2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Giordano had a pretty solid season in most measures. Not sure how to quantify the worth vs $6.75M but most of his numbers showed him to be a solid #2, or lesser #1 so it certainly wasn't out of the range needed to justify it.

But ...

He's 38 and could literally hit a wall at any point. May not be the last year of his contract in Calgary but it could be.

And pretty much guarantees a change to the core and the dressing room if the captain goes and creates cap space.

Love the guy, appreciate what's he's done, but don't give up assets to protect one year of Giordano UNLESS you head more in the rebuild direction and you keep him to move him at the deadline for value.

This is all logical, but you are speaking in a vacuum... This franchise will not head in a "rebuild direction", unless the thing just completely falls apart this coming season. So, you will get the first part possibly (assets paid to protect Giordano) because Sutter sees him as his best defenseman, etc. But you will not get the trade at the deadline, again, unless things fall apart, and Giordano hitting the wall would be one of the reasons things fall apart... So, I do not know if it will be possible to recoup whatever bribing Francis will cost...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dammage79

That's a bit tricky to pull off and a bit of a gamble no?

You pay assets to keep Gio which are rumored to be ridiculously high to trade him at the deadline?

I'm a little concerned that the value given up to keep him will be greater than the deadline return. Especially since you're gambling big on him not hitting the wall.

And even if he doesn't, is the value even still there to match what you gave up?

What rumours are these? I've not seen anything aside from sheer speculation on this site?

It's a pretty easy calculation for me: if you think the price you pay to keep him (whatever pick you give up plus you lose Kylington) is less than what you can get at the TDL (let's say a first), you make the deal. If not, you don't, you get the cap space and use it well, and you give Kylington a shot.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

What rumours are these? I've not seen anything aside from sheer speculation on this site?

It's a pretty easy calculation for me: if you think the price you pay to keep him (whatever pick you give up plus you lose Kylington) is less than what you can get at the TDL (let's say a first), you make the deal. If not, you don't, you get the cap space and use it well, and you give Kylington a shot.

It was a Friedman quote I'm sure of it.

[GreenLantern2814]

All the teams who got screwed the worst by Vegas were the ones who tried to avoid losing a specific player.

Panthers gave up Smith and Marchessault.

Wild lost Tuch and Haula (and a 1st! I believe, anyway)

We’re going to lose someone.

We could be competitive next year or we could finish last. I have no idea.

But let expansion run its course. I don’t trust Brad to outsmart anyone in this scenario

[FlamesAddiction]

With our luck, we will pay up to ensure Seattle doesn't take Giordano only to be a bubble team anyway, thereby not capitalizing on any potential return at the trade deadline.

I am not convinced Seattle would take him. I think we should take the gamble and leave him unprotected. Worst case scenario is we get $6.75 million in cap space for a player that simple due to age, isn't in the long term plans anyway.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dammage79

It was a Friedman quote I'm sure of it.

Oh, I do remember that - a line about sticker shock.

[activeStick]

I predict that Giordano will be on the Flames upcoming season opening roster and the Flames will re-sign him to a 1 or 2 year deal in the summer of 2022.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by dammage79

I don't much like the variables in the scenario. Because the Flames will very much likely be in the hunt but not quite in it and lose him for nothing. I mean, it'd be the nail in Trees coffin many ppl want. 5 coaches and lose your decade long top pairing with nothing in return? The story writes itself.

Do you mean lose Gio for nothing in expansion? Because that's not losing him for nothing, it's losing a 38 yo on the last year of his deal instead of another asset.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

What rumours are these? I've not seen anything aside from sheer speculation on this site?

It's a pretty easy calculation for me: if you think the price you pay to keep him (whatever pick you give up plus you lose Kylington) is less than what you can get at the TDL (let's say a first), you make the deal. If not, you don't, you get the cap space and use it well, and you give Kylington a shot.

Factored into that calculation has to be:
- risk of injury precluding a trade
- risk of a down season significantly reducing his trade value

The other question is what Kylington's trade value is? I reckon he'd fetch at least a 3rd. Maybe even something like: OK +4th for 2nd+6th


Just lose who you lose and move on. Losing an LHD would be fine, we have too many as it is:

Hanifin
Valimaki
Kylington/Gio
Mackey

If Gio goes, there are lots of cheap vets on the market to bolster depth and pair with young guys (M Staal, B Smith, Demers, K Miller, Hamonic).

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Do you mean lose Gio for nothing in expansion? Because that's not losing him for nothing, it's losing a 38 yo on the last year of his deal instead of another asset.



Factored into that calculation has to be:
- risk of injury precluding a trade
- risk of a down season significantly reducing his trade value

The other question is what Kylington's trade value is? I reckon he'd fetch at least a 3rd. Maybe even something like: OK +4th for 2nd+6th


Just lose who you lose and move on. Losing an LHD would be fine, we have too many as it is:

Hanifin
Valimaki
Kylington/Gio
Mackey

If Gio goes, there are lots of cheap vets on the market to bolster depth and pair with young guys (M Staal, B Smith, Demers, K Miller, Hamonic).

No, I mean letting him walk at the end 9f the year in a scenario where they hold onto him at the deadline while they're on the bubble, when they'll likely not make it.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Just lose who you lose and move on. Losing an LHD would be fine, we have too many as it is:

Hanifin
Valimaki
Kylington/Gio
Mackey

If Gio goes, there are lots of cheap vets on the market to bolster depth and pair with young guys (M Staal, B Smith, Demers, K Miller, Hamonic).

I agree with most of your post, and the ultimate decision. But none of the other LHD have even come close to showing any of Gio's offensive ability. Gio, in a bad year and at the age of 37, had 26 points and only 8 were on the PP. Hanifin had 15. Valimaki had 11. On the right, Rasmus had 21 but they were pretty quiet points IMO. Without Gio there's a significant offesnive hole on the back end. It's one reason I wouldn't be averse to Barrie if his contract expectations take a dive (though he's a RHD). Or maybe Gus?

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Do you mean lose Gio for nothing in expansion? Because that's not losing him for nothing, it's losing a 38 yo on the last year of his deal instead of another asset.



Factored into that calculation has to be:
- risk of injury precluding a trade
- risk of a down season significantly reducing his trade value

The other question is what Kylington's trade value is? I reckon he'd fetch at least a 3rd. Maybe even something like: OK +4th for 2nd+6th


Just lose who you lose and move on. Losing an LHD would be fine, we have too many as it is:

Hanifin
Valimaki
Kylington/Gio
Mackey

If Gio goes, there are lots of cheap vets on the market to bolster depth and pair with young guys (M Staal, B Smith, Demers, K Miller, Hamonic).

I don't see Kylington's value being more than a 4th. He could've been claimed off waivers this year. That's also a part of the reason his value is so low. If a team acquires him, they need to commit a roster spot to him so that they don't lose him for nothing on waivers.


I have nothing against Kylington. I hope he is given a chance somewhere, and runs with it. He only has 8 games last season and he is now 24, which suggest his value is probably around that of a replacement level player, or a bit higher.


As for Gio leaving, I am sure he can be replaced. At the very least his minutes will be used to give an opportunity to a younger player to run with the role. As for free agency, I thought there were more good RD than LD this year. This made me wonder if Andersson could be used to bring in a good asset in the forward ranks.



PS: I'm not saying we should trade Andersson for scrubs, or in order to keep Gio. Just thinking of what other options do the Flames have with their back end.

[868904]

The Flames shouldn't be paying assets to retain Gio, but if they are going to, the maximum should be a 3rd rounder, nothing more. Because what you potentially get for Gio at the trade deadline is probably in the range of a 1st to 3rd rounder depending on his play and the market.

Or maybe if they take Kylington, you give them a prospect like Parsons or Gawdin. A guy with either injury risk or low upside. Seattle does this simply to build depth.

For Seattle, the choice is:

A potential 1st to 3rd round pick value at trade deadline;

or

Depth for the roster.

[Geeoff]

I personally think that it could be a nice reset for the Flames to lose someone significant in the expansion draft. I doubt the team will do worse in the standings.

[kukkudo]

Giving up assets to keep Gio? No way just roll with it and see what happens.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

Giving up assets to keep Gio? No way just roll with it and see what happens.

A lot to be said for the best moves being the ones you don’t make.

$6.75M of cap room in a flat cap environment is enormous.

And frees us of our stupid “Gio Cap”.

[Poe969]

I still think they should leave Backlund exposed, I'd rather they lose him over Gio. Gio is on an expiring deal and can be dealt at the deadline. Losing Backlund would take his 5+ cap hit off the books, get rid of a core player to shake things up, open up a spot for someone new step into and it would really test the team to see what they really are. Backlund is good but he's not the difference from contender to bubble team. I would first shop him to see if any team would actually give up value for him but I can't see a single team giving anything up for him because they would in turn have to protect him in the expansion draft and take on his salary.

I think this is all a mute point because I bet Seattle signs Ryan as a UFA and that counts as their pick from the Flames.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I personally think that it could be a nice reset for the Flames to lose someone significant in the expansion draft. I doubt the team will do worse in the standings.

I agree and I think we are going to see a significant turnover in the core of this group. Seattle will be the only avenue where Gio is gone but I believe he makes the most sense for them especially if they do sign Hamilton.

I think a decision needs to be made with Johnny and if he is re-signed then I think there is a reasonable chance that Tkachuk could be traded. I believe that Monahan is also a guy who could be traded. I hate to say it but I could see Monahan for OEL after Gio is claimed by Seattle.

If the Flames make some moves and free up significant cash to make a move for a UFA forward I suspect both Hall and Nuge would be targets knowing they could have interest in Western Canada

[Geeoff]

Could dangle one of our D for a top 6 forward and expose Backlund. Honestly very low risk expansion draft for the Flames because the team is bad, with potential high reward from other teams that need to make moves.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I agree and I think we are going to see a significant turnover in the core of this group. Seattle will be the only avenue where Gio is gone but I believe he makes the most sense for them especially if they do sign Hamilton.

I think a decision needs to be made with Johnny and if he is re-signed then I think there is a reasonable chance that Tkachuk could be traded. I believe that Monahan is also a guy who could be traded. I hate to say it but I could see Monahan for OEL after Gio is claimed by Seattle.

If the Flames make some moves and free up significant cash to make a move for a UFA forward I suspect both Hall and Nuge would be targets knowing they could have interest in Western Canada

Monahan for OEL would be a disaster! I know I have been one of the most vocal posters lately about Monahan's game taking a huge step back, but it's nothing compared to the way OEL has been playing. I honestly wouldn't trade Lucic for OEL at this point. I really hope that the Flames are of a similar opinion.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

5 years is a long time. In professional sports, it's difficult to plan for anything more than that.

Five years is a long time. That's about how long it takes to develop a draft pick into a player that will consistently produce in the NHL. It is a lengthy process and not something you don't plan on. So if you go get Eichel today, and draft players to support him in the first possible draft, you are unlikely to see a player capable of play at or near Eichel's level for five years. Since it would cost us our best player, our best prospect, and our best pick - to start - we would be way behind the eight ball in seeing anything tangible hit the team before Eichel is ready to bolt.

Treliving has always said he wants to ice the best team possible, and Jack Eichel is the best player (known to be) available, and it's not even close. He also addresses a need that needs to be addressed.

Emphasis added because it really is lost on you and the vast majority that are clamoring to get Eichel. Treliving is building a team, not a collective of individuals. You need more than one guy at center. You need talent to surround him, and based on Eichel's performance in Buffalo, you need a #### load of talent around him to win. Eichel is not a team player, and he has made that abundantly clear in his comments and wishes. He will go where he wants to go, which is counter to the type of players Treliving is looking for.

This assumption that Jack (or Johnny...or whoever else) won’t sign here are just silly at this stage.

No, it's not silly, it is the reality we most likely face. Getting big name talent to come to Calgary is tough. Getting them to stay has been just as hard. Unless we want to be a team like the Oilers, with two or three good players, and a load of crap, this team needs to build through development of depth and having a great team. Once you do that, then you will attract the Piertangelos and Stones of the league.

The big question mark that has been living in everyone's mind was whether or not Johnny would bolt to Philly at first light...and? Nope. He wants to sign here long-term and play the rest of his career here.

Gaudreau did not say what you are suggesting. He did not come right out and say he's going to sign here and stay here the rest of his career. Sure, Johnny will stay here and play here for the rest of his career, if the Brinks truck backs up to his house. There's the problem. Outside of money, which every team can offer, his other motivators are clearly elsewhere. But that is here nor there. Gaudreau's status has nothing to do with Eichel's, or vice versa.