(A) 3 fairly high picks are 3 shots to hit a home run. We know Hamonick is a complementary piece and not a franchise difference maker. If you keep trading picks for mediocre players you will always have a mediocre team
(B) If you are set on trading those picks and really wanted to go for it, it turns out you could have added Stastny and Kane and still had a 2nd left. Picks are currency and you certainly could have done better than a mediocre defenseman, especially given the D depth we already have
(C) If things go really ill, Treliving will forever be known as the idiot that traded Niedermayer for Kurvers and added 2 2nd round picks for good measure.
You are wrong for a few simple reasons:
(A) You completely disregarded the actual percentages.
(B) Statsny and Kane were rentals
(C) The lottery didn't exist in 1990
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hackey For This Useful Post:
Those guys are rentals! If anything they make the Hamonic trade look better better not worse.
I have heard others say that too, but I don't really see it that way.
Kane for example will cost a late 2nd rounder, a 4th and an average prospect, if that, if not re-signed. They get him for one playoff run. Hamonic will be here for at most 2 playoff runs and cost much more than that.
One thing about rentals is that you pretty certain to get one post season from them.
I have heard others say that too, but I don't really see it that way.
Kane for example will cost a late 2nd rounder, a 4th and an average prospect, if that, if not re-signed. They get him for one playoff run. Hamonic will be here for at most 2 playoff runs and cost much more than that.
One thing about rentals is that you pretty certain to get one post season from them.
They also get Hamonic as a regular season player for 3 years. That's got to be worth something, too.
The Following User Says Thank You to the2bears For This Useful Post:
I have heard others say that too, but I don't really see it that way.
Kane for example will cost a late 2nd rounder, a 4th and an average prospect, if that, if not re-signed. They get him for one playoff run. Hamonic will be here for at most 2 playoff runs and cost much more than that.
One thing about rentals is that you pretty certain to get one post season from them.
The Flames could also trade Hamonic at any time...much more valuable asset than a player for two months. In Kane's case it costs SJ a 1st to sign him as UFA. 30 other teams can sign him without giving up a thing.
Calgary also has the ability to extend Hamonic...to just assume he is here for two more years and takes off is a pretty big assumption.
They also get Hamonic as a regular season player for 3 years. That's got to be worth something, too.
Not to mention they also have the rights to negotiate a new contract with him before anyone else. Saying he'll only be here for "at most 2 playoff runs" likely won't be a true statement.
I think the timing of the Hamonic trade is fair to criticize but the price was about right.
The Following User Says Thank You to N-E-B For This Useful Post:
Not to mention they also have the rights to negotiate a new contract with him before anyone else. Saying he'll only be here for "at most 2 playoff runs" likely won't be a true statement.
I think the timing of the Hamonic trade is fair to criticize but the price was about right.
Because Hamonic is a top pairing defenseman that is a sure thing to be a selection on Team Canada?
Is Hockey Canada waiting for him to declare that he will play for Team Canada at the 2018 World Championship in Denmark this May?
They also get Hamonic as a regular season player for 3 years. That's got to be worth something, too.
It definitely is. He is a very useful player that has considerable value. It's just that I believe getting a player for the post season is more valuable.
It all comes back to the fact that adding Hamonic and Smith to last year's team and missing the playoffs by a wide margin is rather shocking. Makes any drat pick trade look worse.
The Flames could also trade Hamonic at any time...much more valuable asset than a player for two months. In Kane's case it costs SJ a 1st to sign him as UFA. 30 other teams can sign him without giving up a thing.
Calgary also has the ability to extend Hamonic...to just assume he is here for two more years and takes off is a pretty big assumption.
Comparing the two trades is tough, but I think you have to at least look at the contracts they are currently playing under, without assuming any extensions.
You are right that Hamonic has the ability to be traded before his deal is up, however then we are talking about only one possible playoff run with him.
Assuming neither player is re-signed, the least valuable piece of consideration given up for Hamonic is worth more than the highest value piece given up by the Sharks for Kane.
I can certainly see and appreciate differing views of value, but for me, I didn't see the deadline deals and suddenly felt better about the Hamonic deal for the Flames.
Good grief, the Flames do not need a retool, and are not in dire shape.
The problem the past 2 years have been large and part the coaching. Brodie has been bad yes, but a lot of the issues stem from what coaching has done to him. Watch what he did the years under Hartley, even in 2015-16 and you see a completely different Brodie.
What do you notice? Brodie shooting on the powerplay, Brodie transition passes to center, Brodie leading a rush from the back of the net, Brodie activated on offense. Brodie even has breakaways as a Defenseman (see 5:50). Almost all of his passes are on the backhand as well.
How often under Gulutzan has he done any of that? The players are being told to move as a stupid 5 man system that only works on paper without the other side adapting, and Brodie is playing on his wrong side because of a stubborn left / right D hockey school mentality. Defense is told to stay back and wait to move as a 5 man unit. When Brodie's feet are not moving, he gets caught. Because Corsi is all that Gulutzan seems to care about, it looks pretty stats wise.
There is clearly a confidence issue in Brodie right now (he's afraid to shoot on the PP), and a large part of that is what Gulutzan has brought to the team. Trading him without a chance to redeem himself under a proper coach will be a worse trade than Justin Schultz traded for a bag of pucks for being bad under Eakins. The last place Avalanche from last year are in a playoffs spot this year, and that's while losing Duchene for mostly picks.
Bump.
GG was the worst thing to ever happen to the Flames in a decade and Brodie. Glad to see the pre-GG Brodie back, and that the Flames did not have a tire fire and traded Brodie in panic, they just had a real bad coach. Bennett playing more like the guy we drafted, Hamonic playing like an elite defenceman, Giordano doubling up on points. Peters good, Gulutzan bad. Brodie's play this year is a testament that coaching actually matters. It's also funny that 'character' issues suddenly disappeared this year with a coach that coaches (and it certainly was not all on Hamilton).
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
