[PGT] Flames eat slow-cooked Mammoth

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Answers in red.

To reiterate, I want to swing for the fences. There are some exciting bluechip targets out there we can be aiming at, and without worrying about getting a current NHLer back as part of the return (other than a bad contract), at kills two things at once. A future top-line player from the trade, and strengthens our chance at landing a cornerstone player in the draft.

Nobody wants to trade anyone for nothing... although, trading everyone for a bag of pucks and then finishing in last place, guaranteeing us one of McKenna, Verhoeff or Lawrence would still be a pretty good trade. (I'm not actually recommending doing that, since finishing in 32nd place is the only guarantee of a top-three pick, which is way too much of a risk.)

There are a couple posters for whom the return is pretty much irrelevant - its the negative effect on team play that they want (even though the team is sitting bottom three they think it won't last).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

If that’s what was holding up a deal it would be made already. What’s missing from any offer so far is an asset valuable enough to make it worthwhile to the Flames. Like you said, quality over quantity. Or perhaps both.

Yeah I would doubt the margin between the level the team set for the three assets and the current offer on the table is a 4th rounder.

And I'm sure they understand the risk/reward of driving too hard a bargain and drafting lower in the first round.

[jonesy]

mushy middle
pushy piddle
gushy griddle
rushy riddle
paradiddle
2nd fiddle

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

There are a couple posters for whom the return is pretty much irrelevant - its the negative effect on team play that they want (even though the team is sitting bottom three they think it won't last).

I'll be honest, I've been skipping over most of this discussion lately. There's not a lot of movement from some of the participants on either side.

Although, we should all be familiar with the Flames' penchant for playing themselves out of a good draft pick with no tangible reward for doing so by now. There's also some "the bigger the heater we go on, the less they'll want to trade these guys" fear happening.

All in all I think people don't really trust Maloney's level of influence on hockey decisions. I really wish they didn't just extended him. It just adds so much uncertainty to everything.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Answers in red.

To reiterate, I want to swing for the fences. There are some exciting bluechip targets out there we can be aiming at, and without worrying about getting a current NHLer back as part of the return (other than a bad contract), at kills two things at once. A future top-line player from the trade, and strengthens our chance at landing a cornerstone player in the draft.

Nobody wants to trade anyone for nothing... although, trading everyone for a bag of pucks and then finishing in last place, guaranteeing us one of McKenna, Verhoeff or Lawrence would still be a pretty good trade. (I'm not actually recommending doing that, since finishing in 32nd place is the only guarantee of a top-three pick, which is way too much of a risk.)

I used 2nd rounder as an example because that is likely the only way they move at this moment. It is dumping them for dirt cheap.

Blue-chip prospects rarely move. Who do you think is available in this deal?

I mean Brock Nelson went for a late first and Cal Ritchie (who was drafted late first and isn't a first liner).

Actually, one poster has stated they would get rid of Kadri for nothing if it meant a top 3 pick.

Flames are Sitting in 3rd last right now. Yes they are winning more lately, but it is a big climb up. If they remain bottom 4/5 teams until the deadline they can move with retention to more teams, opening up a better return. For example, they can try and get some 2027 firsts as part of the return. The more lotto tickets the better. Likely lose 75% off their games after they move the vets to drop back lower in the standings.

You also do not want to just dump guys for nothing as it hurts you in trade leverage with other teams.

[Macindoc]

In addition to wanting to maximize the return on veterans being traded away, I suspect the Flames don't want Wolf to give up 5-6 goals per night and destroy his confidence. He and Parekh are the organization's most valuable assets. IMO Wolf is just as capable of elevating the Flames to Cup contender status as any non-generational top 3 pick. So the Flames don't want to destroy his confidence or to push the rebuild so far out that he's out of his prime by the time the window opens.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

In addition to wanting to maximize the return on veterans being traded away, I suspect the Flames don't want Wolf to give up 5-6 goals per night and destroy his confidence. He and Parekh are the organization's most valuable assets. IMO Wolf is just as capable of elevating the Flames to Cup contender status as any non-generational top 3 pick. So the Flames don't want to destroy his confidence or to push the rebuild so far out that he's out of his prime by the time the window opens.

That's a good point.

(But it's probably part of culture, which I am repeatedly told does not exist.)

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That's a good point.

(But it's probably part of culture, which I am repeatedly told does not exist.)

If the culture is so fragile that losing one or two vets, or having a losing season, will shatter it, then is it really much of a culture at all? A true winning culture would persist through player turnover, and wouldn't be shaken by one bad season.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

If the culture is so fragile that losing one or two vets, or having a losing season, will shatter it, then is it really much of a culture at all? A true winning culture would persist through player turnover, and wouldn't be shaken by one bad season.

The question is whether Wolf's confidence would be permanently damaged by being shellacked night after night behind a team that can't or won't play defence. I think that's a legitimate concern; ask any goalie who's been through Edmonton and had to rehab his whole career after.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The question is whether Wolf's confidence would be permanently damaged by being shellacked night after night behind a team that can't or won't play defence. I think that's a legitimate concern; ask any goalie who's been through Edmonton and had to rehab his whole career after.

Yes, it's a concern. But I don't think moving out Andersson & Kadri suddenly makes this a team that can't play defense. It just means we might score 1 fewer goal some nights and give up 1 or 2 more scoring chances per night compared to now. Not earth shattering stuff. But it puts us back on track to a top 3 pick.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Yes, it's a concern. But I don't think moving out Andersson & Kadri suddenly makes this a team that can't play defense. It just means we might score 1 fewer goal some nights and give up 1 or 2 more scoring chances per night compared to now. Not earth shattering stuff.

I agree with that. I think the team can comfortably trade those two and Coleman, too, but I hope they don't cut any deeper on defence this year. I believe having three rookie D at once on a weak team (Kuznetsov, Parekh, and Brzustewicz, as I think one poster suggested) would turn almost any goalie prematurely bald.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I agree with that. I think the team can comfortably trade those two and Coleman, too, but I hope they don't cut any deeper on defence this year. I believe having three rookie D at once on a weak team (Kuznetsov, Parekh, and Brzustewicz, as I think one poster suggested) would turn almost any goalie prematurely bald.

Wolf could pull it off.

Spoiler!