2024/2025 Season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Best place to find talent is through the draft. But there is no way to control where you draft, and in most years there is a big gap between the first overall and fourth overall pick.

So it doesn’t make sense to run a franchise with a direction that steers it towards an outcome you truly have no control over. It’s better to commit 82 games towards an identity and work ethic rather than commit 82 games for a 1 in 4 random outcome.

[1qqaaz]

Ottawa and Detroit rebuilds are taking forever because they haven't had enough picks at the very top of the draft.
Anaheim is similar, but at least they had a few top 3 picks.

Chicago and San Jose seem to have very bright futures and they have picked at the top.

Buffalo has had several high picks. But they haven't picked a forward at #1 OA. In fact, Buffalo hasn't even picked a forward in the top 5 since Eichel in 2015 and Reinhart in 2014. I don't even think that Buffalo has any forwards in their organization that were picked in the top 5.

Montreal is a bit of an exception. They did pick a forward at #1, but I think Demidov at #5 is actually the player with the higher ceiling with franchise potential.

[traptor]

People use Buffalo as an example to not to tank, but not so long ago they had the pieces to be a good team.They've just mismanaged the #### out of it.

Eichel, oreilly and reinhart have all gone on to be core members of cup winners.

They'd actually be a really interesting case study of what went wrong

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by traptor

People use Buffalo as an example to not to tank, but not so long ago they had the pieces to be a good team.They've just mismanaged the #### out of it.

Eichel, oreilly and reinhart have all gone on to be core members of cup winners.

They'd actually be a really interesting case study of what went wrong

Ownership trouble was a major factor in Buffalo for a lor of years, it often gets forgotten when using them as a cautionary tale against rebuilding.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Ownership trouble was a major factor in Buffalo for a lor of years, it often gets forgotten when using them as a cautionary tale against rebuilding.

I do hope Edwards provides a long leash for Conroy, who in turns does the same for Huska. I think turnover in those positions is generally a negative, and I’d like those two to be around for a while to set the culture and expectations.

[blender]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Ottawa and Detroit rebuilds are taking forever because they haven't had enough picks at the very top of the draft.
Anaheim is similar, but at least they had a few top 3 picks.

Chicago and San Jose seem to have very bright futures and they have picked at the top.

Buffalo has had several high picks. But they haven't picked a forward at #1 OA. In fact, Buffalo hasn't even picked a forward in the top 5 since Eichel in 2015 and Reinhart in 2014. I don't even think that Buffalo has any forwards in their organization that were picked in the top 5.

Montreal is a bit of an exception. They did pick a forward at #1, but I think Demidov at #5 is actually the player with the higher ceiling with franchise potential.

I'm not sure about your argument. Stutzle is the consensus top player of his draft class. Sanderson is another elite talent.

And Chicago and San Jose? May be a little early to call those ones successful, no?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by blender

Chicago and San Jose? May be a little early to call those ones successful, no?

Chicago: .317 last year, .417 so far this year.
San Jose: .287 last year, .167 so far this year.

Yeah, pretty damn early to claim any kind of success for either of them.

Chicago hasn't won a best-of-7 playoff round since their last Cup win in 2015. They've missed the playoffs in every season since 2017, except the Covid year when they squeaked into the qualifying round (12th in the conference) and knocked off the no-good Oilers to make the first round of actual playoffs – where they were curb-stomped by Vegas.

San Jose has missed the playoffs five straight years and appears to be worse than ever.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by blender

I'm not sure about your argument. Stutzle is the consensus top player of his draft class. Sanderson is another elite talent.

And Chicago and San Jose? May be a little early to call those ones successful, no?

San Jose is horrible

[traptor]

Rebuild to contetion seems to take about 5-10 years.

Typically you want your core to be in the 25-30 age range to be seriously competitive, and you draft them at 17.


Dallas is used as a quick rebuild model but from 2008-2018 they made playoffs twice.
They hit big in the 2017 with getting 3oa and pulling 3 star. That turned things around.


At the end of the day it just comes down to having to draft star talent and wait for them to fully mature.

We're 2 years put of playoffs. Do we have any of those star players in the system devoping yet? No one's really shown it. Zary is the closest amd maybe he becomes a star but he's not there yet.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Chicago: .317 last year, .417 so far this year.
San Jose: .287 last year, .167 so far this year.

Yeah, pretty damn early to claim any kind of success for either of them.

Chicago hasn't won a best-of-7 playoff round since their last Cup win in 2015. They've missed the playoffs in every season since 2017, except the Covid year when they squeaked into the qualifying round (12th in the conference) and knocked off the no-good Oilers to make the first round of actual playoffs – where they were curb-stomped by Vegas.

San Jose has missed the playoffs five straight years and appears to be worse than ever.

Not sure why you are judging a teams rebuild success based upon recent playoffs.

They are in the earlier stages of a rebuild. I would base it not on their records but on their stable of young talent. And each of those teams has accumulated a plethora of young, potentially elite, talent.

Rebuilds take a long time. Posters who think Calgary will be relevant when the new arena opens are likely going to be disappointed. Calgary likely hasn’t hit bottom yet. This season notwithstanding, I want to see how Calgary looks once guys like Andersson, Kuzmenko etc are gone. Or maybe not gone. It could go either way with Calgary. They are playing well, it’s just not luck. They haven’t really been outplayed since the first game of the year. And Wolf looks good.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blender

I'm not sure about your argument. Stutzle is the consensus top player of his draft class. Sanderson is another elite talent.

And Chicago and San Jose? May be a little early to call those ones successful, no?

Chicago and San Jose have both drafted what are widely regarded as elite, franchise centres. That’s the most important piece of the puzzle in building an elite team.

[mennoknight]

also, Celebrini has literally played ONE game

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Best place to find talent is through the draft. But there is no way to control where you draft, and in most years there is a big gap between the first overall and fourth overall pick.

So it doesn’t make sense to run a franchise with a direction that steers it towards an outcome you truly have no control over. It’s better to commit 82 games towards an identity and work ethic rather than commit 82 games for a 1 in 4 random outcome.

You can’t control exactly where you draft. But you can strongly influence whether your team picks in the top 10. It’s all about playing the odds.

People warn about all the teams that have failed at deep rebuilds as the reason to avoid them. What about the steady-as-she-goes teams that haven’t accomplished much of anything. Aren’t the Wild, Preds, Flyers, and Islanders cautionary tales about getting stuck in the mushy middle? I guess they’ve avoided the peril of building a losing culture, so yay for sustaining a culture of mediocrity instead?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

It’s better to commit 82 games towards an identity and work ethic rather than commit 82 games for a 1 in 4 random outcome.

Better based on what?

And who says that teams like Chicago and San Jose haven't demonstrated good work ethic? Those teams are trying with good effort (players, not owners), notwithstanding their lack of current talent. And they are likely closer to being a contender than teams like Calgary are. At least they have more pieces in place than Calgary.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Better based on what?

And who says that teams like Chicago and San Jose haven't demonstrated good work ethic? Those teams are trying with good effort (players, not owners), notwithstanding their lack of current talent. And they are likely closer to being a contender than teams like Calgary are. At least they have more pieces in place than Calgary.

Tit for tat.

Based on what?

Building a cup contender is more than a collection of high profile names.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Tit for tat.

Based on what?

Building a cup contender is more than a collection of high profile names.

Based on IMO.

Agreed, its more than a collection of names, but both have what is likely some elite talent which is the start of a potential contending core. Those players are more than just a name.

I don't really know what Calgary's plans are.

I think trading Andersson when his value is high (not sure when that exactly will be) rather than signing him to a long term expensive extension will tells us where Calagry is going. And especially with Kuzmenko this year.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You can’t control exactly where you draft. But you can strongly influence whether your team picks in the top 10. It’s all about playing the odds.

Did Anaheim tank a couple of years ago because they really really wanted Carlsson?

Or did they upset the tank gods? Did Chicago have a tank mastermind who knew they’d win the lottery with their 1 in 8 odds over Anaheim’s 1 in 4 or Columbus’s 1 in 6?

The examples that ‘worked’ only do so in retrospect because confirmation bias lets people throw out the majority of the data that points to it being a poor strategy.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by mennoknight

also, Celebrini has literally played ONE game

And the team is still going to suck for a long time. Congrats you got a center. By the time you can put together a supporting cast that isn't an embarrassment he'll be making 10 million.

The idea of throwing away an entire year in the hope of sucking enough to be at the bottom. Then winning the draft. Then there being someone worthy to pick. You have to suck for 5-7 years for that game plan to work.

Obvious reasons why the Flames want nothing to do with that.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by traptor

Rebuild to contetion seems to take about 5-10 years.

Typically you want your core to be in the 25-30 age range to be seriously competitive, and you draft them at 17.


Dallas is used as a quick rebuild model but from 2008-2018 they made playoffs twice.
They hit big in the 2017 with getting 3oa and pulling 3 star. That turned things around.


At the end of the day it just comes down to having to draft star talent and wait for them to fully mature.

We're 2 years put of playoffs. Do we have any of those star players in the system devoping yet? No one's really shown it. Zary is the closest amd maybe he becomes a star but he's not there yet.

Correlation is not necessarily causation. Almost every team in the league will be a playoff contender at least once in a ten year window.

Getting lucky with a draft lottery win when a franchise player is available in the draft definitely helps. But there is absolutely no evidence that teams dedicated to the tank have better overall playoff results than those that take other approaches.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Correlation is not necessarily causation. Almost every team in the league will be a playoff contender at least once in a ten year window.

Getting lucky with a draft lottery win when a franchise player is available in the draft definitely helps. But there is absolutely no evidence that teams dedicated to the tank have better overall playoff results than those that take other approaches.

Well, Chicago clearly tried to tank prior to them winning 3 Stanley Cups, as did Pittsburgh.

Tanking is not about getting the #1 pick, or a generational player. It's about getting elite talent.

Being a "playoff contender" every 10 years is an exceptionally low bar.

I think the bar teams should be trying to attain is a Stanley Cup contender.