2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Nelson]

https://twitter.com/PierreVLeBrun/st...646797313?s=20

Could this rumoured offer that Jim Rutherford has for one of his goalies be the rumoured Flames pitch from earlier in the thread? If it is, apparently what the Flames are offering isn't good enough.

[ComixZone]

To me trading Johnny for Konecny doesn’t move the needle for the team.

Might get the same production, but does nothing to improve the team. That’s just a maintenance trade. Keeps the team what it is for a longer period of time.

Is the team better tomorrow with Konecny rather than Gaudreau? I’d say no.

Is the team better in 2023 with Konecny, Gaudreau, or a return based on high quality futures (like New Jersey’s 7th overall)? I think the answer is the 7th overall in this year’s draft.

I’m pretty firmly in the keep Johnny, or get a high draft pick(s) and tackle restructuring the foundation through the draft.

With Ward seemingly coming back, I just want the core to get added to now. Change the make up of the defence through the expiration of contracts. Give a lot of responsibility to Valimaki and watch him thrive. Hammer Bennett in as a centre, move Ryan for cap reasons. Get Hall, get a better goalie tandem.

With Jankowski and Hamonic both seemingly moving on, there’s really no players on the roster that I “dislike” on the ice for this team.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I agree Philly needs to move JVR. I don't think it has to part of a deal for Gaudreau.

For the multitude of pieces contained in the trade proposal I was responding to, it does.

Just not going to get a good young roster player + high end pick + top prospect for Johnny hockey.

Offer to take 21 million off their cap though....

[Flash Walken]

I feel like I've been saying this for years, but I don't think there is any trade out there for Gaudreau that has a net positive short term impact for the organization.

He is too good and his cap hit is too low to find a comparable 1-1 deal out there.

Which is why I think the Hamilton/Lindholm trade was the re-tool and the gaudreau trade should be the rebuild.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by New Era

The problem I see here is that you're putting all of the impetus on the Flyers to execute the trade.

See how easy it is to make that simplistic statement. The reality is that deals have to be two-way streets. You have to give to get, and you take as well. In the cap world, especially the flat cap world, salaries pretty much have to balance out. This is the reality that all teams are facing right now. Unless you have a bottom feeder that is willing to take a salary dump for longer term benefit (draft picks) then you have to make the best of the situation and find a deal that works best for both teams.

Personally I would not take JVR. Doesn't address a need for the Flames. If we have to eat salary I try to angle on Voracek or Gostisbehere as the salary coming back. I would try and do a Frost, Gostisbehere, and a 1st for Gaudreau if salary was a consideration. If Philly needs to dump a big salary, then I would be inclined to look at Voracek with a better sweetener. Frost, Myers, Voracek, 1st for Gaudreau and Ryan. The key is filling important gaps in the lineup. Lucic is still a money pit the team needs to get out from under, but I'm not sure how they do that. Retain a chunk and send him packing as part of this deal? Frost, Myers, Voracek, 1st for Gaudreau and Lucic (25% retained)? Then you square that by knowing you have Frost in the lineup cover the retention? Lots of moving pieces, but we're taking some money back in any deal that happens. It's just the way things are likely to shake out as the teams we are likely to target don't have the cap space to take on Gaudreau without shedding a salary too.

Except you cut out the part of my post where i explained why and made it not such a simplistic statement, but sure, ok.

Trades are definitely a two way street, but you're making it seem like we are actively trying to ship Johnny out when I think that's the worst possible way to trade a star player. We should be saying that it's possible that Gaudreau is traded and otherwise not work on a deal until it's at the finish line and needs final tweeking. Let the other GMs do the heavy lifting/ compete with each other to acquire this excellent player on a great contract.

You do make some excellent propositions: Frost, Myers, Voracek, 1st for Gaudreau and Ryan.
I would accept that without even thinking hard about it. But I'm not sure the flyers do- Voracek is still productive. Changing Voracek to JVR makes it much less appetizing, but frankly it's still in the realm of the deal I proposed.

[dammage79]

If the best offer available is Futures for Gaudreau, take it. Tkachuk is a 1st LW today anyways. You can always find a middle six winger pretty easily in FA anyways. Or Give your home grown players a larger role and see if they take off with it.

I belive the Flames can find a greater overall balance without Gaudreau. Spreading across all situations.

I'm open to almost all trade scenarios involving Gaudreau.

I'm not open to moving Monahan without the guarantee of another bonafide top 6 center on the roster. We have a bazillion capable wingers, 3 or 4 Centers.

[powderjunkie]

I'm no fan of JVR, but I'm not sure his contract is the disaster many profess. It more/less market value for a goal scorer like him. I'll acknowledge that GMs have been overvaluing this type of player for the entirety of the cap era...but they keep doing the same thing over and over.

Compared to his previous 3 seasons, JVR's gpg (29g, 36g, and 27g/66gp) gpg was down by 28% and ppg down 15% this season.

Same criteria, JG gpg is down 23% and ppg down 45%.

I don't think you can say JVR has fallen off that much of a cliff and is now a negative value asset. Considering the remaining real money due is slightly less than his AAV, I think he is still a neutral/marginally positive asset to the right team. Similar deal with Voracek (though I think he's actually worth more despite the extra term and AAV).


I don't see the case for Philly to do a trade that doesn't involve one of their protected slot forwards serving as the bulk of the return. They want JVR and Voracek to stand out as the most appealing option for Seattle.

Originally Posted by bax

Yes they are, but if Treliving is trading Gaudreau he is dealing from a position of strength. He doesn't need to accept other team's garbage contracts to make it work. They can keep the headache.

Can you elaborate on why you believe this? There are a lot of ticking time clocks working against getting great value for Gaudreau.

[Roof-Daddy]

Jason Zucker and his $5.5 million AAV cap hit for 3 more seasons was just traded for a very good prospect and a 1st round pick.

If the Flyers retained $1-1.5 million on JVR they should be able to trade him for at least a 2nd round pick I would wager. JVR is almost 3 years older, but he's also got a history of better production than Zucker.

[the_only_turek_fan]

When was Pierre McGuire on Fan 960?

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Prepare to be bitterly disappointed by the return if you think it will be dramatically better than a .93 ppg 23 year old winger who plays with an edge on a 5.5 mil a year contract for five more years.

he is a .613 ppg player, don't overinflate based on one year. Gaudreau is a .95 ppg player over his career.

[AC]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

When was Pierre McGuire on Fan 960?

690, in Montreal.

[bax]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I'm no fan of JVR, but I'm not sure his contract is the disaster many profess. It more/less market value for a goal scorer like him. I'll acknowledge that GMs have been overvaluing this type of player for the entirety of the cap era...but they keep doing the same thing over and over.

Compared to his previous 3 seasons, JVR's gpg (29g, 36g, and 27g/66gp) gpg was down by 28% and ppg down 15% this season.

Same criteria, JG gpg is down 23% and ppg down 45%.

I don't think you can say JVR has fallen off that much of a cliff and is now a negative value asset. Considering the remaining real money due is slightly less than his AAV, I think he is still a neutral/marginally positive asset to the right team. Similar deal with Voracek (though I think he's actually worth more despite the extra term and AAV).


I don't see the case for Philly to do a trade that doesn't involve one of their protected slot forwards serving as the bulk of the return. They want JVR and Voracek to stand out as the most appealing option for Seattle.





Can you elaborate on why you believe this? There are a lot of ticking time clocks working against getting great value for Gaudreau.

For sure I can. Essentially there are a lot imaginary deadlines, but nothing concrete. The Flames don't need to trade Gaudreau, and in fact I think it's likely that they don't. Treliving is more than comfortable keeping him and trying to build around him next season and possibly the following season.

Gaudreau is a player that out performs his contract and still has 2 more years on his deal. That is extremely valuable in a league where the cap is staying flat. There isn't a need to trade Gaudreau this offseason so if a team really wants him- they can pay up. Treliving doesn't need to take back a garbage contract or accept a less than stellar return.

The NTC issue is overblown too. Realistically everybody knows Johnny is either going to end up long term in Calgary or one of the east coast teams. Teams that will be willing to put together a significant package for him will have an understanding if they can sign him or not and I'm sure his NTC won't exclude east coast teams.

Realistically there are four different times you can trade him. This offseason, 2021 deadline, 2021 offseason, or 2022 deadline. Who's to say Johnny wouldn't be willing to waive his NTC to go to any team for a playoff run and then go to free agency? Even in that worst case scenario the Flames probably make out with a 1st and prospect (plus 1.5 seasons of Gaudreau vs trading him this offseason) at a minimum. Is that return really all that worse than what's being proposed in this thread?

Erik Karlsson was traded as a pending UFA and brought back Tierny, Demelo, Norris (1st round pick), Balcers (5th round pick), a 1st round pick, and a 2nd round pick. I don't know if Johnny will pull quite that much as a UFA, but bottom line Treliving isn't in a position where he needs to force a trade in fear of losing out on value.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Klimchuk, Poirier, Agostino, Hanowski, Cundari and Berra. Ignoring trades bringing in first round talents onto the Flames - both to and from the Flames - Lazar, Jankowski, Shinkaruk, Baertschi, Erixon, Nemisz, Rychel.



Looking at that 'strongest draft since 2003', makes you think:
3 Drouin
7 Nurse
8 Ristolainen
10 Nichushkin
11 Morin
17 Lazar
19 Rychel
21 Gauthier
22 Poirier
24 Shinkaruk
25 McCarron
28 Klimchuk


Most of this list is outright busts or disappointments. You can argue that Drouin is coming around. You can argue that Nurse is still a decent piece, as is Ristolainen. Point is that nobody on this list can be considered a 'core player'. Some are ok support players, and they vary in usefulness to outright busts. This was an 'exceptional draft', but it still produced a lot of busts.


Point I am making is that the Flames have a legitimate exceptional talent in Gaudreau. I also do think that the Flames drafting has been improved and is among the best in the NHL - if you argue against that point, then you haven't been paying attention to what the Flames have been doing especially as compared to the rest of the league in general. There are still better drafting teams in the league, but Calgary is definitely among the best in the league in that regard.


However, what is the intent on trading Gaudreau? What are you trying to accomplish here? There are only 2 possibilities to me:


1) You want to win now and feel that Gaudreau is not part of the solution.
2) You want to blow it up.


2 is easy, and I am fully on board with this - start trading your assets for futures, and try and draft a completely new core. With Covid playing havoc on the economy, and with the implications this has on both the bottom lines of teams and in how many games are actually going to be played between now and... whenever - this isn't a terrible place to start. Also, a rebuild now will coincide nicely with a new arena - Flames should start being a competitive team by when the new arena is completed. So you have both a bit of savings for the owners to ride this pandemic out a bit, as well as making it a bit less painless on the fans since there probably won't be as much hockey to be upset about losing. Doubt it happens, but I am ok with this.


Back to #1 - winning now. I am also on-board with this. I fully and completely 100% support doing this as well. I believe that this team is better and more talented than what it has accomplished and what it is made out to be. I also think that Gaudreau is and should remain part of the solution. He is a world-class talent, and though he may or may not be able to produce 5on5 in the playoffs, he is still a dangerous player out there that other teams are required to pay extra close attention to, and this makes room for other players. Plus, he still produces on the PP - last time I checked, a PP goal was worth just as much on the scoreboard as a 5on5 goal in terms of winning.


Fine, so you think Gaudreau is not part of the solution. I won't argue with you. Have at it. Trade him. Go and take a look at the first part of this post, however, and I think the wrong solution is to trade him with an emphasis on 1st round picks and 'good' (but not blue-chip) prospects. It is a TERRIBLE mistake to think of it as 'restocking the cupboards'. The team is not in a position to restock the cupboards in this manner. You simply can't count on drafting someone to step up into the lineup with this current core in the next few years, and if it happens, it likely won't be a player of significance.


Don't rebuild while trying to win. You don't throw assets away like trading first round picks on rentals when this team hasn't shown they are close, but you don't sell players and try to compete either. That's a fool's errand. You keep stocking the cupboards with your own draft picks as best as you can so you can keep the window open as much as possible, and give yourself the flexibility to make moves during the seasons that you are actually competing in - as actual contenders.


If you can sign Hall and keep Gaudreau - do it. If you can trade Gaudreau for blue-chip prospects that are really ready to step into the league this upcoming season - then fine. If you can trade Gaudreau for impact top 6 players that are younger and less proven, then fine. You balance those trades according demanding more in return, or sending more the other way as well, but keep a team that is supposedly 'contending' now.


Trade him for futures like picks and less established prospects, but you better then be using them as currency and using them to buy players from other teams that have given up on contending and are becoming sellers.


Don't try to sell and compete at the same time. Draft as best as you can always, but there is a very low chance that a team is going to be able to draft as well as a Gaudreau in the 2nd half of the 1st round, and the averages show that there are many players that just get a sniff of the NHL and not much more (and often they get that sniff only because they are 1st round picks and teams want them to succeed so bad just for the optics).


Don't restock if you are trying to compete. Sell and do a proper rebuild if you want to restock. Compete and try to make the Calgary Flames - not the Stockton Heat, or just your organizational ranking among the various outlets that rank futures. If you don't think this core can win, then rebuild. I still think it can - Gaudreau included - but it needs work.


What work is that?


For me, it starts with the goalie. Is Talbot/Rittich enough to win with? I don't know. I think it is enough to not lose games outright with. It is 'fine', but I would like to see an upgrade somehow.


The biggest question mark to me is coaching. Coaching is suspect to me.


Why? On a team with Giordano, Brodie, Hanifin, Andersson, Gustafsson, Kylington and Valimaki, supplemented with guys like Gaudreau, Bennett, Mangiapane, Backlund, Lindholm - this SHOULD be a fast transitioning team. Fix the transition. We had Gulutzan kill this team's 'danger factor' for 2 straight years, and Peters fixed it right away. Then he couldn't figure out how to tighten defence up in the playoffs (or rather, he couldn't figure out how to contain MacKinnon in the slightest, and how to defend against the 4 on Gaudreau play).


Get a competent coach that can use the horses that the Flames have on the backend, and make other teams have to actually work hard to defend the Flames. They aren't working hard. Flames give them all the time to set-up in their own zone, and enter the zone without causing much in the way of confusion, and thus less defensive zone breakdowns for the other team, and thus less effective shots, regardless of where they happen to be coming from.


If the Flames want to retain Ward as a head coach - that's fine. Give him the pieces to make it work then.


He is not going to utilize a quick transition. That's fine. It isn't the only way to win, but let's then make some swaps on defence and bring in more defensive-oriented defencemen who may not be the greatest at making passes and exiting the zone. That's not their job any longer anyway, so it doesn't really matter. They only have to make 5 foot passes to the forward circling back to retrieve the puck.



Out is: Giordano, Brodie (which seems likely won't be re-signed, unfortunately), Hanifin, Andersson, Kylington, Gustafsson, Valimaki (though Kylington and Valimaki are cheaper deals, so might as well keep them). Forbort gets re-signed. Those defencemen should be used to acquire replacement cheap but defensively effective defencemen, and then forwards to supplement the system. Big strong forwards with some footspeed.



Ok, maybe my post is a bit of an exaggeration on what the Flames should do, but hopefully you see what point I am trying to illustrate here.


Don't do any moves until you figure out coaching.


Make moves after the new (or existing) coach figures out what he wants to do, and make trades trying to make it work - for the upcoming season!



Do not trade Gaudreau (or any other core player) for futures unless you are going to use them as currency. Keep your own draft picks and use those to supplement your organization. Don't take away from the team now to try and win tomorrow.



You can easily end up getting an 'Iginla like return'. 2 firsts, Frost and something else for Gaudreau? Sure, if you are going to repackage everything for another player from somewhere else, and plan on signing Hall. Go for it. That's a great deal. If you are going to roll the dice on getting players to help you compete 2-5 years from now - at best - then what really is the point of that?


Rebuild or compete. Don't do either halfway. That's how you end up mediocre at both.

[Flash Walken]

Gaudreau isn't close to an Erik Karlsson comparable.

UFA or not, not even close.

[dammage79]

I loved the end of the Treliving interview today.

I know the Flames saying this week has been "We arent making a move for the sake of making a move" on repeat ad nauseum. But the end of Trees interview you can clearly hear how much stuff is gonna go down once the floodgates open on this team.

Also, I'm predicting Ward will not be back, along with the other coaches.

"We left a few cards off the table and I'm still sour, I dont know if you ever stop being sour after watching the end of that series"

He is one angry papa.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by AC

690, in Montreal.

I missed this. Worth listening to? Or what was said if its easily summarizable?

[bax]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Gaudreau isn't close to an Erik Karlsson comparable.

UFA or not, not even close.

Yeah, I agree- just a recent example of a top tier UFA trade off the top of my head.

My point being is there really a rush to trade Gaudreau now? Say we get a 1st, 2nd, prospect, bottom 6 roster player.

Or we trade him in 1.5 seasons of trying to compete and get a 1st and a prospect? I just don't buy the ticking clock narrative that we have to move him now for anything less than an amazing return.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

However, what is the intent on trading Gaudreau? What are you trying to accomplish here? There are only 2 possibilities to me:


1) You want to win now and feel that Gaudreau is not part of the solution.
2) You want to blow it up.

.[/B]

You are missing the most important thing you are trying to accomplish which is to maintain or grow the value of the asset.
3 outcomes
1. He walks for nothing
2. He is signed to a risky long-term deal
3. He is traded for a return

Depending on what you can get for him I would strongly suggest the third outcome in the best one for this organization. And if you agree with that it is reasonable to suggest that the time to maximize that return is now to avoid several risk factors that will erode the player's value further
- restrictive NTC kicking in
- less term on the very affordable contract
- continued degradation in the player's value due to declining or continued poor play.

The first two are certainties. Those are things that are going to happen. The last one is an unknown. The only unknown that could improve the players value as an asset is improved play.

So balance all the risk factors, and to me you conclude two things
1. The best outcome is to trade the player
2. The time to maximize the return for that trade is this off-season

So that's what you are trying to accomplish and what is drives the intent to trade him.

[GioforPM]

Calgary4Life: don’t want to quote that massive post but I totally agree that a fast transition game is where this team should go, and they have sufficient speed to do that - you don’t need blazing straight line speed, you need players who buy into a quick transition and coaches who preach it.

i thought they were doing it starting on the China trip under Peters, but they got away from it.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by dammage79

I loved the end of the Treliving interview today.

I know the Flames saying this week has been "We arent making a move for the sake of making a move" on repeat ad nauseum. But the end of Trees interview you can clearly hear how much stuff is gonna go down once the floodgates open on this team.

Also, I'm predicting Ward will not be back, along with the other coaches.

"We left a few cards off the table and I'm still sour, I dont know if you ever stop being sour after watching the end of that series"

He is one angry papa.

Where can I hear this interview?