2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Macho0978]

I don't mind the idea of a retool. Trade a core piece away for picks and prospects might be needed. To me it makes most sense with Gaudreau as he is the first of the core to become a UFA and more than likely get a huge raise. Trading him for picks and prospects pushes the window out a year or 2 and maybe if they trade Johnny, Gio is next and maybe he is a deadline deal next season.

That being said why would a team this young that consistently makes the playoffs completely rebuild? To me it makes no sense. IMO it was a trend that made sense and worked 15 years ago when the cap was first introduced. Things have changed in recent years and it's not a sure fire as it used to be.

When the cap was first introduced the trends were much different. Players were signing reasonable deals first deal after ELC. Teams could sign guys for 15 years if they wanted. Teams could sign players with front loaded deals and lower star players cap hits to keep their teams together. Now you can't and players are signing horrible 2 contracts these days and you can't keep your stars for ever. Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington, LA all had success but everyone of these teams had contracts that are now illegal contracts. Pittsburgh is the last of those teams to have success but it doesn't hurt having the best player in the league on an illegal contract. Things have changed.

What teams since the 2nd lockout in 12/13 has ripped it apart and drafted high picks and dominated. Maybe Colorado but they did that when they got Duchene, Landeskog and Mackinnon. Mackinnon was draft just after the lockout and his 2nd contract was back when it was reasonable to sign players after their elc.

Maybe the Rangers but even they only sucked for 1 year before they started adding Panarin and Trouba.

The idea of a full rebuild being the only way to fix it is a trend that died almost 10 years ago.

Teams that seem to be having the most success are the teams that get lucky and just miss the playoffs and win the lottery. Not teams like the Red Wings.

[blender]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

I don't mind the idea of a retool. Trade a core piece away for picks and prospects might be needed. To me it makes most sense with Gaudreau as he is the first of the core to become a UFA and more than likely get a huge raise. Trading him for picks and prospects pushes the window out a year or 2 and maybe if they trade Johnny, Gio is next and maybe he is a deadline deal next season.

That being said why would a team this young that consistently makes the playoffs completely rebuild? To me it makes no sense. IMO it was a trend that made sense and worked 15 years ago when the cap was first introduced. Things have changed in recent years and it's not a sure fire as it used to be.

When the cap was first introduced the trends were much different. Players were signing reasonable deals first deal after ELC. Teams could sign guys for 15 years if they wanted. Teams could sign players with front loaded deals and lower star players cap hits to keep their teams together. Now you can't and players are signing horrible 2 contracts these days and you can't keep your stars for ever. Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington, LA all had success but everyone of these teams had contracts that are now illegal contracts. Pittsburgh is the last of those teams to have success but it doesn't hurt having the best player in the league on an illegal contract. Things have changed.

What teams since the 2nd lockout in 12/13 has ripped it apart and drafted high picks and dominated. Maybe Colorado but they did that when they got Duchene, Landeskog and Mackinnon. Mackinnon was draft just after the lockout and his 2nd contract was back when it was reasonable to sign players after their elc.

Maybe the Rangers but even they only sucked for 1 year before they started adding Panarin and Trouba.

The idea of a full rebuild being the only way to fix it is a trend that died almost 10 years ago.

Teams that seem to be having the most success are the teams that get lucky and just miss the playoffs and win the lottery. Not teams like the Red Wings.

I agree with most of this.
Better to build on top of the good you have than tear it down.
Only thing I'd mention is that Neither Colorado nor the Rangers have won SFA.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Because their best players - Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Brodie and Tkachuk to an extent - are in their prime. And other key players - Giordano and Backlund - are going to decline going forward.

Just because they haven't had success yet, doesn't mean they can't next year (see St Louis last year)

When your core is in their prime, pretty much every organization will look to add to it, not tear it apart and start over again.

the difference between winning and losing is razor-thin.

The prime of those players just wasn't good enough. There's no realistic path to true contention in the next 2 years.

STL made the playoffs for 6 straight years. Never lost in the first round in less than 6 games (ultimately eliminated by the Kings x2, Hawks, Wild, Sharks (SCF year), Preds (SCF year). Every game against the Preds was a 1 goal game (same with their series years earlier against the cup defending Kings). The only time they got laughed out of a series was 2012 when the team of destiny Kings swept them in the second round. 99 pts was their worst reg season in that stretch.

They won 3 series in years 5 and 6. Despite this, they seem to have recognized that they weren't good enough, so they retooled.

They took a step back and missed the playoffs (94 pts). They re-tooled again. It looked like a disaster. Until it didn't.


I'm not sure what lesson the hot/fizzle Flames can take from the perennially competitive Blues. But I'm pretty sure 'stay the course' or 'get in and anything can happen' aren't it. The lesson might be that the Flames need to get a lot better before a re-tool is even worthwhile?

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I'm not sure why it is considered a win now mode. We aren't winning anything. 3 playoff game wins in 5 seasons - whatever "window" some people may think is open is an entirely false concept, likely established 6 seasons ago when we beat the Canucks.

It should be noted that we beat the decomposing corpse of the Canucks who had won exactly 1 playoff game in the previous 3 years. A series win is a series win I suppose, but the conclusion there should not have been that the 'Flames had arrived', but rather that the 'Canucks were dead'.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Because their best players - Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Brodie and Tkachuk to an extent - are in their prime. And other key players - Giordano and Backlund - are going to decline going forward.

Just because they haven't had success yet, doesn't mean they can't next year (see St Louis last year)

When your core is in their prime, pretty much every organization will look to add to it, not tear it apart and start over again.

the difference between winning and losing is razor-thin.

Ugh. St Louis winning is a curse in many ways, because it vindicates short-sighted GM's and ownership groups that cling to it as "anything can happen in the playoffs", which 90% of the time is BS.

Prime or not, this core has given no indication they're about to take a step forward without some pretty substantial roster reconstruction.

There is a path forward without going full scorched earth, with some good young pieces in this group. IMO, without cashing in on some of these soon-to-be expiring assets, scorched earth is the only route and nobody wants that.

[GioforPM]

Flames also finished second in the west just last year, bad PO notwithstanding. So it’s not like they had zero success. I do think they are going to have to take a step back though.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

The prime of those players just wasn't good enough. There's no realistic path to true contention in the next 2 years.

STL made the playoffs for 6 straight years. Never lost in the first round in less than 6 games (ultimately eliminated by the Kings x2, Hawks, Wild, Sharks (SCF year), Preds (SCF year). Every game against the Preds was a 1 goal game (same with their series years earlier against the cup defending Kings). The only time they got laughed out of a series was 2012 when the team of destiny Kings swept them in the second round. 99 pts was their worst reg season in that stretch.

They won 3 series in years 5 and 6. Despite this, they seem to have recognized that they weren't good enough, so they retooled.

They took a step back and missed the playoffs (94 pts). They re-tooled again. It looked like a disaster. Until it didn't.

I think it's more accurate to say that the Blues problem were having 2 distinct core groups, one that dominated the organization and hadn't gotten over the hump, and a younger emerging group that looked like they could be something.

Backes was 31, brouwer was 30, stastny was 29, Berglund was 27.

They weren't getting it done, but Tarasenko scored 40 goals at 23, Parayko exploded into the lineup and Pietrangelo was really pulling it together at 25.

I see the flames as having similar roster similarities.

Old core: Gio, Johnny, Monahan, Backlund....

New core: Tkachuk, Rasmus, Valimaki....

[Enoch Root]

St Louis is AN example, not THE example. There are lots of examples of teams that haven't put it together then, one key addition or whatever, and it all comes together.

There have been a few really good teams recently that dominated the Cup (Chicago, Pittsburgh and LA), but that is not always the case.

Prior to winning in 04, Tampa had missed the playoffs 6 years in a row, then lost in the 2nd round in 03. After winning, they lost in the 1st round the next 2 years, then missed the playoffs the next 3

Prior to winning in 06, Carolina missed the playoffs twice, then went to the conference finals, then missed the playoffs twice, in the 5 years leading up to the Cup. Then they missed the playoffs the next 2 years after.

Prior to winning in 07, the Ducks missed the playoffs 3 times, then went to the finals, then missed, then went to the 3rd round in the 5 years prior. After the Cup, they lost in the 1st round.

The Capitals, prior to winning in 18, lost in the 1st round, missed the playoffs, then lost in the 2nd round 3 years in a row before winning. The next year, they lost in the 1st round. And everyone said Ovechkin couldn't win a Cup (until he did)

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Flames also finished second in the west just last year, bad PO notwithstanding. So it’s not like they had zero success. I do think they are going to have to take a step back though.

Careful-I used that argument in another thread, and I got jumped on....

Many teams have had to re-tool on thier way through rebuilding, and on to prominence. Boston, LA, St.Louis are recent examples, and that's where I see this group.

[Harry Lime]

I was curious as to what the 'new core' looked like on paper, once they are all jammed into a top six/top four scenario. I thought that they would look like fodder for the rest of the league, but to be honest... not half as bad as I thought it would look. Give it a year or two, and a rebuild would be complete, with whatever you add. Make a complete second and fourth line, and second pairing with players on hand plus traded players. That's not a monumental task.

Lindholm is the old man.

Tkachuk - Lindholm - Mangiapane
Dube - Bennett - Phillips (?)

Hanifin - Andersson
Valimaki - Kylington

[Enoch Root]

that would be fodder

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

I was curious as to what the 'new core' looked like on paper, once they are all jammed into a top six/top four scenario. I thought that they would look like fodder for the rest of the league, but to be honest... not half as bad as I thought it would look. Give it a year or two, and a rebuild would be complete, with whatever you add. Make a complete second and fourth line, and second pairing with players on hand plus traded players. That's not a monumental task.

Lindholm is the old man.

Tkachuk - Lindholm - Mangiapane
Dube - Bennett - Phillips (?)

Hanifin - Andersson
Valimaki - Kylington

There's also whatever superstar player we draft this year...

[Harry Lime]

To follow on the heels of the 'new core', here are the second and fourth lines, while only trading Gaudreau and Monahan, and letting the entire current fourth line go to pasture. Both players are traded for a crappy return, to prove that the Flames arn't that far out of a contending team.

Hall - Backlund - Voracek (2M retained)
Middelstadt - Ryan - Frost

Giordano - Miller

That's right, sign Hall, Johnny for Voracek and Frost and Monahan for Middelstadt and Miller. Crappiest returns ever. And that along with the 'new core' is a pretty good team. Still room under the cap for a good goalie too!

[Sylvanfan]

I just don't see enough top end talent on the Flames for them to be a real top team. Last year was the peak, and if you keep with this group, it will be the Brent Sutter years all over again. I'll die on this hill....Can Treliving see this now, and alter the course to reset things...or does he make a last hurrah to try and keep adding to a core that is more in the 8-16 range than in the top 5 in terms of league talent? If he can add and be successful that will be pretty impressive. I'd pull the plug and start over myself....

Maybe you can trade Gaudreau for Konecny...but in time does it make the Flames any better than what they've been...or does it keep them the same team that hasn't been good enough but with different bodies. I think the latter in this case. I'd be completely fine with a 3 year tear down to get every asset possiblee and come out of the ashes.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I'm not sure why it is considered a win now mode. We aren't winning anything. 3 playoff game wins in 5 seasons - whatever "window" some people may think is open is an entirely false concept, likely established 6 seasons ago when we beat the Canucks.

Well, to be fair, just because a team hasn't experienced success doesn't mean that they aren't in a 'win now' mode. Much like the Flames from 2010-13 that didn't make the playoffs, they were very much a team that was trying to compete for the cup, and definitely not in the rebuilding stage.


6 seasons ago when they beat the Canucks is 6 seasons ago. They were a 'surprise' team then in how quickly they started experiencing success, and I think that it did negatively impact their future moves in trying to rebuild too quickly. However, 6 seasons removed from the start of a rebuild should be more than enough time to enter 'contender status' - which they are obviously not. So I think they are at a crossroads now with how their contracts are structured, and which contracts they are. Either win now, or admit the rebuild failed and start over. Trading some players for futures while trying to win now is just staying in the same spot - trying to compete with a team that isn't a contender.

[Corral]

^^^^^ stay in the same spot and try to compete with a team that isn’t a contender ^^^^^^

I think those words are etched in stone on the flames mission statement

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

St Louis is AN example, not THE example. There are lots of examples of teams that haven't put it together then, one key addition or whatever, and it all comes together.

There have been a few really good teams recently that dominated the Cup (Chicago, Pittsburgh and LA), but that is not always the case.

Prior to winning in 04, Tampa had missed the playoffs 6 years in a row, then lost in the 2nd round in 03. After winning, they lost in the 1st round the next 2 years, then missed the playoffs the next 3

Prior to winning in 06, Carolina missed the playoffs twice, then went to the conference finals, then missed the playoffs twice, in the 5 years leading up to the Cup. Then they missed the playoffs the next 2 years after.

Prior to winning in 07, the Ducks missed the playoffs 3 times, then went to the finals, then missed, then went to the 3rd round in the 5 years prior. After the Cup, they lost in the 1st round.

The Capitals, prior to winning in 18, lost in the 1st round, missed the playoffs, then lost in the 2nd round 3 years in a row before winning. The next year, they lost in the 1st round. And everyone said Ovechkin couldn't win a Cup (until he did)

Do you ever ask yourself what those teams did during the preceding time frame or are you content to view this as non linear progression and call it a day?

Anaheim made 4 top 10 picks, drafted twice in the first round in 2003 and then moved 2 of their top 10 picks plus another first rounder for maybe the best player in the league at the time. 4 picks in the first three rounds in back to back years.

The canes made 3 top 5 picks in a row. Their highest pick scored 28 points in 25 playoff games the year they won.

Washington drafted in the first round every year save one. They drafted 6 times in the 2nd round over that time. Washington just payed that forward by moving a 2013 first round pick for a 2nd and a 3rd. That's the Monahan draft.

These teams you're using as examples for core groups turning things around aren't actually doing that. You're describing teams building new core groups and a team in Washington that continued to draft frequently.

The flames aren't comparable to either group because they aren't drafting with the necessary regularity, but when they do they are walking away with players like Rasmus, Dube Valimaki and Tkachuk.

The solution couldn't be more stark.

[JTech780]

5v5 Playoff Points:

Johnny Gaudreau 4 points in 30 games
Sean Monahan 4 points in 30 games
Elias Lindholm 2 points in 15 games
Matthew Tkachuk 3 points in 15 games
Mikael Backlund 5 points in 30 games

This core isn't getting the job done when the games matter most. I know it won't happen, but if this team wants to win a Cup they need to find a new core group of players.

I know it's not a fair comparison because MacKinnon is probably the best player in the game but he has 26 points at 5v5 in 38 career playoff games. Ryan O'Reilly had 16 5v5 points in 26 games last year on the way to winning a Cup.

To me it shows that the top players on this team aren't even coming close to being good enough.

[Husky]

Originally Posted by JTech780

5v5 Playoff Points:

Johnny Gaudreau 4 points in 30 games
Sean Monahan 4 points in 30 games
Elias Lindholm 2 points in 15 games
Matthew Tkachuk 3 points in 15 games
Mikael Backlund 5 points in 30 games

This core isn't getting the job done when the games matter most. I know it won't happen, but if this team wants to win a Cup they need to find a new core group of players.

I know it's not a fair comparison because MacKinnon is probably the best player in the game but he has 26 points at 5v5 in 38 career playoff games. Ryan O'Reilly had 16 5v5 points in 26 games last year on the way to winning a Cup.

To me it shows that the top players on this team aren't even coming close to being good enough.

Many forwards are to blame 5 on 5 but we must also consider the complete lack of offensive engagement by the D 5 on 5 as well. No D was threatening.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Husky

Many forwards are to blame 5 on 5 but we must also consider the complete lack of offensive engagement by the D 5 on 5 as well. No D was threatening.

Yeah, one major commonality between the competing teams left right now is that they all have a young, talented, offensive blue liner that drives play from the back end.
Col: Makar
Van: Hughes
Dal: Heiskanen
VGK: Theodore
NYI: Pulock
Flyers: Provorov/sanheim
TB: hedman/sergachev

We do not have one. Maybe Valimaki but we have to hope injuries haven't set him back too much.
Gios decline hurt us pretty bad.

[Nelson]

I’m sure I’m late to the party with this comment, but I found it shocking that no Flames were on the Seravalli trade bait list. I feel like that list is usually pretty good. Does Seravalli know something about Treliving’s plans to stay status quo? Or is Seravalli just out to lunch?