I wildly disagree with the good leadership/good room type stuff. If you win, you have a good happy team but that same team goes on a losing streak and the room sucks.
Obviously you don't want complete idiots on your team bringing everything down, but total disagree with it being a deciding factor in trades.
Anyone who's been an employee at a company that does engagement surveys can see a correlation between company success and engagement. Everyone is pumped up when the company hits the growth targets and they get their bonuses, but those same people are annoyed when the company misses and bonuses/perks go away.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
I have never understood the entire league's fascination with Kotkaniemi. Always overhyped. I never saw a stand out player at any point in my viewings of him. Let's not double down on hoping he'll suddenly pop with us.
Right? The Flames are the opposite of what KK needs to pop. If he is struggling to put up goals on a team that is 3rd in the league in scoring goals, moving to a team that is 2nd worst at scoring goals is not the solution.
Absolutely nothing about the Flames system will unlock offensive potential.
Right? The Flames are the opposite of what KK needs to pop. If he is struggling to put up goals on a team that is 3rd in the league in scoring goals, moving to a team that is 2nd worst at scoring goals is not the solution.
Absolutely nothing about the Flames system will unlock offensive potential.
Yep. This Calgary system would probably make it worse.
__________________
I hate just about everyone and just about everything.
I would definitely prefer the Flames take back a bad contract in a Kadri trade vs. retaining salary.
Yeah we need roster players, and with more ice time and Huska's system maybe we rehab a player enough to move him when a kid takes his spot; more assets later.
Right? The Flames are the opposite of what KK needs to pop. If he is struggling to put up goals on a team that is 3rd in the league in scoring goals, moving to a team that is 2nd worst at scoring goals is not the solution.
Absolutely nothing about the Flames system will unlock offensive potential.
He's an upgrade on Beecher, Kirkland and Kerins.
If he comes with enticements in the form of a bunch of picks or prospects, then yes please.
I see no one saying he'll 'pop' here.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Badgers Nose For This Useful Post:
I would definitely prefer the Flames take back a bad contract in a Kadri trade vs. retaining salary.
I would definitely prefer the Flames retain on Kadri's contract to get a bigger return than take back a bad contract and add a struggling player to an already full roster.
One of the perks of moving out Kadri is that it will force the team to slot Zary into C and then hopefully give more time to a player like Stromgren to get more minutes. Similarly, moving out Coleman could make room to bring Gridin back up. Or Kerins or Morton.
Giving any one of these guys a bigger chance at the NHL is better than bringing a bad contract back to logjam the system.
I wildly disagree with the good leadership/good room type stuff. If you win, you have a good happy team but that same team goes on a losing streak and the room sucks.
Obviously you don't want complete idiots on your team bringing everything down, but total disagree with it being a deciding factor in trades.
Anyone who's been an employee at a company that does engagement surveys can see a correlation between company success and engagement. Everyone is pumped up when the company hits the growth targets and they get their bonuses, but those same people are annoyed when the company misses and bonuses/perks go away.
Yes, and one added thing: recognition/opportunity. Lot's of employees rate that higher than wages in surveys.
In Flames talk: young guys getting benched while Huby plays lots is very bad for morale. It doesn't matter how many good leaders you have, if kids see the earned not given motto as bull ####.
If he comes with enticements in the form of a bunch of picks or prospects, then yes please.
I see no one saying he'll 'pop' here.
Presumably, you don't take on $5M in salary for many years to be your 4th line center and potential healthy scratch. You would only do that if you assume you can get more out of him than what he's currently producing.
I think it's a bad bet. Save your cap and roster spots for better players.
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
I would definitely prefer the Flames retain on Kadri's contract to get a bigger return than take back a bad contract and add a struggling player to an already full roster.
One of the perks of moving out Kadri is that it will force the team to slot Zary into C and then hopefully give more time to a player like Stromgren to get more minutes. Similarly, moving out Coleman could make room to bring Gridin back up. Or Kerins or Morton.
Giving any one of these guys a bigger chance at the NHL is better than bringing a bad contract back to logjam the system.
You don't know who is coming back though. So why have a strong position on it at all?
Also, it is possible some of our log jam of mediocre players will get shipped. Zary, Sharky, Lombo, Popsicle (when back), Kerins, Kirkland, Beecher. There is often a movement of fringe players in these types of deals. There's no accounting for what some GMs covet. Surprises abound.
Last edited by Badgers Nose; 01-09-2026 at 10:58 AM.
Presumably, you don't take on $5M in salary for many years to be your 4th line center and potential healthy scratch. You would only do that if you assume you can get more out of him than what he's currently producing.
I think it's a bad bet. Save your cap and roster spots for better players.
Don't need the cap space now or in 3 more years. $5M is about to be 4th line C money.
Agree to disagree. We'll see what happens and what the right bet was soon enough.
The thing I do like with KK is essentially he is a center that can slot in for the 4 years he has left as a stop gap that gives you some options. If Kadri goes then Frost and Backlund are pretty much what is left. Backlund also has 2 years remaining so KK is C depth insurance if any of the kids can't make the jump and/or a Backlund replacement in the bottom 6. It also allows you to shop Frost next year if one of the kids pop. Worst case scenario you buy him out in his last year and get 3M cap saving with only an addtional year of 1.7M dead cap space.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Robbob For This Useful Post:
I actually think KK could be a beauty Backlund linemate, who could learn from what Backlund does, helping turn him into a beauty defensive player (because that’s what Backs does), eventually transitioning back to centre (maybe).
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
The thing I do like with KK is essentially he is a center that can slot in for the 4 years he has left as a stop gap that gives you some options. If Kadri goes then Frost and Backlund are pretty much what is left. Backlund also has 2 years remaining so KK is C depth insurance if any of the kids can't make the jump and/or a Backlund replacement in the bottom 6. It also allows you to shop Frost next year if one of the kids pop. Worst case scenario you buy him out in his last year and get 3M cap saving with only an addtional year of 1.7M dead cap space.
Agreed. I don't think the detractors are thinking this through.
You could hit big on the picks coming back too. If you get another Gridin or Bruz because you took on KK's contract, then how do you rate the trade?
Not to mention the benefit of having a 4th line that doesn't get owned every game, LOL
If he comes with enticements in the form of a bunch of picks or prospects, then yes please.
I see no one saying he'll 'pop' here.
We could probably get the same (or better) enticements by retaining 50% on Kadri. Retaining may even have more value because the 'Canes would try to advocate that JK does not have that much negative value.
Also, what is the point in getting a "bunch of picks or prospects" if we never let them play in the NHL because we logjam the bottom 6 with guys like Kotkaniemi for 4 more years?
I don't mind the idea of building a big stable of prospects but then you have to make room for them to play. Otherwise you are just collecting prospects for the sake of having them. And, just to say it again, I would rather consolidate into 1 great prospect than 3-4 middling assets.
Carolina is one of the best teams in the league and yet they have Staal who is a 4th liner and Janko at center. I think if they traded with the Flames Frost for JK and a 2nd, they gain cap space, gain at center and keep their best assets.
They could then make a run at another center who is better than Frost and a better 2nd line option. Move Frost to the wing and have him in case of injuries. Janko also depth at center in case of injuries.
JK is worth the risk that he is better than he is playing and plays a style that could fit as a 3rd liner near the end of the deal when Backlund is gone and young players come in who are better than he is.
Staal is playing like a 2nd line center but could easily be moved down to a 3rd liner with Kadri. Aho - Kadri - Staal - Jankowski is a fantastic set of centers down the middle and would contend with either Florida team and any other Eastern conference suitors. I think with those set of centers they can finally break their conference final curse.
JK is a cap dump at this point. The offer sheet gamble didn't work out. It is what it is, but they have draft capital from the Rantanen/Stankoven swap, and they've got plenty of good prospects that we could figure out a deal with them for sure. They handle their cap space well, so fitting in Kadri for a few years shouldn't be an issue.
