Do you trade Rasmus Andersson this summer?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

I suggested targeting Sergachev in a Rasmus trade rather than re-sign Rasmus. We have extra picks, they have none. Rasmus probably gets same money as Sergachev already makes now but is younger and the contract ends at a much younger age.

Rasmus to Tampa allows Tampa to keep Stamkos and not hurt their chances of winning now

Serg is 25, Rasmus is 27 right now?

TB would be trading 7 years of Serg for 2 years of Rasmus.

I get that would fit their competitive window, but Serg is considered better than Rasmus, and TB loves him. Plus it only saves then less than $4M, so I doubt that Stamkos would be interested in that kind of money.

Serg's NTC kicks in on June 15, FWIW.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I’m not pumped to sign a 30 year old Rasmus to a 8 year 55 + million dollar deal

We have to stop signing 30 year olds long term

Trade him to the Leafs, I hear their GM likes to sign 30 year olds long term.

[Strange Brew]

Flames aren't big on trading guys until they have to, either because their contract is expiring or they want out. With two years left on hid deal, I really doubt they trade him.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

My only stress is over exposing Wolf. If he is going to be a franchise goalie we need to give him a fighting chance, and a part of that is protecting him from getting shelled night in night out.

Getting shelled nightly is the best thing for him.

Don’t worry about wins and losses or stats of any kind really.

Learn the league. Build your book on shooters. Figure out how your hedgehog style actually translates to the league.

The AHL doesn’t have Connor McDavid or Nathan MacKinnon or Jack Eichel.

Wolf needs to learn to deal with NHL level talent, and the only way he’s gonna do that is to play.

If he were 20 years old, I’d worry about “protecting” him.

He’s 23.

Learn to fly already.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Trading one guy who's 28 years old means the Flames will be bad for 10 years?

No, I didn’t mean trading Rasmus would lead to a decade of loses, I just think if the Flames trade all the veterans for picks/prospects it will lead to a much much longer timeline for a turnaround to a contender. Has a team in the last 15-20 years stripped it down to the bones and successfully transformed 3 or 4 years later with the assets they had accumulated? I think there are more examples like Ottawa, Buffalo, Blue Jackets that get mired in the mud for much longer than anyone believed possible. I don’t want that for the small market Flames with a new building on the near horizon. Keeping a culture of competitiveness would be my preference.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

I would guess you would have 0 chance signing Rasmus for 4 years. I would bet it's 8 years or a higher cap for 6 years minimum.

8 years @ $8.5 or so

6/7 years @ $9+

But that's my point.

Based on the matrix he will be 30 when the new deal starts so you approach it as a four year deal.

Internally maybe you make a decision to give him 5 or even 6 as a slide or exception, but otherwise it's an "OK then, I guess we have to deal you".

I want Andersson to stay. I don't believe in down to the studs as a rebuild method. But I also don't believe in 8 year deals to 30 year olds.

[boogerz]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Serg is 25, Rasmus is 27 right now?

TB would be trading 7 years of Serg for 2 years of Rasmus.

I get that would fit their competitive window, but Serg is considered better than Rasmus, and TB loves him. Plus it only saves then less than $4M, so I doubt that Stamkos would be interested in that kind of money.

Serg's NTC kicks in on June 15, FWIW.

Sergachev for Andersson is an interesting trade proposal, imo.

Tampa currently has $5M to find two top6 wingers, a 12/13 forward, and a 6/7 defensemen.

Sergachev and Andersson are roughly equivalent right now with respect to their impact on the game. Different styles and strengths, but they both slot in as a 2/3 dman on a good team. Sergachev may have untapped potential and could be a future #1, but he's the 13th highest paid dman in the league and there's no guarantee that he takes another step in his development to make his contract worth it.

Hypothetically, the $4M Tampa saves by trading Sergachev for Andersson gives Tampa enough cap room ($9M) to resign Stamkos at a decent amount (suppose $5M AAV with Stamkos taking a "hometown" discount), two league minimum players to fill out the roster, and roughly $2.5M remaining to find a skilled player willing to sign for cheap (Duclair?).

Hedman-Cernak and McDonagh-Andersson is still cup-caliber defense and Tampa stays loaded upfront with Point, Kucherov, Hagel, Stamkos, and Cirelli. Everyone's contract is locked in, so this is their roster for the next two seasons.

Calgary gets a dman that can immediately replace Andersson with some potential to be better.

A deal focused on Sergachev for Andersson sounds like a reasonably fair deal for both teams. Maybe Calgary throws in a pick or something, but I would do it if I was Conroy and the pick isn't a first rounder.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Getting shelled nightly is the best thing for him.

Don’t worry about wins and losses or stats of any kind really.

Learn the league. Build your book on shooters. Figure out how your hedgehog style actually translates to the league.

The AHL doesn’t have Connor McDavid or Nathan MacKinnon or Jack Eichel.

Wolf needs to learn to deal with NHL level talent, and the only way he’s gonna do that is to play.

If he were 20 years old, I’d worry about “protecting” him.

He’s 23.

Learn to fly already.

The Flames D is already bottom of the league with Rasmus, without him it is downright awful maybe the worst in the NHL. With Andersson he only have 3 NHL D men. What happens if Weegar gets hurt, or Kyllington needs another year away?

I say Trade Markstom, Mangiapane and Kuzmenko. But leave the D alone unless someone proves next year that Andersson is replaceable.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Serg is 25, Rasmus is 27 right now?

TB would be trading 7 years of Serg for 2 years of Rasmus.

I get that would fit their competitive window, but Serg is considered better than Rasmus, and TB loves him. Plus it only saves then less than $4M, so I doubt that Stamkos would be interested in that kind of money.

Serg's NTC kicks in on June 15, FWIW.

June 15....2027

I get that Sergachev is better, but contract has value and situation also contributes. Rasmus likely would stay in Tampa too.

Tampa has $5 mil cap add another $4 mil and you got Stamkos. Who else could they trade to save cap? Rasmus and McDonagh in for Sergachev and the cap to keep Stamkos is a huge win for them. We likely have to add picks and maybe it would need to be Van's 1st but I think they would consider it.

Almost all their high cap guys contribute at a high level, but Sergachev seems to get hurt the most and their d was bad last year. Which is why the added McDonagh back despite the bad contract and age. They don't care about long term, the window is closing soon no matter what they do. Why not make a run now?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

June 15....2027

I get that Sergachev is better, but contract has value and situation also contributes. Rasmus likely would stay in Tampa too.

Tampa has $5 mil cap add another $4 mil and you got Stamkos. Who else could they trade to save cap? Rasmus and McDonagh in for Sergachev and the cap to keep Stamkos is a huge win for them. We likely have to add picks and maybe it would need to be Van's 1st but I think they would consider it.

Almost all their high cap guys contribute at a high level, but Sergachev seems to get hurt the most and their d was bad last year. Which is why the added McDonagh back despite the bad contract and age. They don't care about long term, the window is closing soon no matter what they do. Why not make a run now?

Sergachev has a full No Trade Clause effective next season. Pretty sure it kicks in in about 3 weeks.

[CKPThunder]

When did NTC and NMC start in the middle of June? I always thought they started on July 1 which coincides with free agency.

Sergachev has a full NTC that starts for the 2024-2025 season which I believe is July 1, 2024.

I figure the June 15, 2027 date is when his full NTC probably changes like a 5-10 team NTC and he has to submit a list or something like that.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Sergachev for Rasmus? Yes please.

Don't know how drunk you'd have to get BriseBois to make that happen though.

Tampa would never do that. I think people overrate Rasmus big time.

[activeStick]

Are there any recentish examples of a 28 year old top 2 defenceman on their team (top 4 league-wide based on the team) that has signed as a UFA for 4 years?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Are there any recentish examples of a 28 year old top 2 defenceman on their team (top 4 league-wide based on the team) that has signed as a UFA for 4 years?

1) Nobody is suggesting or assuming he would sign that deal. Just saying I wouldn't go by 4 years (maybe 5 or 6 as an exception).
2) He won't be 28 when his new deal kicks in.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by Bingo

1) Nobody is suggesting or assuming he would sign that deal. Just saying I wouldn't go by 4 years (maybe 5 or 6 as an exception).

2) He won't be 28 when his new deal kicks in.

I agree with you that an 8 year extension is scary and I too would try for 6. Wasn't attacking anyone with my post, as it is a legitimate question of mine, wondering if any 29 year old top 2 or top 4 dman has ever taken a 4 year deal as a free agent.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by activeStick

I agree with you that an 8 year extension is scary and I too would try for 6. Wasn't attacking anyone with my post, as it is a legitimate question of mine, wondering if any 29 year old top 2 or top 4 dman has ever taken a 4 year deal as a free agent.

Some team will give Andersson 8 years. If the Flames' plan is to keep him to try and get him on a six year deal then just cut bait now.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Freddy

No, I didn’t mean trading Rasmus would lead to a decade of loses, I just think if the Flames trade all the veterans for picks/prospects it will lead to a much much longer timeline for a turnaround to a contender. Has a team in the last 15-20 years stripped it down to the bones and successfully transformed 3 or 4 years later with the assets they had accumulated? I think there are more examples like Ottawa, Buffalo, Blue Jackets that get mired in the mud for much longer than anyone believed possible. I don’t want that for the small market Flames with a new building on the near horizon. Keeping a culture of competitiveness would be my preference.

Not sure why it would be longer to become a contender, when none of the current Flames we are suggesting being traded would be around when Calgary might be a contender.

Keeping them delays becoming a contender for the sole purpose of winning some meaningless games so Calgary doesn’t look like a SJ or Chicago. Chicago especially stripped it down, they are closer to being a contender than we are, notwithstanding how bad they are today.

I get that many don’t want to watch that type of team, but I really don’t want to watch a bubble team the rest of my life.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by activeStick

I agree with you that an 8 year extension is scary and I too would try for 6. Wasn't attacking anyone with my post, as it is a legitimate question of mine, wondering if any 29 year old top 2 or top 4 dman has ever taken a 4 year deal as a free agent.

At 29 any UFA will try and get as much as he can for term.

That term will depend on how good he is.

If he only gets offers in the 4 year range, he’s likely a 4 at best, and certainly not a top 3 guy.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Some team will give Andersson 8 years. If the Flames' plan is to keep him to try and get him on a six year deal then just cut bait now.

I agree, I think they should cut bait if a 6 year deal won’t work for Andersson. That said, I think the Flames place a very high value on the ‘culture of competition’. Meaning they tend to want to keep the guys they can, who are good players/people and vets.

What’s good to see though is, under Conroy, they are holding firm on term. It could very well be the Flames offering a 6 year term and saying ‘take it or leave it’. Seems like this was their strategy last year with a number of their pending UFA’s, Toffoli and Zadorov specifically. Sounds like they had 8 years on the table for Lindholm but held firm on $. Also good to see.

[Rick M.]

Time for a poll?