[Rumour] Dreger: Bowen Byram trade talks heating up. Calgary one of many teams interested

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

In your opinion.

I'd say more an educated guess than an opinion. There are a lot of things you can point to that lead someone to the same conclusion.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yeah, I think we need to recognize ownership has a different plan than many of us want. We want the Flames to draft and develop an elite core that can contend for the Cup over a 6-8 year span. Edwards wants a team that makes the playoffs more often than it doesn’t, and hopefully goes on a Cinderella run once in a while.

The whole front office is terrified of becoming a joke franchise. That fear was behind the decision to immediately reload with Huberdeau and Kadri after Gaudreau and Tkachuk walked; the narrative that nobody wanted to play here had to be changed. The overriding culture of the Calgary Flames organization is loss-aversion.

but that's what we are trying to do right now, no? The Flames had 2 first rounders last year, 2 first rounders this year, and they'll have 2 first rounders next year. We have amassed these picks because Conroy was allowed to trade impact players for futures.

The team was set up for failure in 24-25. The team overachieved, sure - but the higher ups were obviously okay with the plan to gut the team and draft high.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

I'm not sure it's the team or if it's some posters that aren't willing to learn: Conroy has said over and over he's going to try to resign expiring core UFAs as they enter their last year, and if they aren't willing to resign, he'll trade them. He's done that with every vet.

You can disagree with this plan, and I did at first, but that's the path this team is taking to rebuild.

What's helped me turn the corner and get behind it--beyond being a lifelong Flames' fan--is how well the Flames have drafted over the last decade or so when they've held onto their higher picks, and especially what they've done in the last few drafts.

With the prospects now in the fold, I very much can see a path to long-term contending -- where the team has layers of talent that they can continually replenish with young guys shifting into the lineup as they develop or used as trade chips for controllable higher end talent. It's a pretty exciting crop of prospects that should make their mark on the team in the next few years, even though there's only one top 10 pick in that group.

It will be difficult to compete with 0 stars. We might have 2.

Trying to compete and rebuild and sign aging players isn’t a path to success.

[Rhett44]

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

The problem is that actually sends a bad message to the young players that are there. Look how competitive Wolf was down the stretch, he wanted nothing more than to make the playoffs and even the coaching staff mentioned he was way more vocal and a leader down the stretch.

IMO You can't go scorched earth mid-season once the players already battled hard to get into a playoff race and defyed expectations.

It's why the ideal time to trade Andersson for maximum return would have been before last season, but you need to get it done for sure this offseason and can't let it drag into the season.

It's also why I'd say the ideal time to move a piece like Coleman should have been this offseason but do think he's the type of player you can move next deadline too.

Pieces like Huberdeau and Kadri are tougher because I don't think they want to leave and have full NMCs or are potentially untradeable (in Huberdeau's case).

For the most part Conroy has tried to tank. He's traded Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, Markstrom, Zadorov, Mangiapane, and Toffoli for predominantly futures based returns.

He seems to be in the process of moving out Andersson and maybe Coleman.

He's signed no major UFAs and was a bottom 5 cap team last season and likely will be again this upcoming season.

If he's trying hard to compete he has a weird way of showing it. What I think he's trying to do is manage assets and accumulate as many assets as possible...and whatever the outcome of the season is he doesn't have direct control over that.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

It’s called the Edwards plan. A reason why he was voted one of the worst owners in the NHL.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by FusionX

Still technically possible then IF there are no NMC/NTC in the new contract then? In that case, only his current 6 team NTC would apply for this final year right?

I'm assuming these clauses are to protect the players so in the situation where a new contract is signed without trade protection, the team can't retroactively apply the lack of a NMC/NTC to the end of a contract right? Would be interesting to know if a player could, though I'm not sure why they would.

Edit: Not that I'm saying this is the way to go, just interesting contract nuances we typically don't consider as fans.

Sure, it's technically possible if he agrees to sign a long-term contract without any trade protection. He could also agree not to have the trade protection apply retroactively. Neither is likely to happen though, so it's a waste of time to discuss it.

They might as well suggest lying to another team and telling them that Andersson is anxious to sign an 8-year extension with them, then making the trade only for the other team to find out he didn't agree to sign an extension. Technically, it could happen, realistically, it never would.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

I don’t think the expected to be near the playoffs last year
I don’t think they are trying to compete
I think they are trying to be competitive
If you are trying to compete you don’t enter a season with that payroll, goaltending or blueline

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

I think they have picked a direction. If they can make the team better with what they have and continue to draft as they have, they'll keep doing things this way.

They've only just started what I call "The Churn" where they'll move a veteran once a prospect bubbles up and takes their spot. And I'm kind of on board with it. It's not going to get you a top flight 1st overall prospect, and it may not necessarily get you to round 3 or 4 of the playoffs in the first two seasons but they've been horrible at short tracking build ups prior and I think this approach if they stay on it, will yield the results we all want.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The problem is that actually sends a bad message to the young players that are there. Look how competitive Wolf was down the stretch, he wanted nothing more than to make the playoffs and even the coaching staff mentioned he was way more vocal and a leader down the stretch.

IMO You can't go scorched earth mid-season once the players already battled hard to get into a playoff race and defyed expectations.

It's why the ideal time to trade Andersson for maximum return would have been before last season, but you need to get it done for sure this offseason and can't let it drag into the season.

It's also why I'd say the ideal time to move a piece like Coleman should have been this offseason but do think he's the type of player you can move next deadline too.

Pieces like Huberdeau and Kadri are tougher because I don't think they want to leave and have full NMCs or are potentially untradeable (in Huberdeau's case).

For the most part Conroy has tried to tank. He's traded Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, Markstrom, Zadorov, Mangiapane, and Toffoli for predominantly futures based returns.

He seems to be in the process of moving out Andersson and maybe Coleman.

He's signed no major UFAs and was a bottom 5 cap team last season and likely will be again this upcoming season.

If he's trying hard to compete he has a weird way of showing it. What I think he's trying to do is manage assets and accumulate as many assets as possible...and whatever the outcome of the season is he doesn't have direct control over that.

I agree to some extent that they couldn't rip it apart at last trade deadline.

But they've had many clear opportunities to break it down before that, where it wouldn't have a negative impact on the young core.
They've had the last 3? summers where they could of. The most clear being after Chucky and Johny left, and then again last summer when the other UFA vets left.

It's now starting to get to the point that it's too late to break it down any further because you will damage some of the young guys, like losing Wolfs prime.


I think that's what many are saying though. They're not really trying to be competitive. But they're also not really trying to break it down past trading aging UFA's.
It's a plan, but many aren't confident it's an ideal plan.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The problem is that actually sends a bad message to the young players that are there. Look how competitive Wolf was down the stretch, he wanted nothing more than to make the playoffs and even the coaching staff mentioned he was way more vocal and a leader down the stretch.

IMO You can't go scorched earth mid-season once the players already battled hard to get into a playoff race and defyed expectations.

It's why the ideal time to trade Andersson for maximum return would have been before last season, but you need to get it done for sure this offseason and can't let it drag into the season.

It's also why I'd say the ideal time to move a piece like Coleman should have been this offseason but do think he's the type of player you can move next deadline too.

Pieces like Huberdeau and Kadri are tougher because I don't think they want to leave and have full NMCs or are potentially untradeable (in Huberdeau's case).

For the most part Conroy has tried to tank. He's traded Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, Markstrom, Zadorov, Mangiapane, and Toffoli for predominantly futures based returns.

He seems to be in the process of moving out Andersson and maybe Coleman.

He's signed no major UFAs and was a bottom 5 cap team last season and likely will be again this upcoming season.

If he's trying hard to compete he has a weird way of showing it. What I think he's trying to do is manage assets and accumulate as many assets as possible...and whatever the outcome of the season is he doesn't have direct control over that.

A fluke run shouldn’t have you deviate from the plan.

All this talk about culture and the room is nonsense. The most important culture is winning. Now he may have cost him self getting prime assets holding onto Andersson. A big fumble by Conroy.

Just because we trade away players for the betterment of the future shouldn’t make the players less competitive and if it does they should be sent packing as well.

[PepsiFree]

The Flames traded almost all their vets, including their top scorers and #1 goaltender, had the lowest payroll in the league, and had a second year coach with a losing record.

Anyone who thinks they were trying to compete is on another planet.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don’t think the expected to be near the playoffs last year
I don’t think they are trying to compete
I think they are trying to be competitive
If you are trying to compete you don’t enter a season with that payroll, goaltending or blueline

I agree. Heading into last year it was very reasonable to think the team would falter. But after over performing with some pricey veterans who have probably played themselves into sellable assets, to me it’d be prudent to double down on that direction vs staying on the fence.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by traptor

I agree to some extent that they couldn't rip it apart at last trade deadline.

But they've had many clear opportunities to break it down before that, where it wouldn't have a negative impact on the young core.
They've had the last 3? summers where they could of. The most clear being after Chucky and Johny left, and then again last summer when the other UFA vets left.

It's now starting to get to the point that it's too late to break it down any further because you will damage some of the young guys, like losing Wolfs prime.


I think that's what many are saying though. They're not really trying to be competitive. But they're also not really trying to break it down past trading aging UFA's.
It's a plan, but many aren't confident it's an ideal plan.

I think it was also a bit of a weird situations...because you actually just can't trade all these guys at once and get the best value back for them.

2023 Offseason: Toffoli
2023-24 Season: Hanifin, Tanev, Lindholm, Zadorov
2024 Offseason: Markstrom, Mangiapane
2024-25 Season: Kuzmenko
2025- Offseason: ???

Overall up until this offseason I think they've tried to tear it down pretty good. I get why they didn't sell more at the deadline of the 24-25 season.

This offseason Andersson and Coleman should have been moved IMO (and Andersson should have been moved last offseason) . Seems like they are trying on Andersson at least.

[iggyloob12]

Not sure if this was posted but Jeremy Rutherford with The Athletic cowrote a piece on a potential Byram swap and where he’d fit with the Blues.

The Blues are trying to revamp their defense and get younger. They’ve made major renovations, adding Broberg (24 years old) and Logan Mailloux (22). Byram (24) could fit into their plans perfectly. The Blues currently have Cam Fowler and Broberg in their top four on the left side. Byram is a left-shot who can also play the right side, so if they were able to include Justin Faulk in the trade, he could take Faulk’s spot. With Fowler having just one season left on his contract, if he’s not renewed, Byram could play in the top four on the left side in the future.

Of the players without trade protection, wingers Jake Neighbours and Holloway and defenseman Broberg make the most sense for Buffalo … The fact that the Sabres would be asking for one of the Blues’ top-six forwards, I feel, is probably why this deal hasn’t been made already. It would be great in Armstrong’s mind to add Byram, but the Blues will be missing some scoring with Bolduc’s departure.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/647...en-byram-trade

[dammage79]

In my opinion. Trelivings was on the right path, he lost his script with the Harmonic trade and it snowballed from there. We need to remember that Feaster gave him the only real prospect depth the franchise had during his tenure. Sutter drained the swamp so to speak leaving the Flames with an old and stale team with very empty cupboards.

Anyways, they really need to keep the idea of what tree was doing during the first 4 years of his tenure and don't start pushing chips in like the Harmonic trade. Keep thos picks, swap out an expiring contract or two for more picks and then when you're bubbling over with good prospects, then you start making those "all in" types of moves.

[Paulie Walnuts]

If Buffalo is looking for forwards Farsbee or Sharangovich make sense to move. If they need a defence we can toss in Miromanov or Pachal.

The concern is if Byram actually wants 9M. That can easily be one one of the worst contracts in the NHL.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

In my eyes, the Flames are trying to compete, while trying to rebuild at the same time.

I just don't know if that strategy necessarily works. You can't be everything, and that is why I'd like them to be bold and choose a direction. I know the players aren't going to purposely lose, but you can ship out the veterans.

At last trade deadline we should have shipped out Rasmus and some vets. But we didn't want to miss the playoffs. Which doesn't matter to me anyways if we are not a contender.

IMO the Flames and Conroy in particular did the best he could with a bad situation. The vets in Kadri, Huberdeau, Coleman, Weegar, and Andersson were all locked up long term, for a decent chunk of the cap. I think it's better when your vets show up and potentially increase their value instead of just quitting on the team.

At the same time the Flames are probably among the top of the league in terms of the money they shipped out. If you look at what they're making this year: Lindholm($7.8M), Hanifin($7.4M), Toffoli($6M), Markstrom($6M), Zadorov($5M),Tanev($4.5M), Kuzmenko($4.3M). That's about $40M that could've been on the roster. Andersson and his future $8M are next.

Is Conroy the best GM in trades? Probably not, and maybe he could've gotten say a ~15% better package in some of the trades. The Flames also missed out on a couple of conditional picks. That's why I'm not too upset about it. I reserve judgement until I see the next couple of big trades.

Finally, I don't think the Flames are trying to compete as much as they're trying to generate assets that will be good for them in 2-3 years time. The plan based on the roster moves so far is short term pain for long term gain.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The Flames traded almost all their vets, including their top scorers and #1 goaltender, had the lowest payroll in the league, and had a second year coach with a losing record.

Anyone who thinks they were trying to compete is on another planet.

If the Flames were really committed to rebuilding and finishing bad enough to get the much needed elite talent they would not focus on the veterans but rather trade the following players for future picks.

Bahl - young dman like this who is under contract can probably get a very big return
Coronato - another young player on a very nice deal. Probably gets you a monster return
Wolf - trade him to the Hurricanes, suspect they part with many many picks for a goalie like him
Zary - should get the Flames a pretty good return.

Once you trade those 4 all the vets will ask to get out because the writing would be on the wall. Anybody who advocates burning it to the ground and picking a lane who is not pushing to move all 4 of those assets really has not truly picked the rebuilding lane.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

If the Flames were really committed to rebuilding and finishing bad enough to get the much needed elite talent they would not focus on the veterans but rather trade the following players for future picks.

Bahl - young dman like this who is under contract can probably get a very big return
Coronato - another young player on a very nice deal. Probably gets you a monster return
Wolf - trade him to the Hurricanes, suspect they part with many many picks for a goalie like him
Zary - should get the Flames a pretty good return.

Once you trade those 4 all the vets will ask to get out because the writing would be on the wall. Anybody who advocates burning it to the ground and picking a lane who is not pushing to move all 4 of those assets really has not truly picked the rebuilding lane.

I think more like one of the vets goes, you could see an exodus this season. If the Flames move Ras I suspect Coleman and maybe Kadri (dare I say his name) could be looking to move as well.