2024/2025 Season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Bandwagon Surfer]

I take comments about character issues with a big grain of salt. There is a lot of '"old boys club wanting unearned respect" energy in hockey. And far too often things like skin colour and birth country are the difference between "good boy showing his passion for the gsme" and "cocky showboater with no respect for the game".

Unless you are in the room or know them personally, who knows. From their track record, I will trust the flames scouts on character.

[Bonded]

Character issue is broad. It could also be about a guy like Gridin and his academics.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Saying what things?
That the Flames should have sold these players earlier? Sure. Most of us felt the same. But that ignores the element of needing ownership buy in for that.

Lots of people on this forum blame Treliving for going all-in during the final years of his tenure, and praise Conroy for moving veterans for futures. But this article is more evidence that Edwards calls the shots on the strategic direction of the team. It’s pretty clear that it was Edwards who gave the orders to reload on top veterans after Gaudreau and Tkachuk left, Edwards who belatedly recognized the roster wasn’t a contender, and Edwards who hired a loyal company guy with instructions to do a quick re-tool rather than a rebuild.

Some fans are never going to accept it, and will dismiss all of this stuff innuendo unless Edwards calls a press conference announcing his role in team decisions (which will never happen). Some will resist it because it sucks as a fan to acknowledge that a guy who can never be replaced and will never be accountable makes these calls. So there will always be denial. But it’s getting harder and harder to persist in that denial.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

But really it's neither.

If you take the latter in the form of a psychedelic, you'll discover the former is true.

[mogg]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Paraphrasing here and I can’t remember who said it but… when Conroy drafted Parekh, I remember the first thing from one of the commenters on Sportsnet was that Parekh told teams not to draft him if they didn’t want him to play his game. That same commentator also praised his skill and ability but I couldn’t help but think that type of statement from a young player could rub lots of scouts or GMs the wrong way. It can be seen as an attitude problem or can be seen as a kid being confident in his skills.

Can anyone else remember this comment about Parekh?

I remember that, but more something like “anyone who drafts me needs to understand I have to play the game a certain way.”

This Athletic article by Scott Wheeler is mostly about his unique approach and style (paywall):

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/552.../?redirected=1

Some snippets:

“You’ll watch him play and you’ll be like, ‘Man, does this guy even care right now?’” Dalmao said, chuckling. “There’s times where I get on him about it. Like ‘Hey, Z, your body language,’ and he kind of just looks at you like he doesn’t know what you’re talking about, and that’s because he’s kind of just standing there because he’s kind of just watching everything happen. And then all of a sudden you snap your fingers and he’s in the place he needs to be and he’s making something happen.”

Dalmao says ever since Parekh was a little kid, he needed to be stimulated by what they were doing. Whereas some players go through the motions even when they’re not interested in something, Parekh won’t do that, according to Dalmao. Instead, he’ll simply say, “This does not interest me.”

“He’s a creative guy, especially on the ice,” Dalmao said. “He certainly sees things a little bit different at times. But that was something that we wanted to nurture.”

…Azim’s priorities aligned with Parekh’s interest in offense, and so they each focused, from an early age, on building skills more like forwards would.

Parekh “took that to a different level,” though.

“A lot of players overlook this, but Zayne Parekh, for as much hockey as he’s played, he has seen just as much. And watching developed his ability to see the game in a certain way, and in a way that makes it easy for him to process,” Dalmao said. “Things slow down for him. That’s why it almost looks like there’s not a lot of effort there, but it’s just slowed down to him so much that he just kind of plays like that. And those things have combined to lend themselves to him being so dynamic offensively.”

“Every critic that’s out there says he doesn’t defend hard enough, which I disagree with,” Drinkill said. “He’s just smart about how he defends. If you really watch him play and how he defends, even on the penalty kill, his stick’s so active, he breaks up plays, he reads plays before they happen. … People have to criticize him for something, but I know he’s definitely making a conscious effort to improve that stigma, and I think he has done a heck of a job with it.”

[Jay Random]

“Every critic that’s out there says he doesn’t defend hard enough, which I disagree with,” Drinkill said. “He’s just smart about how he defends. If you really watch him play and how he defends, even on the penalty kill, his stick’s so active, he breaks up plays, he reads plays before they happen.”

The Italians call it sprezzatura – the art of making difficult things look easy. I find it admirable when someone is good enough to do that. Some sports fans can't appreciate an athlete's skill unless he makes it look like he's about to bust his rivets straining.

I'm pretty positive that Parekh will never be among the league leaders in shot-blocking. As we learned by watching Kris Russell years ago, blocking a shot is often a last-ditch effort to make up for a mistake you made further up the ice. If you're smart, read the play well, and make the right defensive move early, the opponent's play never develops and you don't get the chance to show off your rivet-busting abilities. The brain does the hardest part of the work so the body doesn't have to.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by mogg

I remember that, but more something like “anyone who drafts me needs to understand I have to play the game a certain way.”

This Athletic article by Scott Wheeler is mostly about his unique approach and style (paywall):

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/552.../?redirected=1

Some snippets:

That’s it. Thanks. I still think quite a few GMs/scouts could take that kind of response the wrong way. I think what they would want to hear is “I’ll play any way you want me to and do whatever my team needs me to do”.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Probably the clearest example you could make of it, too.

Because they were unnamed with only vague roles given. For all we know they could be two of the biggest dunces in the league working for teams that are disasters themselves.

But because they said something somebody wants to hear, those people don’t even question the source. Never even crossed their mind to question it.

Because it vindicates them after being #### on for a year and proves, without a doubt, that they were right all along!

[Snuffleupagus]

When Parekhs body catches up with his brain and natural skill…look out.

That isn’t my quote, it’s from a very respected scout.

[FanSince'01]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Flames made a lot of picks last year.

I'd put Parekh on the top of the list as a person scouts wouldn't exactly love with his manner and demeanor. IMO, Parekh with his stat line should have gone top 5 in that draft, so in my.mind he fell into Calgary's lap.

After that, no idea. Rather disingenuous to immediately assume the only Russian they drafted was the character issue for other teams.

Could be a reason why the likes of Basha or Mews or Misa fell the way they did. Who knows.

Originally Posted by CF84

Maybe a guy like Basha only nailed his Flames interview because they were the only team he wanted to play for as a Flames fan. Of course other teams would view an unenthusiastic interview as a red flag. I hope he walked into the Oilers interview and just said "nope" and then left.

Can't speak for the others we drafted, but my wife taught Basha in high school. Kid is one of the nicest, most humble kids you could meet and always takes responsibility and owns up to his mistakes. Don't know why he fell out of the first round but character most certainly isn't the reason. I doubt he would've tanked an interview either - that doesn't sound like him from everything I've heard about how great a kid he is.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by FanSince'01

Can't speak for the others we drafted, but my wife taught Basha in high school. Kid is one of the nicest, most humble kids you could meet and always takes responsibility and owns up to his mistakes. Don't know why he fell out of the first round but character most certainly isn't the reason.

Of course character was the reason. Edmonton would have taken him 32nd, but he wasn't a big enough Dbag for them.

[FanSince'01]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Of course character was the reason. Edmonton would have taken him 32nd, but he wasn't a big enough Dbag for them.

They do have a type and Basha most certainly isn't 'it'

[Sylvanfan]

Pretty clear the exec from team 2 thought they would be better in the summer and come deadline had no shot at the playoffs.

[liamenator]

I know when they interviewed GMs, I heard most of the candidates said they would completely gut and build that team up again. Those guys didn’t get the job, obviously.

Reads a bit like Exec One interviewed and is sour his rebuild pitch didn't land him the gig.

[RedHawk12]

Interesting article and fun to read.

I can definitely see ownership still having a hand in things and not approving of a tear it to the studs rebuild. Completely in line with what what we've heard and what Conroy has been saying (tried to re-sign Lindholm and Hanifin and only traded them when they wouldn't sign, re-signed Sharangovich, kicked tires on Petterson, etc.).

I can also see how outsiders may see us, and I think they probably have a more unbiased view on things compared to Flames fans on a Flames forum. The St. Louis comparison is a decent one in my opinion. Minnesota, Nashville and recently Pittsburgh are other examples of similar types of teams with that kind of a mindset. Our young players are playing well, but we don't have elite first liners. Can't really argue with that.

It's interesting how we all come to the defense of the Flames, but we'd probably all agree if the same things were said about St. Louis or Nashville.

I do agree that our drafting has been better. That's how a market like Calgary can compete with the rest of the league. My guess is that the comment about character issues are mostly about Misa and Parekh. Parekh is definitely not a "do whatever you tell me to do" kind of a player, but with his skill set i don't mind that at all. Misa was a projected 2nd rounder that fell to the 5th for no apparent reason, so it's possible there's some behind the scenes stuff. But it's probably overblown and teams will regret passing up on the skill.

[memphusk]

Wasn't Charles Barkley going to sue someone for defamation of character until he realized he didn't have any? Charles is a beauty.

[Macindoc]

Wow, a lot of people seem happy that the word of two unnamed executives confirms their thoughts on Flames management. Did any of you consider that said executives (and why are they unnamed?) might have been trying to sewer Conroy’s reputation in order to give themselves a leg up in negotiations? The first tactic in an adversarial negotiation is to try to make your counterpart feel weak or to create the perception that they are weak. That’s how Trump is successful. He’s not a great businessman, but he knows how to let the rumour mill assassinate his opponents, even if there is no substance to the rumours he spreads.

These execs aren’t trash talking the Flames’ management because they want to help Flames fans or expose incompetence of the Flames organization. They’re hiding behind anonymity to create a narrative that they think will benefit them. I mean, if the Flames organization has been incompetent and remains so, isn’t that what’s best for them?

[Jay Random]

If the unnamed executives in the article were trying to sewer Conroy's reputation, they were doing a piss-poor job of it. They praised him at least as much as they criticized him. To me, it read more like they were BSing their way through the bits they weren't prepared for, giving Conroy generic praise for obvious things, then throwing in a bit of dispraise here and there to give the impression of being unbiased and wise.

A great deal of talk is not done to communicate either truth or lies, but to make the hearer think the speaker is important.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Wow, a lot of people seem happy that the word of two unnamed executives confirms their thoughts on Flames management. Did any of you consider that said executives (and why are they unnamed?) might have been trying to sewer Conroy’s reputation in order to give themselves a leg up in negotiations? The first tactic in an adversarial negotiation is to try to make your counterpart feel weak or to create the perception that they are weak. That’s how Trump is successful. He’s not a great businessman, but he knows how to let the rumour mill assassinate his opponents, even if there is no substance to the rumours he spreads.

These execs aren’t trash talking the Flames’ management because they want to help Flames fans or expose incompetence of the Flames organization. They’re hiding behind anonymity to create a narrative that they think will benefit them. I mean, if the Flames organization has been incompetent and remains so, isn’t that what’s best for them?

Two unnamed executives looking to sewer Conroy’s rep to advance their own went to ‘the win column’ to do so?……….uh, okay. If you’re right, they sure picked the wrong outlet to do so.

I don’t think there’s anything here that should be overly surprising. We’ve known for years, decades, that the Flames will not tear it down. Sutter didn’t do it, nor Feaster, Burke, Treliving, and now Conroy’s publicly stated intent is not to tear it down to the studs. The Calgary Flames, other than the Golden Knights, are the only team in the league to have never had a top three pick and if they do get one in the next handful of seasons, I bet it will be dumb lottery luck that leads them to it.

As for the character issues, we’re talking about 18 year olds. We are also talking about one hockey executive who has maybe had a handful of interactions with said player(s), maybe. I’d also question, at large, what ‘character issues’ are in hockey culture. Seems to me institutions such as Hockey Canada and NHL teams such as the Blackhawks, ought to distance themselves from making these sorts of assessments because, clearly, ‘character issues’ extend beyond teenagers and young men nor do these institutions appear to be capable to make that sort of assessment. I’d take ‘character issues’ with a heavy grain of salt.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Lots of people on this forum blame Treliving for going all-in during the final years of his tenure, and praise Conroy for moving veterans for futures. But this article is more evidence that Edwards calls the shots on the strategic direction of the team. It’s pretty clear that it was Edwards who gave the orders to reload on top veterans after Gaudreau and Tkachuk left, Edwards who belatedly recognized the roster wasn’t a contender, and Edwards who hired a loyal company guy with instructions to do a quick re-tool rather than a rebuild.

Some fans are never going to accept it, and will dismiss all of this stuff innuendo unless Edwards calls a press conference announcing his role in team decisions (which will never happen). Some will resist it because it sucks as a fan to acknowledge that a guy who can never be replaced and will never be accountable makes these calls. So there will always be denial. But it’s getting harder and harder to persist in that denial.

Organizations that are perennially/mediocre/bad are that way because of ownership as lack of success over decades always starts at the very top. As Flames fans we are always going to be hopeful of better days ahead but I've already accepted that Flames will never win another Stanley Cup as long as Edwards owns the team.