Should we be going for Ovie?

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by Karl

Yes. Unless they re-sign him to a new one later this offseason. As it is right now, he's an RFA.

Which I see happening, I hated Chiasson as much as the rest of you guys but he picked it up near the end of the season and was definitely useful as a 4th line winger.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Personally I agree

I think it will cost a contract (Brouwer or Frolik), 2 prospects (Andersen/Kylington/Fox/Hickey+Klimchuck/Mangipane/Dube/Jankowski), a 1st, and maybe a conditional pick (2nd that becomes a 1st if the Flames make the conference finals)

Yeah roster player + good prospect + B/C prospect and a pick.

[Tinordi]

I like the sentiment of this trade, reminds me of the arms race with the Oilers back in the 80s.

Practically though it would be way too difficult to make a trade like that happen. Washington will need to look like they got a great deal for their captain. Flames couldn't sell too many of the pieces that they're relying on to make them contenders.

Ultimately the flames just don't have the expendable assets to make it work.

[Jason14h]

Can you imagine if the Flames traded a 31 year old Iginla for some of the packages being mentioned here....

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Can you imagine if the Flames traded a 31 year old Iginla for some of the packages being mentioned here....

The Flames spent Iginlas whole career trying to build around him, not build in spite of him.

The Reghre trade, Jokinen trade, the Phaneuf trade, and basically the eventually lousy return for Iginla is because the Flames couldn't come to the realization that Iginla and Kipper were never the answer.

Had we received some actual top prospects for Iginla and not bottom of the barrel guys, that would've turned the Flames around a lot quicker. They spun their wheels for too long.

I would actually give Washington props if they exercised some smarter asset management than what the Flames tried to do.

And the thing is, Ovechkin is not THE GUY in Washington anymore. Iginla was always the best player on the Flames squads. The Flames could never have drafted a Kuznetsov

[JohnnyB]

Doesn't make sense to me. We have a thread about Ovie as a choker next to one about him as a potential huge trade target?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

I like the smug "I did" as if you know anybody remotely close to being inside the Capitals war room and their intentions. For all you know, they released the idea of trading Ovechkin to the public in order to light a fire under Ovy's ass.

Here, in fact, is what the Capitals released to the public:

“People are looking for a major solution to what we have going on,” MacLellan said. “I think part of it is they watch certain things in his game, and then it shows up and they say that’s not acceptable. But he’s a big part of our franchise, a big part of our history. He’s been a big part of where we’re at as an organization and just to casually say, ‘Let’s trade him?’ For what? For who? I don’t think it makes sense from an organizational point of view. Maybe at some point if there’s a legitimate hockey deal that came available, but I don’t know if that’s where we’re at right now. I just think he’s got a history here. He’s a big part of this franchise, and he’ll continue to be going forward.”

(Washington Post, May 30)

That's the quote that caused every bit of this absurd speculation. The Caps' GM says that maybe he would consider trading Ovechkin at some point, and only for a legitimate hockey deal – i.e., for NHL roster players ready to make an equivalent contribution to what Ovechkin is making now.

No, the Capitals are not rebuilding. No, they are not looking to sell Ovechkin for picks or prospects. No, they are not willing to take another team's garbage in exchange for the best goal-scorer they have ever had.

They're not even ‘trying to light a fire under Ovy's ass’. MacLellan's remarks were made in the context of defending Ovechkin against his critics.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

The Flames spent Iginlas whole career trying to build around him, not build in spite of him.

The Reghre trade, Jokinen trade, the Phaneuf trade, and basically the eventually lousy return for Iginla is because the Flames couldn't come to the realization that Iginla and Kipper were never the answer.

Had we received some actual top prospects for Iginla and not bottom of the barrel guys, that would've turned the Flames around a lot quicker. They spun their wheels for too long.

I would actually give Washington props if they exercised some smarter asset management than what the Flames tried to do.

And the thing is, Ovechkin is not THE GUY in Washington anymore. Iginla was always the best player on the Flames squads. The Flames could never have drafted a Kuznetsov

I'm yet to see a trade offer with top picks and prospects though!

Mid round 1sts and B level prospects! Even if Bennett is included I doubt he is regarded as a top level prospect.

The unfortunent truth is the Flames don't have the assets to get this done even if it was an option without trading a top end player +

[Love]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I'm yet to see a trade offer with top picks and prospects though!

Mid round 1sts and B level prospects! Even if Bennett is included I doubt he is regarded as a top level prospect.

The unfortunent truth is the Flames don't have the assets to get this done even if it was an option without trading a top end player +

Not unfortunate at all. I'm rather happy actually.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Here, in fact, is what the Capitals released to the public:



That's the quote that caused every bit of this absurd speculation. The Caps' GM says that maybe he would consider trading Ovechkin at some point, and only for a legitimate hockey deal – i.e., for NHL roster players ready to make an equivalent contribution to what Ovechkin is making now.

No, the Capitals are not rebuilding. No, they are not looking to sell Ovechkin for picks or prospects. No, they are not willing to take another team's garbage in exchange for the best goal-scorer they have ever had.

They're not even ‘trying to light a fire under Ovy's ass’. MacLellan's remarks were made in the context of defending Ovechkin against his critics.

More like ie, making an inference based on a vague and broad statement. I like how you drew the conclusion of "equivalent contribution" from the statement "legitimate hockey deal". Do they not teach the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning in schools anymore?!?

Did he answer a question that asked point blank "will you, or are, trading Alex Ovechkin?". No, he brought up the idea of Ovy potentially being traded. And when you decide to bring that up, you certainly don't want to send a message to 30 other GMs that you're desperate. It's posturing, and if you ever haggled before you could also draw that conclusion.

I mean it could've been just as easy to say "I won't discuss specific individuals at this time. We will evaluate our season and conduct close-out interviews with our players and coaching staff before making an evaluation on the year. We will then use that evaluation to formulate an action plan going forward". You know, the #### EVERY GM says. Not "Hey, let me needlessly introduce the concept of trading Ovechkin.

So yeah, smug for no reason.

[Resolute 14]

You can lead a horse to water...

[CroFlames]

God it would have been awesome if there was some meat on this rumor bone.

[Northendzone]

I think if you could make this rumoured trade, that you make it. I think I'd be ok with losing Bennett. if the deal involved tchuck (sp), then I am not as keen.

one might think that having ovie in the line up might tip the scale in the flames favour for a free agent depth guy or two.

[Fan in Exile]

I would think the Capitals would be keen on Gio. He's exactly the kind of piece they need. For the Flames that would go a long way to creating the required cap space but leaves a big hole. You'd just have to have faith that all the defensemen we have down the pipe will continue to develop like what the Ducks have done. Risky but it could pay off.

[Northendzone]

my initial thought is that if the flames were to get ovie, then to me that signals the start of a three year window to win the cup.

while I don't disagree with the fact that trading gio opens up cap space, it would also likely mean that one of two years of the perceived three yr window may be used up developing a guys who might replace gio.

[Jiri Hrdina]

If the Flames trade Gio the blueline looks like
Brodie-Hamilton
xx-xx
xx-xx

Can't do that. How are you going to fill 4 spots, including two top 4s?

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

If the Flames trade Gio the blueline looks like
Brodie-Hamilton
xx-xx
xx-xx

Can't do that. How are you going to fill 4 spots, including two top 4s?

Well, at the moment, it's

Gio-Hamilton
Brodie - xx
xx - xx
(Bartkowski)

I think Andersson is ready and I think Kulak is ready with Wotherspoon and Kylington ready to see some NHL duty this season as well. I'm optimistic about Hickey being NHL-ready soon too.

So we're looking at having to sign two quality free agent defensemen (or acquiring one through trade) instead of needing one. Like I said, sure it's risky but if you want Ovechkin, the price has to be pretty significant, it has to fill an organization need for the Caps, and you need to make cap space.

Like you, I think it's probably more prudent to exercise patience.

[GioforPM]

I suppose if you trade Gio for Ovie, the Caps might not sign Shattenkirk, in which case maybe the Flames do. He doesn't fill Gio's skates, especially defensively but it's at least one defence spot is filled. At a lower cost, for a younger guy.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I suppose if you trade Gio for Ovie, the Caps might not sign Shattenkirk, in which case maybe the Flames do. He doesn't fill Gio's skates, especially defensively but it's at least one defence spot is filled. At a lower cost, for a younger guy.

Why would Shatt come here?
Chances of that a very remote.
And you end up signing him probably for as much or more than Gio makes. Not sure why one would assume a lower cost.
This is the problem. People can say that certain prospects are ready (absent proof of them actually being ready) or that you can easily acquire a dman to replace Gio.
But we know both those are probably unlikely.
Look how hard it has been to fill the need in net.
The more holes you have, the harder it is to fill them.

[Mass_nerder]

I would love to see Ovi here, but is the team entering the "win now" window? It's tough to mortgage what little prospect depth we have if we're not prepared to push for a cup for the next 3-4 years.
If we had a legit #1 goalie, I would feel a lot better about losing Bennett etc...for Ovi.