2024 Off-season trade rumours and speculation thread

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by bax

It’s not.

Stone was willing to sign an extension in Vegas and not in Calgary. Valimaki would have been a Sen if Stone was willing to sign.

Its unreal people still don't get this

[rhino]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Probably Montreal but the Flames still have to do a big retention and not getting much in return

His reputation around the league is not good

Retention is way less than a buyout or keeping him

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Soft player, choked in the playoff, team won the Cup moving on from him, 2 struggling years with the Flames.

Is that enough?

That’s his reputation in your head not around the league.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Soft player, choked in the playoff, team won the Cup moving on from him, 2 struggling years with the Flames.

Is that enough?

Team won the cup when their 10M goalie went from terrible to amazing...this is such a dumb narrative. They were down 3-1 when he was on the bench as the backup and then he suddenly became all world again. When he played poor in these playoffs they got hammered too.

They should really change the name of the sport to goaltending.

If a team wins the cup are all previous players bad lol

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

That’s his reputation in your head not around the league.

Ok let see if they can trade him

[Heavy Jack]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Its unreal people still don't get this

lol I fully ‘get’ it. And knowing now how Valimaki panes out getting lost for nothing via waiver claim I wouldn’t have minded seeing mark stone as a pure rental on that team as contrast. We might stand a better chance against a Colorado team that walked us in 5 and get more than 2 weak efforts in round 2 over the decade long era of Gaudreau.

Vancouver is likely not getting zad or Lindy back and the cost was high - likely higher than what we would have paid for stone as a pure rental - and it got them to within a couple goals of the conference finals.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Ok let see if they can trade him

nobody is disputing the contract is bad, why are you like this?

If he made 6M he would be an easy trade with many suitors

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Team won the cup when their 10M goalie went from terrible to amazing...this is such a dumb narrative. They were down 3-1 when he was on the bench as the backup and then he suddenly became all world again. When he played poor in these playoffs they got hammered too.

They should really change the name of the sport to goaltending.

If a team wins the cup are all previous players bad lol

Huberdeau had a miserable playoff the year they traded him.

For 10.5M they want someone that can help them win.
It’s hard to convince people that Huberdeau is the guy
It’s much easier to trade guys like Kadri and Coleman

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

lol I fully ‘get’ it. And knowing now how Valimaki panes out getting lost for nothing via waiver claim I wouldn’t have minded seeing mark stone as a pure rental on that team as contrast. We might stand a better chance against a Colorado team that walked us in 5 and get more than 2 weak efforts in round 2 over the decade long era of Gaudreau.

Vancouver is likely not getting zad or Lindy back and the cost was high - likely higher than what we would have paid for stone as a pure rental - and it got them to within a couple goals of the conference finals.

It wasn't just Valimaki for Stone, deal would have been bad for the Flames even in hindsight. They also lost to Colorado in 5 games, its not like it was close.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Huberdeau had a miserable playoff the year they traded him.

For 10.5M they want someone that can help them win.
It’s hard to convince people that Huberdeau is the guy
It’s much easier to trade guys like Kadri and Coleman

Yeah because they make far less money and far less term
so and so can't win, until they do

nobody is disputing the contract, he doesn't have a bad reputation though. In fact by all accounts he is great in the room and I know for a fact great in the community. Him and Barkov are still best friends its not like they thew his track suit in the shower.

[Heavy Jack]

Originally Posted by dino7c

It wasn't just Valimaki for Stone

I’m not suggesting it was but looking at what else Treliving spent assets on (hamonic trade for example) the proposed package for a rental stone especially with the team the flames had could have been the shot in the arm they needed. All coulda woulda shoulda at the end of the day but of all the rumoured deals that could have happened and didn’t during the gaudreau era that is the one that grinds my gears the most. Kinda like the Regehr for Thornton deal that coulda happened but was a bridge too far for sutter.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

I’m not suggesting it was but looking at what else Treliving spent assets on (hamonic trade for example) the proposed package for a rental stone especially with the team the flames had could have been the shot in the arm they needed. All coulda woulda shoulda at the end of the day but of all the rumoured deals that could have happened and didn’t during the gaudreau era that is the one that grinds my gears the most. Kinda like the Regehr for Thornton deal that coulda happened but was a bridge too far for sutter.

Alright well I just disagree it makes much difference...Flames still go out early with Stone and lost the assets. They had Mike Smith in net for Christ sake

[Heavy Jack]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Alright well I just disagree it makes much difference...Flames still go out early with Stone and lost the assets. They had Mike Smith in net for Christ sake

Same Mike smith that stomped us out in 5 lol. Meh, agree to disagree. Stone would have been a cool player to see opposite Gaudreau and could have changed the dynamics of the lineup greatly IMO.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Nightmare fuel.

I get ya, but I still think Conroy is going to walk this line. Build in the draft, build aggressively in transactions -> run all streams at all times. I think that’s the mandate/the approach.

Signing free agents to deals shorter than 6 or 7 years then allows him to continue to send players out (like pending UFAs) while finding a competitive balance with the focus being on long-term sustainability.

I’d 100% love to see a year of tanking, I just don’t know if that’s what we’ll see.

Tomorrow should be exciting. We’ll learn a lot.

[Royle9]

Finally heard back on Monahan.
Loves the idea and storyline behind it but doesn’t see it happening. Apparently the jets are very keen to bring him back and Monahan prefers that option.

Doesn’t mean it’s not possible, more likely not probable unless Winnipeg doesn’t bite.
Sorry folks!

With that said, my one worry is the reunion could be Gio, I’d rather not but I could see him come in as a 6-7 and play sheltered minutes while being that presence in the room.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Loves the idea and storyline behind it but doesn’t see it happening.

To clarify, your source loves the idea, or Monahan does?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

I’m not suggesting it was but looking at what else Treliving spent assets on (hamonic trade for example) the proposed package for a rental stone especially with the team the flames had could have been the shot in the arm they needed. All coulda woulda shoulda at the end of the day but of all the rumoured deals that could have happened and didn’t during the gaudreau era that is the one that grinds my gears the most. Kinda like the Regehr for Thornton deal that coulda happened but was a bridge too far for sutter.

You’re pointing something out here that you should acknowledge, though.

Treliving didn’t spend assets on a rental, Stone, but he did on a young player under contract with term.

The results weren’t good with Hamonic, but the principle was correct.

[dino7c]

DeBrusk? Oiler fans desperately want him...and that is reason enough for me to want the Flames to sign him.

No issue with Gio on a bargain deal

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Yeah because they make far less money and far less term
so and so can't win, until they do

nobody is disputing the contract, he doesn't have a bad reputation though. In fact by all accounts he is great in the room and I know for a fact great in the community. Him and Barkov are still best friends its not like they thew his track suit in the shower.

Of course the money is a big part but if people still believe in him they would trade for him. Even PLD got traded.

If someone is remotely interested in Huberdeau, Conroy would be on the phone so quick

[InternationalVillager]

I can't believe we're still dumping on Huberdeau.

Give it a rest already.