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

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by traptor

Is hague + 1st that bad? Its the equivalent of the Markstrom trade which people seem to love. Better then the Hanifin deal and worse then the linsholm deal.

Plus i bet CC is set on getting a roster player back. Its been his MO in pretty much every deal.

Everyone kept pointing out that the Markstrom trade was 'good' because goaltenders do not typically return much in trades.

Andersson is not a goalie. The expectations should be significantly higher for a top pair RD in a sellers market, even if it is just for a 1 year guaranteed deal (plus a year of negotiation time to get an extension in place).

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

If we were to use Lindholm as the upper mark, and targeted return...

To Dallas: Rasmus Andersson (50% retained)
To Calgary: 2027 1st Round Pick, Tristan Bertucci ('23 2nd round pick, LHD), Matt Dumba (cap-dump, Kuzy equivelant)

I think that type of deal is a fair return, and works within Dallas' cap constraints as they're dumping more cap than taking on.

That is a terrible return.
- You are giving up an asset that should be worth at least 1st and a good prospect without a favourable market with lots of teams interested
- Then you are adding retention and getting no value back on it
- And then you are taking a cap dump for nothing?

If you are willing to blow the trade that badly then send him to literally any other team so that you are not wasting a retention slot AND taking back a cap dump contract for no benefit.

The only reason to send Andersson to the Stars is because they are willing to pay more than the other teams in order to win now.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Wolven

That is a terrible return.
- You are giving up an asset that should be worth at least 1st and a good prospect without a favourable market with lots of teams interested
- Then you are adding retention and getting no value back on it
- And then you are taking a cap dump for nothing?

If you are willing to blow the trade that badly then send him to literally any other team so that you are not wasting a retention slot AND taking back a cap dump contract for no benefit.

The only reason to send Andersson to the Stars is because they are willing to pay more than the other teams in order to win now.

Based on what? Go find an equivelant trade, and use it as an example. You won't find one that returns what you're proposing in the last 3 years (I went back and looked at the trade deadlines, so maybe I've missed one pre-season, but I can't off the top of my head think of one). Noah Hanifin is legitimately the closest comparable, and it returned Miromanov, 1st, conditional 3rd (don't believe the pick transferred) with 50% retention. Comparables are what set the market in the NHL - so go find one that shows a selling team extracting that much more value, and we can discuss it as a comparable. Saying he should be worth whatever, without actually bringing up the comparable is nothing more than whatever you've made up in your head.

Retention isn't worth what it used to be (especially at only $2.275M at max).

Dumba, I don't believe is a cap dump strictly speaking. It's an opportuntity to revitalize an asset like Conroy tried with Kuzy.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

It’s been stated they want a good team who is competitive to open the new building.

We got 2 years. Need to start pushing some guys out and adding assets and hopefully picking high enough to get a couple young stars.

It would have been better if they ripped the bandaid off earlier.

I am disappointed Paulie, was really hoping to learn what “ripped the bandaid off earlier” actually means. It appears to just be a comment to sound like there is a better plan than Conroy’s without any specifics to what that elusive plan would be. He has traded 7 of the 11 vets he could trade, re-signed one and has 3 of them still on the roster. Still wondering what the better “rip the bandaid” plan would have been.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Based on what? Go find an equivelant trade, and use it as an example. You won't find one that returns what you're proposing in the last 3 years (I went back and looked at the trade deadlines, so maybe I've missed one pre-season, but I can't off the top of my head think of one). Noah Hanifin is legitimately the closest comparable, and it returned Miromanov, 1st, conditional 3rd (don't believe the pick transferred) with 50% retention. Comparables are what set the market in the NHL - so go find one that shows a selling team extracting that much more value, and we can discuss it as a comparable. Saying he should be worth whatever, without actually bringing up the comparable is nothing more than whatever you've made up in your head.

Retention isn't worth what it used to be (especially at only $2.275M at max).

Dumba, I don't believe is a cap dump strictly speaking. It's an opportuntity to revitalize an asset like Conroy tried with Kuzy.

You are wrong about Dumba. Total cap dump who got benched for the playoffs.

Carlo (not as good as Andersson) gets a 1st, Minten (2nd), and 4th. Andersson plays 5 minutes more per game and over triple the points production.

Andersson for a full year rental should yield a significantly better return than Carlo at the deadline.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Wolven

You are wrong about Dumba. Total cap dump who got benched for the playoffs.

Carlo (not as good as Andersson) gets a 1st, Minten (2nd), and 4th. Andersson plays 5 minutes more per game and over triple the points production.

Andersson for a full year rental should yield a significantly better return than Carlo at the deadline.

Carlo not a pending free agent.

Acquiring Carlo, would effectively be if the Flames traded Andersson at the 2024 trade deadline - and that's not what we're doing.

Again, based on what? If the Flames were to have dealt Andersson with 2.3 seasons left on his contract - yes, the return value would be more.

That's not a comparable trade.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Everyone kept pointing out that the Markstrom trade was 'good' because goaltenders do not typically return much in trades.

Andersson is not a goalie. The expectations should be significantly higher for a top pair RD in a sellers market, even if it is just for a 1 year guaranteed deal (plus a year of negotiation time to get an extension in place).

It is & was until ownership killed the deal.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Wolven

You are wrong about Dumba. Total cap dump who got benched for the playoffs.

Carlo (not as good as Andersson) gets a 1st, Minten (2nd), and 4th. Andersson plays 5 minutes more per game and over triple the points production.

Andersson for a full year rental should yield a significantly better return than Carlo at the deadline.

Not when Carlo has 2 years left and is paid less. Andersson *may* fetch the same, but it’s not a guarantee with his deal expiring.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Wolven

You are wrong about Dumba. Total cap dump who got benched for the playoffs.

Carlo (not as good as Andersson) gets a 1st, Minten (2nd), and 4th. Andersson plays 5 minutes more per game and over triple the points production.

Andersson for a full year rental should yield a significantly better return than Carlo at the deadline.

It’s not a linear scale though. Players on expiring contracts get traded for 1sts at the deadline very often, but that doesn’t mean trading them at the beginning of the year would have brought multiple firsts.

The bulk of the trade value is at the deadline. And that deadline return can be disproportionate because the urgency and number of buyers increases. Not trading Anderson this offseason doesn’t lose you that much on the return; there just aren’t as many offseason buyers as there are deadline buyers.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Not when Carlo has 2 years left and is paid less. Andersson *may* fetch the same, but it’s not a guarantee with his deal expiring.

Carlo's cap savings from $4.1M to $3.485M for two seasons is nice but most teams can find 2nd pair guys for that price pretty easily.

Andersson is a bit of a unicorn by being a top pair RD for $4.55M and retention can cut that in half.

There really isn't a comparable for this trade but if 2nd pair RD in any situation can fetch a 1st, 2nd, and 4th then top pair RD should have a better return than a 1st, 2nd, and negative valued cap dump.

[MissTeeks]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1941977134668325136

https://twitter.com/user/status/1941978258498535433

[Knut]

Means Offersheet is off the table

[Vinny01]

So Buffalo is going to get Byram on a 1-2 year deal and if Byram wants he can get himself to free agency.

Listening to 32 thoughts Byram is all about getting paid

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

It’s not a linear scale though. Players on expiring contracts get traded for 1sts at the deadline very often, but that doesn’t mean trading them at the beginning of the year would have brought multiple firsts.

The bulk of the trade value is at the deadline. And that deadline return can be disproportionate because the urgency and number of buyers increases. Not trading Anderson this offseason doesn’t lose you that much on the return; there just aren’t as many offseason buyers as there are deadline buyers.

Based on the rumours, it sounds like there are more buyers now. Even after free agent frenzy there is still need in Buffalo, Hurricanes, Sharks, Leafs, Vegas, Stars, Red Wings, Bruins, and maybe the Blues.

I expect the list of buyers will only shrink in the regular season as the contenders solidify their position and the other teams fall out of buying / building mode.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

So Buffalo is going to get Byram on a 1-2 year deal and if Byram wants he can get himself to free agency.

Listening to 32 thoughts Byram is all about getting paid

Player and Agent can pick the term between 1 and 2 years.

[Roko]

And how does it work if they are traded prior to the hearing? I do recall the flames doing this with Tkachuk to buy more time to organize a sign and trade without risk of offer sheet. Correct me if I am wrong

[dino7c]

I dont think many contenders are improved...Vegas? Who else? Anybody on the Panthers level?

Tons of teams with closing windas should be desperate

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

So Buffalo is going to get Byram on a 1-2 year deal and if Byram wants he can get himself to free agency.

Listening to 32 thoughts Byram is all about getting paid

I think it also lights a fire under teams trying to acquire him. They likely want the flexibility to sign him to a contract of their own design and not a short term arbitration contract. It's not great for Buffalo either though because if no deal comes before that, his trade value probably goes down. It makes me wonder if they were worried about a potential offer sheet.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Based on the rumours, it sounds like there are more buyers now. Even after free agent frenzy there is still need in Buffalo, Hurricanes, Sharks, Leafs, Vegas, Stars, Red Wings, Bruins, and maybe the Blues.

I expect the list of buyers will only shrink in the regular season as the contenders solidify their position and the other teams fall out of buying / building mode.

Of those teams, the ones that I think it’s easiest to make a trade with in terms of them having the required assets to trade for Andersson are Carolina, San Jose, Detroit and St. Louis. Carolina makes the most sense in terms of a team ready to compete for a cup and have assets to spend. They have 2 first round picks from Dallas (2026 and 2028) as well as their own first round picks. They have a decent prospect base. They have cap space and are not rebuilding.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Blues should be able to push this one over the line now.