2024 Off-season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

No, and that is far from revisionist. The 2014-15 Flames were absolutely considered a McDavid frontrunner, and with Eichel as the consolation prize it was an ideal year to be bad. Gaudreau wasn't the only reason they had an unlikely year... Wideman, Hartley, Bouma, Hiller, Hudler... a lot of things went spectacularly right.

But had we added even Eichel in the draft that year, and then not proceeded to botch the Bennett situation, the last decade likely looks very different. Eichel - Bennett - Backlund down the middle, with Gaudreau on the wings.

Instead the domino effect of 2015 resulted in middling results even in years like 2019 and 2022 when the supporting cast was about as deep as it could be

Does Sean Monahan retire in this scenario and become a coach?

[D as in David]

One factor to consider in determining whether Parekh is ready for the NHL this year is how ready are Flames for Parekh this year? Whoever Parekh's partner is will have a large impact on his development. With only two upper-tier, veteran d-men to be paired with him - both righties, - how he slots in could have a huge impact on him. Weegar can play the left side but he's their best D-man so if you paired these two, there would be no sheltering of Parekh. Partner him with Andersson and you're putting Rasmus on a side where he may not be at his best putting Parekh in a less than desirable situation to grow in.

Put him with any of the other potential d-men on a sheltered, 3rd pairing, now he is playing with either low-tier vet or a greener, younger player trying to figure out their game.

What happens if Weegar or Andersson are injured for an extended period?

I agree with the let the script play out but the worst thing the Flames could do is to burn a year of his ELC because he has a strong start but then ends up getting sent back to junior as the year progresses because he is not ready or the team is not ready.

[Groot]

Counter point to those that say they don't want to waste and ELC year as it's poor asset management, it could actually be better asset management if you're confident on the players trajectory. Also why you make the decision based on what's best for the players development not his ELC years. Assuming an equal development curve since the discussion is about 'wasting' a year of his cheap ELC. Follow Quinn Hughes development path.

Quinn Hughes
D+1 - NCAA - Burned 1-year ELC
D+2 - NHL - 0.78 ppg -10
D+3 - NHL - 0.73 ppg -24 (56 games Covid season)
Signs 6 years @ $7.85 AAV
D+4 - NHL - 0.89 ppg +10
D+5 - NHL - 0.97 ppg +15
D+6 - NHL - 1.12 ppg +38 (Norris Winner)

How much would Hughes have signed for after his D+4 year? $9 million per? Higher? If Parkeh follows similar growth, signing him to his post-ELC contract may be cheaper for 6-8 years (5-7 years when adjusted for one year sooner) if you can sign him to after his D+3 season versus his D+4 season, saving money when the team is trying to compete.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Groot

Counter point to those that say they don't want to waste and ELC year as it's poor asset management, it could actually be better asset management if you're confident on the players trajectory. Also why you make the decision based on what's best for the players development not his ELC years. Assuming an equal development curve since the discussion is about 'wasting' a year of his cheap ELC. Follow Quinn Hughes development path.

Quinn Hughes
D+1 - NCAA - Burned 1-year ELC
D+2 - NHL - 0.78 ppg -10
D+3 - NHL - 0.73 ppg -24 (56 games Covid season)
Signs 6 years @ $7.85 AAV
D+4 - NHL - 0.89 ppg +10
D+5 - NHL - 0.97 ppg +15
D+6 - NHL - 1.12 ppg +38 (Norris Winner)

How much would Hughes have signed for after his D+4 year? $9 million per? Higher? If Parkeh follows similar growth, signing him to his post-ELC contract may be cheaper for 6-8 years (5-7 years when adjusted for one year sooner) if you can sign him to after his D+3 season versus his D+4 season, saving money when the team is trying to compete.

ELC is overrated unless you are an elite team needing cheap contracts. That 2nd contract is the one to manage IMO. This is a prime example of if he is best to be playing in the NHL, those 3 years in the NHL at 18-21 could lead to s steal of a deal on that 2nd contract.

Dahlin is another example, but the Sabres signed him to a bridge deal, and it cost them millions.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Groot

Counter point to those that say they don't want to waste and ELC year as it's poor asset management, it could actually be better asset management if you're confident on the players trajectory. Also why you make the decision based on what's best for the players development not his ELC years. Assuming an equal development curve since the discussion is about 'wasting' a year of his cheap ELC. Follow Quinn Hughes development path.

Quinn Hughes
D+1 - NCAA - Burned 1-year ELC
D+2 - NHL - 0.78 ppg -10
D+3 - NHL - 0.73 ppg -24 (56 games Covid season)
Signs 6 years @ $7.85 AAV
D+4 - NHL - 0.89 ppg +10
D+5 - NHL - 0.97 ppg +15
D+6 - NHL - 1.12 ppg +38 (Norris Winner)

How much would Hughes have signed for after his D+4 year? $9 million per? Higher? If Parkeh follows similar growth, signing him to his post-ELC contract may be cheaper for 6-8 years (5-7 years when adjusted for one year sooner) if you can sign him to after his D+3 season versus his D+4 season, saving money when the team is trying to compete.

I think everyone is massively overthinking this.

If he's ready, keep him up. if not, send him back to Junior.

It's very unlikely he'll be ready. Even the Norris winners seem to be requiring 2 years before they can take a regular turn. Parkeh is not some generational talent, he''s an excellent prospect that likely requires a few years to refine his game.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

No, and that is far from revisionist. The 2014-15 Flames were absolutely considered a McDavid frontrunner, and with Eichel as the consolation prize it was an ideal year to be bad. Gaudreau wasn't the only reason they had an unlikely year... Wideman, Hartley, Bouma, Hiller, Hudler... a lot of things went spectacularly right.

But had we added even Eichel in the draft that year, and then not proceeded to botch the Bennett situation, the last decade likely looks very different. Eichel - Bennett - Backlund down the middle, with Gaudreau on the wings.

Instead the domino effect of 2015 resulted in middling results even in years like 2019 and 2022 when the supporting cast was about as deep as it could be

The Sabres, Coyotes, and Oilers were horribad that year so the Flames likely would have drafted in the 5-7 range that draft and likely ended up with Noah Hanifin who they acquired anyway.

[3rd Degree]

The Flames should be making decisions based on what’s best for the Flames. Developing the player, maximizing the elc, etc.

To those hypothesizing about signing a cheaper second contract by quickly burning through the ELC I ask, would you rather sign a 21 year old to an 8 year deal or 23 year old? Which one would you be more confident in?

The Flames don’t need Parekh this year so how would it benefit the Flames to keep him up?

Unless you think the only place he can develop is in the NHL, why would the Flames ever consider not sending him back to the OHL?

[Kipper_3434]

If Parekh has a good camp, give him some games, no need to make a decision beyond that right now. If he gets some games and looks top 4 quality, I would see very limited benefit to sending him back to Junior.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

No, and that is far from revisionist. The 2014-15 Flames were absolutely considered a McDavid frontrunner, and with Eichel as the consolation prize it was an ideal year to be bad. Gaudreau wasn't the only reason they had an unlikely year... Wideman, Hartley, Bouma, Hiller, Hudler... a lot of things went spectacularly right.

It's hard to find predictions from that season, but even the most optimistic I can find had the Flames as a middle-of-the-road team. The rest had them as pretty bad. They had the worst odds to win the Cup. And in the Sportsnet predictions, 2 of 4 predicted they would win the lottery and get McDavid.


So you're right, it was definitely a possibility.

[browntrout]

Expectations seem very reasonable for parekh

[dammage79]

His training camp will dicate where he goes. Conroy said it himself if they earn a spot, they've earned it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

The 2014-15 Flames were definitely one of the front-runners for the McDavid sweepstakes. I remember many of us - including myself - posting about how good it would be to win the lottery next season.

The brawl in Vancouver drastically changed things. Flames were going about their business really well that season, until Hartley started the 4th line in Vancouver as an FU to the other 3 lines that all played terrible the game before. McGrattan's line was actually pretty good the game before. That's why Hartley started that line in Vancouver. Torts should have just started the Sedins, the Sedins would have probably scored, and nobody would have remembered that game at all. Instead, that brawl galvanized that team, and wrecked Vancouver. Vancouver went on a slump, and Calgary's record noticeably improved, and they were visually better too. McGrattan even spoke about this on a podcast somewhere - how if Torts started the top line, then nobody would even think about jumping the Sedins. Torts is a really smart coach, but he completely lost his marbles that season. However, McGrattan did plan to have that brawl if Torts lined up the 4th line too, so it was premeditated on their part, but not by Hartley.

At the conclusion of the 2013-14 season, I specifically remember 2 people stating that the Flames would make the playoffs the following year (for the 2014-15 season) - TSN's Aaron Ward and our own Cali Flames' Fan. They both got ridiculed IIRC. I seem to remember that most posts were talking about winning the McDavid sweepstakes, the consolations prizes, etc.

For 1.5 seasons, the Flames played well right smack-dab in the middle of their rebuild. It is hard to cheer for losses, but I do not hope for a very quick turnaround again, as much fun as that was. There were simply too many beyond frustrating seasons afterwards. This team absolutely needs elite talent, and drafting high helps in obtaining that elite talent.

One thing that nobody has really mentioned is that there aren't any 'tanking' teams this year, or in the foreseeable future. I have 3 teams potentially blowing it up:

Washington if they implode
Pittsburgh if they can't compete and Crosby gives the ok for a rebuild, or asks for a trade
Edmonton if they lose Draisailt, in which case no point for McDavid to stay, in which case the team sucks.

Every other team that has been bad improved. Calgary seems like the only team that is really selling at this point. Sure, come deadline, there will be more sellers, but there aren't any tankers. There aren't any teams that are trying to be bad right now who have recently sold. I really do think that too many things need to go right next season for Calgary to get out of the bottom 3.

San Jose has a lot of young kids coming through. They will improve, but given what their record was last season, I would be surprised if they improved enough to not finish in the basement.

Chicago I think was particularly bad with the injury bug last year, plus the Perry drama. I think they take a step forward. Arguable if they pass Calgary or not.

Anaheim is getting better. I expect them to improve.

Columbus is my pick for biggest turn-around this season. Coach bump, plus a lot of good young players busting through.

I like what Utah did. I think they move up. Also, they were a playoff team for a while last year, and then they imploded worse than San Jose.

I can go on. Point is, that I do think that for the first time in a while, there are no 'tankers'. There is no danger of a team setting an all-time winless record, or an all time worst Goal Differential, or some of the silly stuff that has been going on. Calgary doesn't really need to 'tank'. They just need not to build a competing team artificially, if that makes sense.

Sell Kuzmenko near the deadline. Sell Mantha. Sell Kadri if you need to and replace his leadership with another vet somewhere. Sell Andersson if someone pays well enough, and replace his leadership with a journeyman at the deadline. I think any going any further would be tanking. Calgary doesn't need to tank to draft high for the next couple of years, unless one of those three teams end up blowing it up. Then all bets are off. Those are three elite tank-commander teams. I know I will be cheering hard for Washington and Pittsburgh to keep winning and making the playoffs. I doubt either of them will, but I am cheering for them because I don't want any other team to start rebuilding at this point. Calgary is the only one that is looking to draft worse than they did last year. Everyone else at the bottom is looking to improve, though it is to be determined how much they do actually improve.

In the 2014 season, Calgary was competing with Buffalo, Arizona, Edmonton, Toronto, Carolina and New Jersey as all sub 80 point teams. It would have been hard to beat out Buffalo and Arizona (54 and 56 points respectively), and even Edmonton with 62. Toronto with 68 would have been possible, and even likely.

Had Calgary not tried to accelerate the rebuild, I think they would have had a chance at Mathews that year - Toronto was last with 69 and won the lottery. I think this upcoming year will be more like that one - no real outright horrible teams, but just 'bad' teams in the high 60's and low 70's. I see this for the next couple of years (again, barring a team from suddenly imploding and entering a rebuild).

This is a perfect time to draft. No real tank-commanders on the horizon, plus it isn't a lower-end draft like we have seen some years with the Taylor or Tyler, or RNH, or the horrible Yakupov year. I think the hockey gods messed with the Flames for a while on their timeline - should have been in the McDavid Sweepstakes, but made the playoffs instead. This time around, Calgary may be getting rewarded here.

[Jason14h]

And none of pitts , wash or Edmonton is rebuilding in the next 2 years .

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

The 2014-15 Flames were definitely one of the front-runners for the McDavid sweepstakes. I remember many of us - including myself - posting about how good it would be to win the lottery next season.

The brawl in Vancouver drastically changed things. Flames were going about their business really well that season, until Hartley started the 4th line in Vancouver as an FU to the other 3 lines that all played terrible the game before. McGrattan's line was actually pretty good the game before. That's why Hartley started that line in Vancouver. Torts should have just started the Sedins, the Sedins would have probably scored, and nobody would have remembered that game at all. Instead, that brawl galvanized that team, and wrecked Vancouver. Vancouver went on a slump, and Calgary's record noticeably improved, and they were visually better too. McGrattan even spoke about this on a podcast somewhere - how if Torts started the top line, then nobody would even think about jumping the Sedins. Torts is a really smart coach, but he completely lost his marbles that season. However, McGrattan did plan to have that brawl if Torts lined up the 4th line too, so it was premeditated on their part, but not by Hartley.

At the conclusion of the 2013-14 season, I specifically remember 2 people stating that the Flames would make the playoffs the following year (for the 2014-15 season) - TSN's Aaron Ward and our own Cali Flames' Fan. They both got ridiculed IIRC. I seem to remember that most posts were talking about winning the McDavid sweepstakes, the consolations prizes, etc.

For 1.5 seasons, the Flames played well right smack-dab in the middle of their rebuild. It is hard to cheer for losses, but I do not hope for a very quick turnaround again, as much fun as that was. There were simply too many beyond frustrating seasons afterwards. This team absolutely needs elite talent, and drafting high helps in obtaining that elite talent.

One thing that nobody has really mentioned is that there aren't any 'tanking' teams this year, or in the foreseeable future. I have 3 teams potentially blowing it up:

Washington if they implode
Pittsburgh if they can't compete and Crosby gives the ok for a rebuild, or asks for a trade
Edmonton if they lose Draisailt, in which case no point for McDavid to stay, in which case the team sucks.

Every other team that has been bad improved. Calgary seems like the only team that is really selling at this point. Sure, come deadline, there will be more sellers, but there aren't any tankers. There aren't any teams that are trying to be bad right now who have recently sold. I really do think that too many things need to go right next season for Calgary to get out of the bottom 3.

San Jose has a lot of young kids coming through. They will improve, but given what their record was last season, I would be surprised if they improved enough to not finish in the basement.

Chicago I think was particularly bad with the injury bug last year, plus the Perry drama. I think they take a step forward. Arguable if they pass Calgary or not.

Anaheim is getting better. I expect them to improve.

Columbus is my pick for biggest turn-around this season. Coach bump, plus a lot of good young players busting through.

I like what Utah did. I think they move up. Also, they were a playoff team for a while last year, and then they imploded worse than San Jose.

I can go on. Point is, that I do think that for the first time in a while, there are no 'tankers'. There is no danger of a team setting an all-time winless record, or an all time worst Goal Differential, or some of the silly stuff that has been going on. Calgary doesn't really need to 'tank'. They just need not to build a competing team artificially, if that makes sense.

Sell Kuzmenko near the deadline. Sell Mantha. Sell Kadri if you need to and replace his leadership with another vet somewhere. Sell Andersson if someone pays well enough, and replace his leadership with a journeyman at the deadline. I think any going any further would be tanking. Calgary doesn't need to tank to draft high for the next couple of years, unless one of those three teams end up blowing it up. Then all bets are off. Those are three elite tank-commander teams. I know I will be cheering hard for Washington and Pittsburgh to keep winning and making the playoffs. I doubt either of them will, but I am cheering for them because I don't want any other team to start rebuilding at this point. Calgary is the only one that is looking to draft worse than they did last year. Everyone else at the bottom is looking to improve, though it is to be determined how much they do actually improve.

In the 2014 season, Calgary was competing with Buffalo, Arizona, Edmonton, Toronto, Carolina and New Jersey as all sub 80 point teams. It would have been hard to beat out Buffalo and Arizona (54 and 56 points respectively), and even Edmonton with 62. Toronto with 68 would have been possible, and even likely.

Had Calgary not tried to accelerate the rebuild, I think they would have had a chance at Mathews that year - Toronto was last with 69 and won the lottery. I think this upcoming year will be more like that one - no real outright horrible teams, but just 'bad' teams in the high 60's and low 70's. I see this for the next couple of years (again, barring a team from suddenly imploding and entering a rebuild).

This is a perfect time to draft. No real tank-commanders on the horizon, plus it isn't a lower-end draft like we have seen some years with the Taylor or Tyler, or RNH, or the horrible Yakupov year. I think the hockey gods messed with the Flames for a while on their timeline - should have been in the McDavid Sweepstakes, but made the playoffs instead. This time around, Calgary may be getting rewarded here.

I agree with most of what you’ve said. Except for Anahiem. They are horrible.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think everyone is massively overthinking this.

If he's ready, keep him up. if not, send him back to Junior.

It's very unlikely he'll be ready. Even the Norris winners seem to be requiring 2 years before they can take a regular turn. Parkeh is not some generational talent, he''s an excellent prospect that likely requires a few years to refine his game.

I said in the post you quoted that it's why you don't make development decisions based on ELC status and do what's best for player development.

I posted a counter ELC argument to show that you can't say it's better value for the team to not waste an ELC and again defer back to what's best for the player development.

[3rd Degree]

Forgetting the ELC, you think playing an 18 year old smaller offensive minded D in the nhl will be better than letting him develop and dominate in junior? Sport like life is extremely mental. Where will he be more likely to grow as a player and build his confidence? Getting low minutes and getting man handled in the nhl or dominating as he hones his craft in junior.

Then layer in that the flames should be doing all they can to secure the best draft position and you have a no brainer.

Rushing him to the nhl will not magically accelerate his development.

9 nhl games max.

Bringing up one off scenarios is like hoping to catch the 3 of spades to complete your inside straight flush draw on the river.

What is most likely? What is most valuable to the team long term?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Groot

I said in the post you quoted that it's why you don't make development decisions based on ELC status and do what's best for player development.

I posted a counter ELC argument to show that you can't say it's better value for the team to not waste an ELC and again defer back to what's best for the player development.

I wasn't responding to you per se, but to the general subject. You just happened to be the last post.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by 3rd Degree

Forgetting the ELC, you think playing an 18 year old smaller offensive minded D in the nhl will be better than letting him develop and dominate in junior? Sport like life is extremely mental. Where will he be more likely to grow as a player and build his confidence? Getting low minutes and getting man handled in the nhl or dominating as he hones his craft in junior.

Then layer in that the flames should be doing all they can to secure the best draft position and you have a no brainer.

Rushing him to the nhl will not magically accelerate his development.

9 nhl games max.

Bringing up one off scenarios is like hoping to catch the 3 of spades to complete your inside straight flush draw on the river.

What is most likely? What is most valuable to the team long term?

Ignoring the ELC (as the organization should), what is most valuable for the team and player will be to play wherever is best for his development. Nothing you said is wrong per se. But it far from a given fact. The argument Royle brought forward about accomplishing all he can in the OHL isn't wrong either.

The team will make the best judgement call they can and I'm fine with whatever they decide

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by 3rd Degree

Forgetting the ELC, you think playing an 18 year old smaller offensive minded D in the nhl will be better than letting him develop and dominate in junior? Sport like life is extremely mental. Where will he be more likely to grow as a player and build his confidence? Getting low minutes and getting man handled in the nhl or dominating as he hones his craft in junior.

Then layer in that the flames should be doing all they can to secure the best draft position and you have a no brainer.

Rushing him to the nhl will not magically accelerate his development.

9 nhl games max.

Bringing up one off scenarios is like hoping to catch the 3 of spades to complete your inside straight flush draw on the river.

What is most likely? What is most valuable to the team long term?

Why don’t you just see how he does and then form an opinion? How crazy would that be?

[Housley4Prez]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

I’d rather we don’t sign him. I think we know what he is as a player, and at this point signing him means losing development opportunities for someone else.

Just say no. He made his bed, and now he needs to sleep in it. Conroy said that he only wants players who want to be here, and signing Kylington would fly in the face of that.