2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

If the ownership group is still out there doing whatever it takes for a couple playoff games then I think they should be facing all the criticism. Getting sick of hearing how much they are involved in the hockey op decisions and spoiling multiple deals both externally and internally. Even hearing the stories of him calling Gaudreau personally and giving him an earful (not sure if fact or speculation?)

Either way getting tired of hearing just how involved these guys are at the most pivotal points.

I think you just have to keep in mind that these are the limitations in place on this team, and they will be there as long as this ownership structure is in place.

We saw how problematic it was last Summer with Bean's trainwreck of a press conference.

It's about progress to smart practices though. Step 1 is what Conroy has been doing (don't lose free agents for nothing). Hopefully that eventually grows to a place where we don't spend like idiots in free agency, invest in young core players correctly (Gaudreau, Tkachuk extensions being too short and not being given enough 'ownership' of the room), with a stretch goal of hopefully one day placing the importance on the top end of the draft that is required to win a Cup in this league.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Toast_Man

Wow, Seravalli on Barnburner today says Fitz and Connie had a deal but 'upper management' killed it over salary retention. He specifically mentions Maloney.

So while I don't think this is 100% true, it does seem the deal was scuttled due to the "value of retention".

https://puckpedia.com/CapRelief

Based on this the value of $3M of retention for 1 season is 43rd overall pick, the value for 2 seasons is 29th overall pick.

So really if they want 50% retention on Markstrom it's worth 2 2nd round picks, or 1 1st round pick.

Which I'm sure is throwing the wrench in the gears in a scenario where you already offered 1st + Holtz.

Because do you want to offer Holtz + 1st + 1st or Holtz + 1st + 2 2nds...starts to feel steep.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Does anyone actually believe they think they have a shot at the playoffs after trading away Lindholm, Zadorov, Tanev and now Hanifin up next.

We literally will have gutted our defence and filled it out with AHL players and waiver pickups. Not to mention someone returning to hockey after 1.5 years away.

They even worked out a deal to trade Markstrom, do you actually think they would have entertained that trade if the playoffs are the goal?

It's weird. on paper you would think zero chance, yet they have stayed afloat.

The emergence of Zary, Pospisil, Pachal, & the return of Kylington have all been surprises to the upside that it has offset a lot of the loss felt from the other guys. Lindholm leaving seemed to also rejuvenate Huberdeau which was also a positive symptom of the trade.

Hanifin would be a big dagger though.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

If the return was indeed quantity over quality I'm glad they nixed it.

It may not be for the right reasons, and the approach of those above Conroy may be deeply flawed ("get in" mentality), but I'm glad it happened.

Only trade markstrom for an overpayment. Doesn't sound like that's what was on the table. It's too bad they asked him to waive before getting the green light from upstairs and opened that can of worms.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So while I don't think this is 100% true, it does seem the deal was scuttled due to the "value of retention".

https://puckpedia.com/CapRelief

Based on this the value of $3M of retention for 1 season is 43rd overall pick, the value for 2 seasons is 29th overall pick.

So really if they want 50% retention on Markstrom it's worth 2 2nd round picks, or 1 1st round pick.

Which I'm sure is throwing the wrench in the gears in a scenario where you already offered 1st + Holtz.

Because do you want to offer Holtz + 1st + 1st or Holtz + 1st + 2 2nds...starts to feel steep.

It's steep because the initial offer is too much. Holtz for Markstrom is enough. If 50% retained is worth the 1st then it should be Holtz and a 1st for Markstrom. IMO $3 mil for 2 more seasons is worth slightly more than a 1st though. Holtz 1st and 2nd in 25 or 26 is worth it from a Flames perspective. NJ should consider it as well because Markstrom at $3 mil is a steal even if there is risk due to his age.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So while I don't think this is 100% true, it does seem the deal was scuttled due to the "value of retention".

https://puckpedia.com/CapRelief

Based on this the value of $3M of retention for 1 season is 43rd overall pick, the value for 2 seasons is 29th overall pick.

So really if they want 50% retention on Markstrom it's worth 2 2nd round picks, or 1 1st round pick.

Which I'm sure is throwing the wrench in the gears in a scenario where you already offered 1st + Holtz.

Because do you want to offer Holtz + 1st + 1st or Holtz + 1st + 2 2nds...starts to feel steep.

Flip the script.

How would Flames fans feel if Conroy traded 2 1st round picks a recent 7th overall pick for a 34 soon to be 35 year old goalie, who has had a bumpy ride in Calgary. Or 2nd round picks a 1st and Holtz.

That is a very ugly deal from the Devils side. Hamonic level bad, maybe even worse.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

If the ownership group is still out there doing whatever it takes for a couple playoff games then I think they should be facing all the criticism. Getting sick of hearing how much they are involved in the hockey op decisions and spoiling multiple deals both externally and internally. Even hearing the stories of him calling Gaudreau personally and giving him an earful (not sure if fact or speculation?)

Either way getting tired of hearing just how involved these guys are at the most pivotal points.

Please remind yourself this is all unsubstantiated speculation, and none of what you are upset about is factual.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Flip the script.

How would Flames fans feel if Conroy traded 2 1st round picks a recent 7th overall pick for a 34 soon to be 35 year old goalie, who has had a bumpy ride in Calgary. Or 2nd round picks a 1st and Holtz.

That is a very ugly deal from the Devils side. Hamonic level bad, maybe even worse.

I agree, the value of the retention is close IMO. The starting point is just not happening. No way the Flames could get Holtz and 1st for Markstrom no salary retained. It's just way off IMO that this is the ask.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

It's weird. on paper you would think zero chance, yet they have stayed afloat.

The emergence of Zary, Pospisil, Pachal, & the return of Kylington have all been surprises to the upside that it has offset a lot of the loss felt from the other guys. Lindholm leaving seemed to also rejuvenate Huberdeau which was also a positive symptom of the trade.

Hanifin would be a big dagger though.

We already saw the team look like crap for 2 period vs Pittsburgh. It took a highlight reel goal from Kadri to get us going.

We are going to keep subtracting from that team, not adding. It's not going to be a pretty end to the season.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Flip the script.

How would Flames fans feel if Conroy traded 2 1st round picks a recent 7th overall pick for a 34 soon to be 35 year old goalie, who has had a bumpy ride in Calgary. Or 2nd round picks a 1st and Holtz.

That is a very ugly deal from the Devils side. Hamonic level bad, maybe even worse.

The teams are on entirely different trajectories.

That being said, I think the values discussed on here can't be real at the end of the day.

There's zero market history that dictates a 34 year old goalie is worth a 1st + recent 7th round pick. The second 1st being about the correct price for the $6M of retention.

1st + 1st or Holtz + 1st is about the closest you can get to what looks like good/market value for Markstrom @ 50%, and even then...comparables just aren't there.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So while I don't think this is 100% true, it does seem the deal was scuttled due to the "value of retention".

https://puckpedia.com/CapRelief

Based on this the value of $3M of retention for 1 season is 43rd overall pick, the value for 2 seasons is 29th overall pick.

So really if they want 50% retention on Markstrom it's worth 2 2nd round picks, or 1 1st round pick.

Which I'm sure is throwing the wrench in the gears in a scenario where you already offered 1st + Holtz.

Because do you want to offer Holtz + 1st + 1st or Holtz + 1st + 2 2nds...starts to feel steep.

Interesting way to break it down if indeed the GMs use a similar valuation as puckpedia.

It would explain that if it was NJ who had a change of heart.....why they did.

Steep in an understatement, but maybe it should be as well.

Complicated stuff.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Does anyone actually believe they think they have a shot at the playoffs after trading away Lindholm, Zadorov, Tanev and now Hanifin up next.

We literally will have gutted our defence and filled it out with AHL players and waiver pickups. Not to mention someone returning to hockey after 1.5 years away.

They even worked out a deal to trade Markstrom, do you actually think they would have entertained that trade if the playoffs are the goal?

Yes

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Does anyone actually believe they think they have a shot at the playoffs after trading away Lindholm, Zadorov, Tanev and now Hanifin up next.

We literally will have gutted our defence and filled it out with AHL players and waiver pickups. Not to mention someone returning to hockey after 1.5 years away.

They even worked out a deal to trade Markstrom, do you actually think they would have entertained that trade if the playoffs are the goal?

No.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

We already saw the team look like crap for 2 period vs Pittsburgh. It took a highlight reel goal from Kadri to get us going.

We are going to keep subtracting from that team, not adding. It's not going to be a pretty end to the season.

Yeah, they've been an up-and-down team, which is to be expected from a team 7 points out of the playoffs.

The surprising part is how they have kept pace for the most part despite the subtractions (due in part to those surprises I mentioned).

I don't think anyone disagrees that this team should miss the playoffs.

I'm just surprised they have lasted this long.

[Matty81]

Fair for the flames to want really good value for retention and if the Devils were trying to get it for free or pennies, no problems with that. Hoping Don Maloney isn't the one pulling the strings and overiding Conroy and it wasn't down to an internal dispute though. That's a guy who has been a serial loser as a Manager and should be no where near the steering wheel or anything other than another voice in the room, he's like Jay Feaster 2.0.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Maloney did well in the GM hiring process. But his input is no longer needed on anything hockey operations outside of moral support.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Sec214

I've been told its a garbage offer of no premium assets, just offering you a Dion deal. Quantity over quality.

Yeah - pass.

That's pathetic. NJ is literally flushing their season down the toilet.

[Hoop27]

As I've always understood things with the Flames is that they have a annual budget for the team. Coaches, players etc. (Say $100M just to put a number out there with no accuracy.)

If management wants to go over that amount due to retention etc. THEN they need ownership approval.

At least that was the case 10ish years ago as I recall so perhaps what they wanted to do would have exceeded said budget. If that was the cause of saying no to something so be it.

[PepsiFree]

If I have this right about the Markstrom trade, the Flames agreed to a deal and asked Markstrom to waive but then:

- pulled the deal because they were playing too well
- pulled the deal because they hadn’t agreed to a deal
- hadn’t agreed to a deal because Murray said “no” to retention
- hadn’t agreed to a deal because Maloney said “no” to retention
- hadn’t agreed to a deal because they only want Mercer
- hadn’t agreed to a deal because they want the 24 1st instead of the 25 1st
- hadn’t agreed to a deal because NJ weren’t offering enough for retention
- never had a deal because NJ never offered enough for a deal in the first place

Clear as mud, really. The nice part is you can just choose which of these allows you to criticize the person you already dislike in the Flames organization.

Meanwhile:
- Despite “going for it” they’ve traded Toffoli, Zadorov, Lindholm, Tanev, and (soon) Hanifin
- Despite not wanting to retain, retained on Tanev
- Despite “sticking to their ask” took less than a 1st for Tanev

It’s not possible that, maybe, Conroy is just good at this and has freedom to operate as he sees fit and the guy who desperately needs a goalie while he watches his team fail down the stretch is leaking crap to the media to cover for his inability to close Markstrom or Saros?

[Hot_Flatus]

Unlike Treliving, who was too often the bridesmaid and not the bride, Conroy has proven to be quite shrewd in terms of getting what at least early on, looks like fair value for a variety of UFA deals.

He was dealt a really rough hand by his predecessor and has done nothing but extract above average value IMHO. I'm not sure there's a home run in the lot yet, but a handful of really nice deals can go a long way in turning a franchise around.

[Sec214]