2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Lets do that.. because clearly you haven't.





Adam Larsson



RHD - Age 24 - 6'3 205lbs, 2016/17, GP 50, 2G 10A, 12 pts 20.13 mins/60 avg $3M +/- +11 PIMS 34min



TJ Brodie



LHD - Age 26 - 6'1 182 lbs, 16/17 GP 52, 3G 14A, 17pts, 23.35mins/60 avg

$3.9M +/- -22 PIM16 min



Larsson is a highly coveted RHD on.. Brodie is not a rarity in the league.



I gotta run, but if you care to continue this discussion, im more than happy top provide more stats to prove that league wide, Larsson holds more value to a team than Brodie does.



This is a classic example of a CP Flames fan over valuing thier own player because of who the other guy plays for.

Way to pick Brodie's worst season in years, trading him now would be textbook selling low. But even now he's still worth more than Landeskog, despite having to deal with playing his off side and stress about his family life.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by mdubz

Aren't you on military time?

I think his watch is definitely broken, because at 11:30 he said in bolded

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Lets do that.. because clearly you haven't.


Adam Larsson

RHD - Age 24 - 6'3 205lbs, 2016/17, GP 50, 2G 10A, 12 pts 20.13 mins/60 avg $3M +/- +11 PIMS 34min

TJ Brodie

LHD - Age 26 - 6'1 182 lbs, 16/17 GP 52, 3G 14A, 17pts, 23.35mins/60 avg
$3.9M +/- -22 PIM16 min

Larsson is a highly coveted RHD on.. Brodie is not a rarity in the league.

I gotta run, but if you care to continue this discussion, im more than happy top provide more stats to prove that league wide, Larsson holds more value to a team than Brodie does.

This is a classic example of a CP Flames fan over valuing thier own player because of who the other guy plays for.

Yet proceeded to post 6 more times in the next 2 hours.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

You could say that about a lot of young players on the team this season.

I'd take the sample size over the last few years with these young guys (especially Brodie under his circumstances)....

but then again I'm not just looking to be needlessly argumentative and negative.

Turning over a new leaf?

[Strange Brew]

Sometimes trading a guy in an off year still nets maximum value. Anyone remember what Gary Leeman fetched after his "off year" following a 50 goal season?

Anyway, trading Brodie now leaves such a gaping hole on defense it's hard to entertain the idea no matter the return. Generally you try to trade from a position of strength. Which for the Flames is....pending UFA's?

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Turning over a new leaf?

Nope, was referring to you judging Brodie by the small sample size this season and not the stellar ones (plural) before it. Thought that was obvious.

[Kovaz]

Not sure where the idea that Larsson > Brodie defensively came about, unless you also believe that Wideman >> Klefbom defensively because Brodie-Wideman as a pair have much better suppression stats than Larsson-Klefbom. The brutal +/- is mostly due to a bad on-ice shooting percentage, their expected goals for are ~12 higher than their actual goals and expected goals against are ~2 lower than actual goals against. So take Brodie's -22, and -14 of that is just due to bad percentages while playing with Wideman. Normalize his percentages and he's more like -3 or -4.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

I think his watch is definitely broken, because at 11:30 he said in bolded


Yet proceeded to post 6 more times in the next 2 hours.

Wow.. talk about a useless contribution.

Have you ever heard of plans changing?

Jesus..

some of you guys, who have nothing to do but try and insult others really need to get a life.

I get that I'm in the minority, but atleast I'm trying to talk hockey and not fling s***
around at other posters.

Its crap posts like yours that is bringing this board down and making it unbearable.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Sometimes trading a guy in an off year still nets maximum value. Anyone remember what Gary Leeman fetched after his "off year" following a 50 goal season?

Anyway, trading Brodie now leaves such a gaping hole on defense it's hard to entertain the idea no matter the return. Generally you try to trade from a position of strength. Which for the Flames is....pending UFA's?

Haha! A veteran GM taking advantage of a rookie GM who is also his former "protege" doesn't count.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Wow.. talk about a useless contribution.

Have you ever heard of plans changing?

Jesus..

some of you guys, who have nothing to do but try and insult others really need to get a life.

I get that I'm in the minority, but atleast I'm trying to talk hockey and not fling s***
around at other posters.

Its crap posts like yours that is bringing this board down and making it unbearable.

Hey pot, where's the hockey talk?

Why is there so much interest in Landeskog? We need a first line RW, second pair D and a goalie. Can't see BT getting a contract if the goalie hole is still open at season end.

Not sure why we would trade Brodie. That probably doesn't solve the FW or goalie hole without creating a bigger D hole.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

Not sure where the idea that Larsson > Brodie defensively came about, unless you also believe that Wideman >> Klefbom defensively because Brodie-Wideman as a pair have much better suppression stats than Larsson-Klefbom. The brutal +/- is mostly due to a bad on-ice shooting percentage, their expected goals for are ~12 higher than their actual goals and expected goals against are ~2 lower than actual goals against. So take Brodie's -22, and -14 of that is just due to bad percentages while playing with Wideman. Normalize his percentages and he's more like -3 or -4.

Even if you go through all the mental gymnastics and statistics manipulation to assume this is all true, -3 or -4 isn't very good, ESPECIALLY for what Brodie has shown in the past.

[GioforPM]

I'm not sure what the advanced stats present or past say, but even when Brodie was playing at his best, I never thought he was great defensively. He could get back to the zone fast, but always has been fairly easy to beat in a board battle and wasn't that good in front of the net. He was pretty lucky to play with Gio, who is far more rounded. That's why I always rejected the notion that he was the best defenceman on the Flames when it was posted.

I like Brodie a lot but there are definite holes in his game and they've always been there. They've been masked somewhat by his great skating and passing.

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm not sure what the advanced stats present or past say, but even when Brodie was playing at his best, I never thought he was great defensively. He could get back to the zone fast, but always has been fairly easy to beat in a board battle and wasn't that good in front of the net. He was pretty lucky to play with Gio, who is far more rounded. That's why I always rejected the notion that he was the best defenceman on the Flames when it was posted.

I like Brodie a lot but there are definite holes in his game and they've always been there. They've been masked somewhat by his great skating and passing.

I think you're looking for deficiencies in his game through a fairly narrow scope though. What your argument amounts to is the lack of a physical element to Brodie's game, which is fair. He's not going to win a lot of physical battles along the boards by outmuscling guys, but he has a very active stick and is good at getting the puck out of trouble areas. Same goes with in front of the net. He isn't going to clear the crease, but excels at tying up sticks and deflecting passes.
The advanced stats before this season consistently showed Brodie as one of the best performers in the league.

[Yrebmi]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm not sure what the advanced stats present or past say, but even when Brodie was playing at his best, I never thought he was great defensively. He could get back to the zone fast, but always has been fairly easy to beat in a board battle and wasn't that good in front of the net. He was pretty lucky to play with Gio, who is far more rounded. That's why I always rejected the notion that he was the best defenceman on the Flames when it was posted.

I like Brodie a lot but there are definite holes in his game and they've always been there. They've been masked somewhat by his great skating and passing.

Fair enough. However we are not comparing him to Gio.
Do you feel Brodie is superior or inferior to Larsson?
That's our trade comparable, if we are considering swapping him for a top forward.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Hey pot, where's the hockey talk?

Why is there so much interest in Landeskog? We need a first line RW, second pair D and a goalie. Can't see BT getting a contract if the goalie hole is still open at season end.

Not sure why we would trade Brodie. That probably doesn't solve the FW or goalie hole without creating a bigger D hole.

Good job! A guy can't defend himself to pointless attempts to incite an argument?


<insert non-sensical hockey ramblings to make it look like you're not a hypocrite so that you can get your jabs in and try and look cool cause you follow the masses>

See, I can do it too..

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

Fair enough. However we are not comparing him to Gio.
Do you feel Brodie is superior or inferior to Larsson?
That's our trade comparable, if we are considering swapping him for a top forward.

You guys are still trying to make this an argument?

I still have yet to say that Brodie is inferior to Larson..

I have not said that at all. I have said they are very different players and that GM's around the league likely covet Larson over Brodie due to the intangibles like size, age and role on a team.

We as Flames fans are the only people who have really noticed Brodie...

When you watch the talking heads, who are the Dmen on the Flames that they talk about?

Gio and Hamilton. Or Wideman for obvious reasons. They don't talk about Brodie because he's not remarkable. He's not a top pairing guy, he's not a league leader, he's a steady as she goes Dman with offensive flair. But he certainly is not elite.

Yrembi brings up Brodie's stick positioning making up for his lack of physicality in the d-zone. Brodie is not exceptional at this either. He is very average in his own end.

Edit: Again... my point is, Brodie does not get you Landeskog and the Avs certainly do not add to Landy to get Brodie.

Edit#2: Believe it or not, I actually really do like Brodie and hope he isn't traded. I'm simply arguing the claim that some have made that the Avs add to Landeskog if a Brodie for Landeskog trade were to ever go down.

Edit #3: I feel I need to draw it out in crayon for some of you who are having a difficult time not comprehending and trying to argue something that I'm not even saying.

[Corral]

This chatter about Brodie and his trade value is another one of those "never would have been brought up before the masses had access to the internet" topics.

[Ozy_Flame]

So is Brodie being traded for Larsson? I can't tell after the last X number of pages.

[Bourque's Twin]

I have a feeling that IgiTang's opinion of Brodie is going to backfire the same way Where R U Chris O'Sullivan's opinoin of Backlund did.

Yes, it's that bad. All of your arguments point to a small sample size of Brodie's worst games. If you did the opposite and pointed to his best games last year AND the year before, one could argue that Brodie is a top 10 D in the NHL.

[Sylvanfan]

I don't know if IgiTang is as far off as it's being lead to be.

Larsson and Brodie are different styles of defenseman so they're not the greatest comparison. But I think you do need to consider the age difference given the position that they play. The two year difference at that age can be significant.

Brodie was absolutely on fire from when him and Giordano were first paired together in January of 2014 until about half way thru last season. But in the past calendar year his play has dropped off significantly. I don't know the exact reason, but there was a point in time albeit at a much younger age where Dion Phaneuf looked destined for greatness. Today he's a guy we might consider as our #4 if someone else paid his salary and retained half of his ego.

The future is tough to predict and players aren't linear in how they develop. I'm hopeful that Brodie is just having an off year with a lot of his team mates and will bounce back. But that's no guarantee.

I don't see the Flames as being in a position to trade one of their top 3 defensemen for a forward, unless it's Giordano, and it's one hell of a forward coming back.

[Rollin22x]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

So is Brodie being traded for Larsson? I can't tell after the last X number of pages.

So far off...
Brodie will be traded to play along side Larsson.
Edmonton will be unstoppable!
That's what I got.