[Trade] Canucks trade Quinn Hughes to the Wild for 2026 1st, Rossi, Buium, and Ohgren

[Burning Beard]

Mean Bahl is the best Bahl.

Edit - wrong thread but I'm going to leave it.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I know what the rumoured NJ offer was and I doubt anyone else was seriously involved. Do you seriously think there was an equivalent star defenceman and a very strong veteran forward offered? Because that's what Florida traded (just reversing the positions). Equivalent defenceman being someone like Heiskenan or Werensky.

The only thing equivalent between 23 year old Tkachuk and almost 30 year old Huberdeau at the time was that they were both coming off 100pt seasons. If Vancouver was worried about replacing Hughes' lost points, then there are plenty of players close to or in their 30s that they could have targeted instead (replacing points doesn't have to be a positional thing).

I liked the Tkachuk trade at the time. I knew Florida was getting the best player in the deal by a wide margin, but we theoretically replaced his points by getting Huberdeau and also got Weegar. Obviously I started hating the deal more and more as time went on, but I've never not liked having Weegsy on the team, and now I can even appreciate Huberdeau (now the the cap has gone up and I've given up on this roster actually being any kind of a contender).

If I had my druthers, though, boy would I ever wish we'd made a deal like the one Vancouver did instead. (The power of hindsight!)

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This is such a silly argument because when the Flames were forced to start making rebuilding trades the Canucks won the division. In terms of rebuilding related trades the flames haven’t made one of those since the summer of 2024 when they shipped off Markstrom and Mangiapane.

The Canucks appear to be starting their rebuild now when the Flames are in there third season since starting to tear it down

As silly as those who say the Flames aren’t rebuilding?

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Do you think Vancouver was rebuilding when they dealt Miller? They were also kinda forced to move him
And after the Miller deal they also traded a first to Pittsburgh
Why didn’t you mention that one?

Anytime you trade someone the caliber if JT Miller you are performing some level of rebuild. Its a team making decisive moves. The Flames try and sign a player until the nth hour and then trade them when they fail, take no action in any direction for long periods of time, bring out the president to reiterate we aren't rebuilding.

I wish the Flames would take a more decisive direction and make aggressive moves to support that direction. We make moves when forced, or we take half measures.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Jaydee

If the flames refuse to trade assets and rebuild, I swear to God I might ####ing cheer for Vancouver. At least their ####ing management isn’t ######ed.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

As silly as those who say the Flames aren’t rebuilding?

To be clear I was commenting on posts like this one

[Burning Beard]

Hughes is a really good player. Minnesota is going to be a big threat

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Anytime you trade someone the caliber if JT Miller you are performing some level of rebuild. Its a team making decisive moves. The Flames try and sign a player until the nth hour and then trade them when they fail, take no action in any direction for long periods of time, bring out the president to reiterate we aren't rebuilding.

I wish the Flames would take a more decisive direction and make aggressive moves to support that direction. We make moves when forced, or we take half measures.

The Canucks were forced to trade Miller pretty much no?
You are also ignoring trades where the Flames didn’t try to sign players and traded them instead ahead of when they needed to
But this has been covered in the past and for some reason is ignored by you and others making this argument

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

As silly as those who say the Flames aren’t rebuilding?

Yes it is silly if fans do not think the Flames are rebuilding. I don’t think it is crazy to question how they are going about it. I am trusting the insiders on this site and some of the dialog from Pat that this team is going to trade more than Andersson this year.

It was a week or so ago where people on this site were stating teams never move players with term left on their deal for futures and rebuilding trades. Many examples were given and we just saw one of our biggest rivals do it and get a monster return.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

The only thing equivalent between 23 year old Tkachuk and almost 30 year old Huberdeau at the time was that they were both coming off 100pt seasons. If Vancouver was worried about replacing Hughes' lost points, then there are plenty of players close to or in their 30s that they could have targeted instead (replacing points doesn't have to be a positional thing).

I liked the Tkachuk trade at the time. I knew Florida was getting the best player in the deal by a wide margin, but we theoretically replaced his points by getting Huberdeau and also got Weegar. Obviously I started hating the deal more and more as time went on, but I've never not liked having Weegsy on the team, and now I can even appreciate Huberdeau (now the the cap has gone up and I've given up on this roster actually being any kind of a contender).

If I had my druthers, though, boy would I ever wish we'd made a deal like the one Vancouver did instead. (The power of hindsight!)

.

Any trade to Vancouver had to have a D coming back and if they are looking veteran - I don't think any team was offering their stars in return. Not at this point in the season.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Yes it is silly if fans do not think the Flames are rebuilding. I don’t think it is crazy to question how they are going about it. I am trusting the insiders on this site and some of the dialog from Pat that this team is going to trade more than Andersson this year.

It was a week or so ago where people on this site were stating teams never move players with term left on their deal for futures and rebuilding trades. Many examples were given and we just saw one of our biggest rivals do it and get a monster return.

All the extreme positions people are taking recently are silly. Those deals don't NEVER happen but they are rare. And I admit I was wrong that I felt Hughes would more than likely go in the summer. I should have kept in mind Vancouver is very aggressive with these things.

I also don't view the deal as a strictly futures deal as it includes two young roster players. In many ways it's similar to the deals Conroy has been making where he gets young roster players and picks. It's just at a much bigger scale because of the quality player that Hughes is.

That was really what I was questioning. Why are some people viewing the Canucks as doing something so much different/better than the Flames. I see it being similar except at a larger scale because of the player involved, and the fact they were actually willing to say the dreaded R word. And BTW I agree it's silly Calgary refuses to. Their PR management of this phase of the team has been awful.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This is such a silly argument because when the Flames were forced to start making rebuilding trades the Canucks won the division. In terms of rebuilding related trades the flames haven’t made one of those since the summer of 2024 when they shipped off Markstrom and Mangiapane.

The Canucks appear to be starting their rebuild now when the Flames are in there third season since starting to tear it down

If picking up 24 year old Rossi counts as part of a rebuilding trade, surely picking up 24 year old Farabee can also count. Let’s see if the Canucks make 6 more rebuilding trades before we call it a rebuild.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The Canucks were forced to trade Miller pretty much no?
You are also ignoring trades where the Flames didn’t try to sign players and traded them instead ahead of when they needed to
But this has been covered in the past and for some reason is ignored by you and others making this argument

So you don't see a contrast between the decisive Hughes trade and their communicated direction versus the Flames 17 months of inactivity and their communication?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Anytime you trade someone the caliber if JT Miller you are performing some level of rebuild. Its a team making decisive moves. The Flames try and sign a player until the nth hour and then trade them when they fail, take no action in any direction for long periods of time, bring out the president to reiterate we aren't rebuilding.

I wish the Flames would take a more decisive direction and make aggressive moves to support that direction. We make moves when forced, or we take half measures.

They traded Miller for a 28 year old dman and a 25 year old year old center, a 22 year old dman and a 27 year old 4th line winger. The Canucks also had to throw in 20 year old prospect, an 18 year old prospect and two other roster players to get that bounty of late 20’s rebuilding chips. Not much of a rebuilding trade.

They then went and locked in that 28 year old dman to a 6 year contract to take him until he’s 34 years old to lock in the rebuild.

[Inferno]

https://twitter.com/user/status/2000023942954958941

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by kehatch

So you don't see a contrast between the decisive Hughes trade and their communicated direction versus the Flames 17 months of inactivity and their communication?

I've already said I don't think the Flames are handling the communication well. But I also don't care much about it. I judge them on their actions.

And in terms of actions, the Flames have a clear pattern of moves that signal they are re-building. Both in terms of what moves they have made and not made.

They also didn't have a player like Hughes to trade during this phase. So it's not an apples to apples comparison.

[FanIn80]

Yeah, for the record, I know this is probably more of an argument about semantics, but I view this Vancouver trade to be an actual rebuilding trade... not any of the ones the Flames did. It's why people in the media use the word "retooling" when talking about the Flames' moves. This Vancouver trade is what a rebuilding trade looks like.

I'm not going to argue about what the differences are between the this trade and the ones the Flames have made (only talking about the last couple (few?) years). If anyone thinks this trade is the same as trading for Frost/Farabee, Kuzmenko, Sharangovich, etc, then there's no point discussing anything else.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

They traded Miller for a 28 year old dman and a 25 year old year old center, a 22 year old dman and a 27 year old 4th line winger. The Canucks also had to throw in 20 year old prospect, an 18 year old prospect and two other roster players to get that bounty of late 20’s rebuilding chips. Not much of a rebuilding trade.

And then they traded a 1st to Pittsburgh in a deal to get a dman back.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by kehatch

So you don't see a contrast between the decisive Hughes trade and their communicated direction versus the Flames 17 months of inactivity and their communication?

Their communicated direction only happened just now, after denying it earlier.

When Hughes made it clear he wanted out.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Yeah, for the record, I know this is probably more of an argument about semantics, but I view this Vancouver trade to be an actual rebuilding trade... not any of the ones the Flames did. It's why people in the media use the word "retooling" when talking about the Flames' moves. This Vancouver trade is what a rebuilding trade looks like.

I'm not going to argue about what the differences are between the this trade and the ones the Flames have made (only talking about the last couple (few?) years). If anyone thinks this trade is the same as trading for Frost/Farabee, Kuzmenko, Sharangovich, etc, then there's no point discussing anything else.

The Flames didn't trade for Kuzmenko. They traded for Kumenzko, Bruz, a 1st and another pick.
Shark was 24 when they acquired him, same age as Rossi. And they got a pick with him.
Bahl was 23 when they acquired him, younger than Rossi. And they got a 1st with him.

So you tell me what exactly the differences are. They are the same type of deals involving young roster players and picks. What exactly do you think makes them different? Vancouver got a larger return because it was Hughes, but the make-up of the deals are virtually identical.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Yeah, for the record, I know this is probably more of an argument about semantics, but I view this Vancouver trade to be an actual rebuilding trade... not any of the ones the Flames did. It's why people in the media use the word "retooling" when talking about the Flames' moves. This Vancouver trade is what a rebuilding trade looks like.

I'm not going to argue about what the differences are between the this trade and the ones the Flames have made (only talking about the last couple (few?) years). If anyone thinks this trade is the same as trading for Frost/Farabee, Kuzmenko, Sharangovich, etc, then there's no point discussing anything else.

Rossi is 9 months younger than Sharangovich was when we acquired him and 3 months older than Bahl was when we acquired him. Rossi is part of a rebuilding trade and Bahl and Sharangovich were parts of retooling trades.