[Rumour] LeBrun: As of right now, sounds like Andersson only wants to sign extension with VGK

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Yup, this is remarkably concerning. Feels like it would've been incredibly easy to auction him off a year ago when extension talks wouldn't even be part of the equation. All the talk about doing right by the players and ticking off the box of token extension talks for respect purposes only for those players to turn around and screw CGY at every turn. Big time opportunity cost manifesting here.

I really want to know why they saw more value in keeping him in a year where they 20 million of cap space and no intentions to compete. I get why they gave it another go with Hanifin and Lindholm. Harder to understand why they kept him last offseason. Won’t be the end of the world but a better return would have been nice.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by Toonage

So essentially Conroy learned nothing from the Hanifin trade. That is beyond concerning.

Also to all the posters who mocked others for this concern, eat it.

What is there to learn? Players in Rasmus' position hold the cards. That's the reality of the NHL today. It's not Conroy's fault that a few players have held him over a barrel and have been unwilling to consider other options.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

Keep him until the deadline then. Hopefully he has a huge season and we get a bidding war

I don't think you want the distraction in the room, now that it is out there.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

What is there to learn? Players in Rasmus' position hold the cards. That's the reality of the NHL today. It's not Conroy's fault that a few players have held him over a barrel and have been unwilling to consider other options.

Trade him last summer.

[kobasew19]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

I don't think you want the distraction in the room, now that it is out there.

Distraction means not being successful on the ice and ergo better chance at McKenna??? I'm all for it.

[Ashasx]

I'll be honest, this whole situation is really unacceptable.

I can forgive Craig making a mistake on Hanifin in his first year as GM of this team, but to see this happen again?

And what's the point of have other experienced executives like Maloney and Nonis on this team if they can't help steer the ship to avoid this, not once but twice?

This is unbelievably aggravating.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Hague?

Probably nonsense and leaked by Treliving

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

"Of note, my understanding is that Nicolas Hague was part of the earlier trade discussions between Vegas and Calgary, but he has since been dealt to Nashville."

Yuck. Glad that opportunity passed by.

If I'm the Flames I tell Vegas that if they don't meet the price, we will pivot to auctioning him off as a 1 year rental with retention.

Vegas just has very little prospect wise.

Yeah I don’t see the problem here. Who cares if he won’t sign an extension? Then we’ll trade him as a rental. The return on a rental will be better than the return if the trade market is only one team with an extension.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

What is there to learn? Players in Rasmus' position hold the cards. That's the reality of the NHL today. It's not Conroy's fault that a few players have held him over a barrel and have been unwilling to consider other options.

Contract is ok.. but ntc... too many negotiated by past management. Conroy is not at fault here but don't hand as many ntc

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Trade him last summer.

This may be valid. I'm not over-reacting as I still think there is a market for the player. But the long-term implications that have-not teams have to now consider trading good players 2 years away from their expiry, are not small.

It goes back to what I said a couple days ago.
- Players are increasingly leveraging all tools to manufacture where they go. This includes strategic application of NTCs and if they don't have that, they just make it clear they won't sign with the acquiring team
- The have teams, like Vegas, will benefit as this pushes down prices. And teams like Vegas will throw their weight around to benefit from that.
- Have not teams will have more challenges as they can't even recoup full value for their players, or have to move them much earlier in the process.

It's going to create some significant imbalance in the league. And don't think this will only be limited to established players. We will see this start to happen even more with drafted prospects.

[Nadal Fan]

Flames don't have to play Andersson, they can make him sit until a trade is done.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I'll be honest, this whole situation is really unacceptable.

I can forgive Craig making a mistake on Hanifin in his first year as GM of this team, but to see this happen again?

And what's the point of have other experienced executives like Maloney and Nonis on this team if they can't help steer the ship to avoid this, not once but twice?

This is unbelievably aggravating.

I don’t even see the Hanifin thing as a mistake on his part. They had to give that group another kick at the can. Hopefully he can pull a Lindholm trade off

[gvitaly]

I'm a bit surprised that 1 year of Andersson at 50% doesn't create more interest. DAL, and COL should be prime destinations for an Andersson trade, even without an extension. Maybe the LAK gets done without an extension.

I think tomorrow will leave a couple of teams holding the ball in free agency, and then Andersson as a 1-year rental will become a lot more tempting.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I'll be honest, this whole situation is really unacceptable.

I can forgive Craig making a mistake on Hanifin in his first year as GM of this team, but to see this happen again?

And what's the point of have other experienced executives like Maloney and Nonis on this team if they can't help steer the ship to avoid this, not once but twice?

This is unbelievably aggravating.

What’s the unacceptable part? Teams trade rentals all the time when they know they won’t resign.

There is absolutely no issue with this.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The fault lies at the feet of our management group, not Andersson.

He isn't exactly working with us here either. F Andersson and his wishes. You are going to get the same return as a rental now anyhow, might as well get the best rental package you can from someone else.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Yeah I don’t see the problem here. Who cares if he won’t sign an extension? Then we’ll trade him as a rental. The return on a rental will be better than the return if the trade market is only one team with an extension.

Yup, sell him as a rental to a team that thinks they can convince him to sign after a season with the team. Only being willing to trade him to Vegas now gives them the leverage.

Carolina traded for Rantanen last year in the hopes they could sign him, only to trade him again and end up with Stankoven.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What’s the unacceptable part? Teams trade rentals all the time when they know they won’t resign.

There is absolutely absolutely no issue with this.

The value of Anderson traded with an extension >> the value of him traded without and extension

The problem is the one team he will extend with has no assets

This could have been largely avoided by be proactive and trading him when teams could benefit from two years of his low AAV contract when an extension wouldn't have been an issue.

[Reggie Dunlop]

It all boils down to a staring contest now.

[FlamesAreOne]

How can the Knights possibly give Marner a huge deal and trade for Ras?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Trade him last summer.

Oh so you wanna just make up scenarios where we have a Time Machine?

Everything‘s easier with hindsight. It made perfect sense to keep him.