2017/2018 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Can you imagine the comments if they brought up Andersson to sit 80% of the games?

See: Utilization of Wotherspoon for cut and paste comments.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

With the Toronto UFAs they don't have a surplus of good young forwards. They need their guys to fill the roster when they pay their elite ELCs

You are assuming that the Flames defense is a position of strength. Just went through an exercise on another thread where Flames #5 Stone would not be an upgrade on any playoff team's #4.

The Flames Brain thrust, after drafting Valimaki, thought they needed Stone to be a #5 for 3 years and Bartkowski at #6. That is pretty much an admission that they thought/think their prospects are 2-3 years away at best.

The Flames defense pool is deeper than the forward depth (to CP level of analysis) BUT it not a closed system.

Brodie would be interesting to other teams ... as he is to the Flames with a new coach/system.... but he would have to be considered a project whether he stays or goes.

I just don't get you man.

You're either trying as hard as you can to seem reasonable so you can argue, or you are literally the polar opposite thinker to every thing that runs through my mind.

I have a feeling it's the first.

You had Toronto in a position of strength but now they need their young forwards? That doesn't add up.

Stone isn't the Flames position of strength ... three or four emerging young defenseman while having a solid top four is. That allows them to either move a top prospect for a top forward prospect or if they think they're ready a veteran for a forward. It's not challenging stuff to understand.

Some teams assume their youth is ready and clear space. Other teams like Calgary build out teams and make the youth steal jobs. Stone doesn't have negative value so signing him for three years and making someone steal his job is solid business in my mind.

[yourbestfriend]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

No, it doesn't mean that at all. It means they liked the veteran presence at the time it was signed, and knew (just like anyone with an ounce of common sense) that if our prospects pushed - it would be a good problem to have - and Stone can be dealt for assets from a position of strength.

I agree, however I believe the development timeline of our d prospects was definitely one reason why Stone was signed.

As for the bolded, having too many NHL level D is a great problem to have, however no GM in their right mind would trade someone they signed a season or so ago.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanTrev

Okay, but if we are talking about adding a top 6 RW, and we traded Anderson for Kapanen (which is what is being proposed), what are you trading for the top flight RW? Suddenly we have already gotten rid of our closest NHL D prospect, so we are now looking at moving one of our Roster D? Who fills that hole that is created? Kylington and Villamaki are pretty much untested at the NHL level. Expecting either of those guys to plug that hole is far too hopeful in my opinion. Fox to me is found money at this point, money that might not be worth anything to this organization if he walks after college. Keep Anderson, Trade Fox and one of Stone or Brodie. That is, unless Hamilton is one of the unnamed players that Brad T took exception with in the Post Season Presser. If so, leverage him for all hes worth and promote from within.

My first choice is to trade Stone and promote Anderson. IMO doesn't hurt the team and gives Treliving almost 3 mil extra cap space to play with. But I don't know exactly what Treliving is going to do and IMO the value is there and I like what Kapanen brings to the table. Is Kapanen the answer for top 2 RW issues? Maybe not but there is no guarantee that Anderson is more than a bottom pairing dman too. Both have similar upside and I would guess more NHL scouts rank Kapanen ahead of Anderson. You could make the case this is an example of trading for a strength to address a weakness still

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

I agree, however I believe the development timeline of our d prospects was definitely one reason why Stone was signed.

But it was aimed at last season, not a view from Management that all d-prospects are 2-3 years away as Ricardow tried trolling. That's what you were agreeing with, and that's inherently false, exaggerated and was only put forth by him as a means of subtly trolling (as is the case with just about everything he says).

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

As for the bolded, having too many NHL level D is a great problem to have, however no GM in their right mind would trade someone they signed a season or so ago.

If one or more of our prospects look ready for full time play this coming season, Stone will absolutely be in play regardless of when he was signed.

[Strange Brew]

I am starting to hope that Trliving trades Stone this summer for something that allows Flames to a prospect in the system. Could he fetch a 2nd rounder?

Then let’s see what Brodie, Hamilton, Hamonic do in this current system, and see just how NHL ready some of these D prospects are.

Treliving’s stated goal was to build from the goalie out so maybe too soon to give up on that strategy.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

...You are assuming that the Flames defense is a position of strength. Just went through an exercise on another thread where Flames #5 Stone would not be an upgrade on any playoff team's #4...

Mmmm. No.

On the contrary, one poster provided a list of twelve playoff teams which he believed Stone would provide an upgrade to their respective top-four defenders. All you did was to counter by merely asserting that that would not be the case for three of them.

I think in the light of that discussion it is best to concede that he would present an upgrade to the first or second pairing for at least half of this years's playoff teams, and as many as twelve.

Of course, I do not expect so much from you. No doubt you will continue with your laughable narrative about the Flames and their fans over-rating their defensemen, and you will persist in drawing ridiculous comparisons between this view and that of a notorious Oilers fan who once bragged about their "six Giordanos."

[VilleN]

Kapanen had 9 pts in 38 NHL games last season. He’s 21. Andersson is also 21, a Dman and scored at nearly the same pace as Kapanen in the AHL. I think Toronto would have to add to get that deal done... or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[yourbestfriend]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

If one or more of our prospects look ready for full time play this coming season, Stone will absolutely be in play regardless of when he was signed.

I don't think he has a NMC so Tre could theoretically trade him, but if he actually did that, good luck convincing any other UFA to sign with us ever again without a NMC.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Kapanen had 9 pts in 38 NHL games last season. He’s 21. Andersson is also 21, a Dman and scored at nearly the same pace as Kapanen in the AHL. I think Toronto would have to add to get that deal done... or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is there a reason you quoted my post when asking this? I've never said anything about trading Andersson or about Kapanen in general.

Now that you're asking I don't think I'd even consider that trade in the slightest. I think Andersson has a much higher ceiling.

I have seen some discussion about a deal surrounding Kapanen and Stone which makes a bit more sense?

[FlamesFanTrev]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

My first choice is to trade Stone and promote Anderson. IMO doesn't hurt the team and gives Treliving almost 3 mil extra cap space to play with. But I don't know exactly what Treliving is going to do and IMO the value is there and I like what Kapanen brings to the table. Is Kapanen the answer for top 2 RW issues? Maybe not but there is no guarantee that Anderson is more than a bottom pairing dman too. Both have similar upside and I would guess more NHL scouts rank Kapanen ahead of Anderson. You could make the case this is an example of trading for a strength to address a weakness still

My issue isn't with Kapanen, I really dont know him all that well. Its more that I don't think Kapanen solves the Number 1 RW issue, and that its a pretty minor trade in the grand scheme of things. I think Treliving needs to think bigger then prospect trades in order to address the team needs. A legit 1st line winger is going to address how other players are slotted in the bottom 6 to some degree. I think you need to start there, and see how everything shakes out before making minor moves, rather then trading for depth and seeing what you have left over to trade for a high caliber player.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

I don't think he has a NMC so Tre could theoretically trade him, but if he actually did that, good luck convincing any other UFA to sign with us ever again without a NMC.

I don't think you can make this assertion without doing the necessary legwork. I suggest you take a look and see how frequently—if ever—UFA signees have been traded the season following their acquisition or extension. But then you should also demonstrate whether or not this action indeed seems to affect a team's ability to entice players in the free agent market.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

I don't think he has a NMC so Tre could theoretically trade him, but if he actually did that, good luck convincing any other UFA to sign with us ever again without a NMC.

Sorry I don't buy this at all. He's a 4/5 d-man and if moving him makes the team better, it will be fully explored.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

I don't think he has a NMC so Tre could theoretically trade him, but if he actually did that, good luck convincing any other UFA to sign with us ever again without a NMC.

Stone has a modified no trade list.

He submits 15 teams he wont go to.

[iloveicedhockey]

If stone wanted to guarantee a stay in Calgary he could've insisted on a full NMC. He probably would've made less guaranteed money but such is the life of the pro athlete.

I particularly like the 'just completed an exercise' statement as well. Made me chuckle.

[Strange Brew]

Wow. Stone cut himself a nice deal.

He is serviceable but top 4 on most playoff teams? That seems like a stretch but I’m admittedly not watching much playoff hockey.

I guess the debate over how good the Flames defenders are will continue until on ice results improve.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Is there a reason you quoted my post when asking this? I've never said anything about trading Andersson or about Kapanen in general.

Now that you're asking I don't think I'd even consider that trade in the slightest. I think Andersson has a much higher ceiling.

I have seen some discussion about a deal surrounding Kapanen and Stone which makes a bit more sense?

My bad, didn't mean to quote you, but hey, it got a response. I think Stone for Kapanen is more of a fair deal... probably Stone + a lower tier prospect, maybe Poirier or Klimchuk.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Kapanen had 9 pts in 38 NHL games last season. He’s 21. Andersson is also 21, a Dman and scored at nearly the same pace as Kapanen in the AHL. I think Toronto would have to add to get that deal done... or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is funny that Leaf fans call Sam Bennett a huge bust but talk about Kapanen as some great asset. Do they forget these players were drafted the same year?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by 868904

I don't think Kapanen projects as a top 6 forward. He is a Frolik type player. You don't trade a potential first pairing guy like Anderson for a Frolik type player.

1st pairing? That’s a lofty upside. I like Andersson but with his skating I’m not convinced he’s a lock to be a top 4 dman. I think our only prospect with top pairing potential is Valimaki.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Frolik has been the Flames #1RW since for the last 3 years. He has another 2 years left at 4.3

In your mind has he become a problem?

Ferland was our #1 RW last year. Do you even watch the games?