2024/2025 Season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Scroopy Noopers]

K. Millers qualifying offer is higher than Anderssons cap hit… I wonder if a flip flop could be arranged with the Rangers. Helps their cap, gives us a younger D we can sign long term.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Weegar is our best defenceman. If we traded him we might as well trade Coleman, Backlund etc.

You want to turn things around quicker you need Weegar great player and everyone in the room loves him.

He should be our next captain.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

K. Millers qualifying offer is higher than Anderssons cap hit… I wonder if a flip flop could be arranged with the Rangers. Helps their cap, gives us a younger D we can sign long term.

Interesting name. Only concern here is he is 25 and has had his offensive stats go down yearly since a career year 3 years ago. His 5v5 corsi stays right around even.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Is it possible flames sign Rasmus and trade Weager? I could see teams paying up for Weager (who's under contract for 3 more years at a very reasonable price). Even moreso if flames retained.

That would be horrible

[Pickle Juice]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

K. Millers qualifying offer is higher than Anderssons cap hit… I wonder if a flip flop could be arranged with the Rangers. Helps their cap, gives us a younger D we can sign long term.

I have always felt like he will be a future Flame for some weird reason. I feel like Andersson's value would be higher based on cost control and NHL pedigree but I could definitely see something along the lines of:

CGY trades Andersson and 18th overall
CGY receives K. Miller and NYR 12th overall

I'm not good at these trade proposals but that would be where I think both teams walk away happy.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Pickle Juice

I have always felt like he will be a future Flame for some weird reason. I feel like Andersson's value would be higher based on cost control and NHL pedigree but I could definitely see something along the lines of:

CGY trades Andersson and 18th overall
CGY receives K. Miller and NYR 12th overall

I'm not good at these trade proposals but that would be where I think both teams walk away happy.

Yeah I have no idea what would be needed to balance out value. I just think the players and cap situation fit nicely.

[Toonage]

Getting that Ranger pick would bolster the chances at drafting a top C prospect. I’d consider both 1sts and Ras for 12 and Miller if I were Conroy.

Miller, a younger big LHD, possibly a Brady Martin for Ras and 2 higher picks? Feels fair if that C pans out

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Weegar is our best defenceman. If we traded him we might as well trade Coleman, Backlund etc.

You want to turn things around quicker you need Weegar great player and everyone in the room loves him.

He should be our next captain.

Im not in a rush to turn things around.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I don’t think it’s fair to compare this to any trades Feaster did. He was essentially called a soft GM by Burke and we had to hold onto Cammy at the TDL to try and start changing that narrative for us.

The team really doesn’t anymore Miromanov type players or target a Maverick Bourque we have those guys on our team and pipeline. You hand Maverick a big contract and he turns into a 3rd liner you will have trouble trading that away and it also blocks spots for guys.

Another guy I think that could move but won’t get much is Rooney. He is easily replaceable. I liked what I saw from Morton. Need to fill some of these roles internally.

You don't need to hand Maverik a big contract with term.
You basically follow the model that the Canes did with Kotkaniemi where you sign him to a 1 year deal that is tough for the other team to match, and then once you have him, the next deal becomes at a lower cap hit.
In that case the habs signed him to a 1 year 6.1M offer sheet, which then dropped to 8 year $38.56 contract, so a lower AAV.

Now I'm not saying ANY of that is good. That's still way too much for a middling player.

But my point is you could sign Bourque to a 1 year deal, that caps out the compensation at a 2nd round pick. And then you figure out where he fits in long-term and what type of deal works.

Really comes down to how they view him as a player.

[Tbull8]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You don't need to hand Maverik a big contract with term.
You basically follow the model that the Canes did with Kotkaniemi where you sign him to a 1 year deal that is tough for the other team to match, and then once you have him, the next deal becomes at a lower cap hit.
In that case the habs signed him to a 1 year 6.1M offer sheet, which then dropped to 8 year $38.56 contract, so a lower AAV.

Now I'm not saying ANY of that is good. That's still way too much for a middling player.

But my point is you could sign Bourque to a 1 year deal, that caps out the compensation at a 2nd round pick. And then you figure out where he fits in long-term and what type of deal works.

Really comes down to how they view him as a player.

With Kotkaniemi it was clearly decided on before he signed the offer sheet that they would be giving him the long term deal. But for Bourque, you could probably entice him to sign just by offering big money now as well as an opportunity to prove himself here vs in and out of the lineup in dallas

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Pickle Juice

I have always felt like he will be a future Flame for some weird reason. I feel like Andersson's value would be higher based on cost control and NHL pedigree but I could definitely see something along the lines of:

CGY trades Andersson and 18th overall
CGY receives K. Miller and NYR 12th overall

I'm not good at these trade proposals but that would be where I think both teams walk away happy.

Would the Rangers drop back for Andersson and trading a 25 year old 2nd pair for what feels like a lateral move for them and a potential upgrade for us in terms of slotting and getting the younger player with more upside.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Pickle Juice

I have always felt like he will be a future Flame for some weird reason. I feel like Andersson's value would be higher based on cost control and NHL pedigree but I could definitely see something along the lines of:

CGY trades Andersson and 18th overall
CGY receives K. Miller and NYR 12th overall

I'm not good at these trade proposals but that would be where I think both teams walk away happy.

I assume the Rangers would just rather sign the way younger Miller to a long term contract than Anderson to a long term contract plus move from 12 to 18.

Anderson has one year of cost control, then he gets very expensive on a contract that will age poorly at the end probably.

I think the Rangers would prefer to keep Miller for the exact same reasons the Flames would want him.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I assume the Rangers would just rather sign the way younger Miller to a long term contract than Anderson to a long term contract plus move from 12 to 18.

Anderson has one year of cost control, then he gets very expensive on a contract that will age poorly at the end probably.

I think the Rangers would prefer to keep Miller for the exact same reasons the Flames would want him.

… yeah… but they have cap constraints. Millers min qualifying offer is more than Rasmus makes.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You don't need to hand Maverik a big contract with term.
You basically follow the model that the Canes did with Kotkaniemi where you sign him to a 1 year deal that is tough for the other team to match, and then once you have him, the next deal becomes at a lower cap hit.
In that case the habs signed him to a 1 year 6.1M offer sheet, which then dropped to 8 year $38.56 contract, so a lower AAV.

Now I'm not saying ANY of that is good. That's still way too much for a middling player.

But my point is you could sign Bourque to a 1 year deal, that caps out the compensation at a 2nd round pick. And then you figure out where he fits in long-term and what type of deal works.

Really comes down to how they view him as a player.

That is a interesting way to do things, but the player would have to be open to that type of arrangement.

Rory Kerins just had a 61 point season the AHL. Do we start to target the same type of player off other teams and not give our own players a shot?

What opportunity are they going to get? they wont be on PP1. We have Kadri, Huberdeau, Coronato, Frost, Farabee, Sharangovich, Zary, Coleman who are above him in the depth chart. Klapka as well right now how his season ended.

We also have some really solid prospects, Basha could be pushing to make the team. Spending picks on middle 6 players that might not even get the shot in that role seems pointless to me. It's all about the big boys now.

I also get that Carolina model, but they have lacked that top guys to get them over the hump.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

That is a interesting way to do things, but the player would have to be open to that type of arrangement.

Rory Kerins just had a 61 point season the AHL. Do we start to target the same type of player off other teams and not give our own players a shot?

What opportunity are they going to get? they wont be on PP1. We have Kadri, Huberdeau, Coronato, Frost, Farabee, Sharangovich, Zary, Coleman who are above him in the depth chart. Klapka as well right now how his season ended.

We also have some really solid prospects, Basha could be pushing to make the team. Spending picks on middle 6 players that might not even get the shot in that role seems pointless to me. It's all about the big boys now.

I also get that Carolina model, but they have lacked that top guys to get them over the hump.

I'm not sure that Kerins is a fair comparison to Bourque. At 22, Bourque led the AHL in scoring and was the MVP. I don't think Kerins fits into the Flames plans.

Now I'm not that high on Bourque, but maybe the Flames are? If they signed him, they would give him premium ice time for sure. Bourque would rise above a number of current Flames players based on potential alone (assuming the Flames liked him).

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I assume the Rangers would just rather sign the way younger Miller to a long term contract than Anderson to a long term contract plus move from 12 to 18.

Anderson has one year of cost control, then he gets very expensive on a contract that will age poorly at the end probably.

I think the Rangers would prefer to keep Miller for the exact same reasons the Flames would want him.

By way younger you mean 3 years younger. And Rasmus has consistently been way better than Miller. The reason Andersson would be more expensive is that he is a better player than Miller.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

That is a interesting way to do things, but the player would have to be open to that type of arrangement.

Rory Kerins just had a 61 point season the AHL. Do we start to target the same type of player off other teams and not give our own players a shot?

What opportunity are they going to get? they wont be on PP1. We have Kadri, Huberdeau, Coronato, Frost, Farabee, Sharangovich, Zary, Coleman who are above him in the depth chart. Klapka as well right now how his season ended.

We also have some really solid prospects, Basha could be pushing to make the team. Spending picks on middle 6 players that might not even get the shot in that role seems pointless to me. It's all about the big boys now.

I also get that Carolina model, but they have lacked that top guys to get them over the hump.

I don't see a lot of forwards coming immediately. Maybe a guy like Morton steals a 4th line spot. But Basha? He is coming off a major injury that limited his playing time in his D+1 season. He ain't ready.
And I'm simply not confident in Kerins. To me he's a tweener. High producer in the AHL and that's it.

Again I don't know what their book is on Bourque, but he's the kind of guy who might take a step with more opportunity and I think he could get it here.

[Pickle Juice]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I assume the Rangers would just rather sign the way younger Miller to a long term contract than Anderson to a long term contract plus move from 12 to 18.

Anderson has one year of cost control, then he gets very expensive on a contract that will age poorly at the end probably.

I think the Rangers would prefer to keep Miller for the exact same reasons the Flames would want him.

Again I don't claim to be good at this but Miller has been on the trade block a few times in recent memory from what I can remember.

[Monahammer]

"tweener" and "high producer in Ahl and that's it" had 4 points in 5 games during his only ever NHL stint. Maybe we should give him a fair shot before we limit his future potential...

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

"tweener" and "high producer in Ahl and that's it" had 4 points in 5 games during his only ever NHL stint. Maybe we should give him a fair shot before we limit his future potential...

I thought he moved the puck with poise, which was a great sign.

But he got filled in when on the ice.

Plenty to work on (speed, 200 foot game) to get into a top nine role, but he certainly had some touches that didn't look like a player over his head.