jets to be honest, an uncharacteristic move for them. They must not really like what they see in the late first round, or got FOMO after the Lindholm trade.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

You're putting it entirely on gaudreau for exercising his rights as a player when the Flames allowed him to remain unsigned until that point? Woof.

Gaudreau had the same right not to sign a contract a year before it expired.

I'm just trying to imagine how badly CP would have melted down if Treliving had offered Gaudreau 8 x $10.5m after his 49-point COVID season.

[AlmightyJay]

On a semi related note, can someone provide a breakdown (in simple English) of all the conditions of the original Monaghan trade to Montreal? If memory recalls someone posted a flowchart of the conditions at one point in time. I tried deciphering it on Capfriendly but got confused.

My fear is that this trade will screw the Flames down the road.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by bigrangy

Which should have required the Canucks to pay appropriately to do so, which they didn’t. The Flames (if they were a well run hockey team) would have no problems retaining half of Lindholm to make it work, not taking on a cap dump for essentially free instead.

Even the maximum retention would not have been enough to keep the Canucks cap-compliant. They also needed to shed an actual player salary.

Where is the value Calgary got for helping Vancouver out of the Kuzmenko contract? It’s just not there. 1st+Bruzustewicz+depth pick/prospect was the absolute bare minimum for what Lindholm should have returned on his own.

It was more than any other team offered. Your opinion doesn't trump the actual market.

So now we get the honor of having to deal with Kuzmenko

Whom you assume, against the evidence, to be useless.

and didn’t get paid a penny to deal with it. Better players have been dumped for more than it took to add Kuzmenko to this trade.

How do you know how much it took to add Kuzmenko to the trade? Do you have information on an alternative offer that did not include Kuzmenko? If not, you have no grounds for complaint.

[QUOTE]But Calgary is not a well run team, they need to “keep a competitive team on the ice”.

And so management sees Kuzmenko as being a drop in replacement for Lindholm more or less, just like they (to some success, so far) saw Sharangovich as a drop in replacement for Toffoli.

They clearly do not see him as that, or they wouldn't have demanded (and received) four other assets along with him. For that matter, they didn't see Sharangovich as a ‘drop-in replacement for Toffoli’.

The mandate is not to get any worse on the ice while moving these players that don’t want to be here long term.

That's your assumption. That's not what Conroy is saying, and it isn't what he's doing.

The futures returns in these trades are secondary to management’s apparent need to have a fresh body take the place of the old one.

Every NHL team is required to dress 20 players for a game, and if it has an AHL affiliate, it has to provide enough players for that as well. The Flames have only 43 players under contract now, which is barely enough to do that. They do actually need to have bodies coming back in trades.

It’s not the worst strategy overall but it is one that keeps the team away from the ultimate goal. This team still needs two franchise players, every good team has 2.

A franchise player is supposed to be a player who makes or breaks a franchise all by himself. By definition, if you need two of them, they aren't franchise players.

You get them at the draft, and you most often get them in the top 5. This team is never going to aim to pick top 5, as evidenced by these trades that are placing value on the return’s ability to contribute on the ice vs it’s ability to contribute in the future.

No team ever aims to pick top 5. That's a fan fantasy.

To use an analogy, the Flames are investing everything in a GIC. “It’s steady, safe, free money” they say, as they lose year over year to inflation. The team needs to gamble a little bit if they ever want to become a premier team.

That's a piss-poor analogy. Managing a hockey team is nothing like building an investment portfolio.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

You're still a treliving supporter?

I didn't know that still existed.

I was a staunch supporter. Was.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Gaudreau had the same right not to sign a contract a year before it expired.

I'm just trying to imagine how badly CP would have melted down if Treliving had offered Gaudreau 8 x $10.5m after his 49-point COVID season.

So just let him expire? That's better?

It may very well have been around what he got in Columbus that summer. Fans would've got over it and continued to enjoy the best Flames line in decades.

I don't think Tre got serious enough on talks then because he assumed Gaudreau loved calgary and would be game to sign later.