Rate the Flames 2020 Trade Deadline

[Brick]

Hopefully these additions help improve our goal differential. I gave it a 7.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Sure, but he didn't ask that. I gave him an example that parallels the Brodie situation pretty well.

I don't. We can't know what St Louis would have done in 2017 had Pietrangelo and Jay Bouwmeester been injured, but I think it is fair to speculate that that would have had an impact on their thinking at the time.

If the Flames had moved Brodie for a higher pick or picks, and still brought in two other Dmen, they would still have enough healthy guys anyway. Especially with Gio back. Yelesin and Davidson also seemed capable of being a 6th Dman as well.

People continue to gloss over this, and I think it is a mistake: Brodie appears uninterested in moving on, and that disinterest makes it exceedingly difficult to trade him, even if that is what the team wants. It's easy for us to criticize the team for things it did not do, but this is really hollow criticism without a clear read on the entire situation. The same goes for the Trocheck trade: without knowing what the Flames offered or what Florida wanted it is a meaningless admonishment.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I don't. We can't know what St Louis would have done in 2017 had Pietrangelo and Jay Bouwmeester been injured, but I think it is fair to speculate that that would have had an impact on their thinking at the time.

[/I]
People continue to gloss over this, and I think it is a mistake: Brodie appears uninterested in moving on, and that disinterest makes it exceedingly difficult to trade him, even if that is what the team wants. It's easy for us to criticize the team for things it did not do, but this is really hollow criticism without a clear read on the entire situation. The same goes for the Trocheck trade: without knowing what the Flames offered or what Florida wanted it is a meaningless admonishment.

We'll never have all the info, so we have to speculate. That's the whole point of a discussion board. Trocheck was traded cheap. If Tre isn't a good enough negotiator to also get a similar cheap deal, then that is a fair admonishment of his abilities.

I also assume you mean 'hollow criticism', not 'hallow criticism'. Now that's me making a meaningless admonishment!

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

We'll never have all the info, so we have to speculate. That's the whole point of a discussion board. Trocheck was traded cheap. If Tre isn't a good enough negotiator to also get a similar cheap deal, then that is a fair admonishment of his abilities.

I also assume you mean 'hollow criticism', not 'hallow criticism'. Now that's me making a meaningless admonishment!

"Cheap" is an opinion.... obviously the team that traded him liked the pieces they got in return. We can say this guy is equal to so and so but they liked what they got better than any other offer

[IamNotKenKing]

6.
Did not do anything stupid, but did not do anything amazing. Did what they could with what they had, what was out there, and the existing circumstances.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I think people will change their tune at the draft when we still have our high picks and Vancouver, Edmonton, ect. don't despite not winning the cup either

Why? Helping the team does not automatically mean spending picks. Also, you could say same about the Flames. They win the Cup and wtf cares about the draft? I’d still be drunk.

On its own, this was a crap deadline.

Reset and move on.

[taxbuster]

4. Improvement is minor. No message sent or received other than "the answers are in the room".

OTOH, he had little room to move, although that is primarily his own doing. There is little to nothing at year end for us as fans, and precious little more for the players.

Better be a big summer. It will, unfortunately I expect, be a long one without Flames hockey. Prove me wrong Flames!! Please.

[CaptainYooh]

A 5 would have been a "meh, neither here nor there".

I gave it a 3, which means that I don't think Treliving did something really dumb, but I would have expected him to do more either way.

As I've mentioned in another thread, Flames do not have a contender-quality roster right now, so going all-in would have been silly. I don't think many people see this current roster as a contender-quality roster. So selling would have been the right thing to do, I think. If Goodrow went for the 1st, what return would Bennett have generated? or Johnny?

At the same time, if Treliving believed in this roster being a contender-quality, then he should have supported it much more aggressively than simply adding 2 depth defensemen.

This tells me that he simply wanted to help the team to make playoffs just for the sake of making playoffs. Que sera, sera...

[agulati]

I gave it a 6. I like the additions on defense. I wish we had been able to shore up the top 6 as well.

I’m glad we didn’t not waste assets or overpay forbsomeone though.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

A 5 would have been a "meh, neither here nor there".

I gave it a 3, which means that I don't think Treliving did something really dumb, but I would have expected him to do more either way.

As I've mentioned in another thread, Flames do not have a contender-quality roster right now, so going all-in would have been silly. I don't think many people see this current roster as a contender-quality roster. So selling would have been the right thing to do, I think. If Goodrow went for the 1st, what return would Bennett have generated? or Johnny?

At the same time, if Treliving believed in this roster being a contender-quality, then he should have supported it much more aggressively than simply adding 2 depth defensemen.

This tells me that he simply wanted to help the team to make playoffs just for the sake of making playoffs. Que sera, sera...

The only reason to move a core piece out like Johnny at the deadline is if you believe you could get more for him then that during the off-season.
Which I don't believe to be likely.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

...
Which I don't believe to be likely.

You could be right about this. And that's not a good thing...

[edn88]

We didnt overpay for anything so plus!

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I don't. We can't know what St Louis would have done in 2017 had Pietrangelo and Jay Bouwmeester been injured, but I think it is fair to speculate that that would have had an impact on their thinking at the time.

[/I]
People continue to gloss over this, and I think it is a mistake: Brodie appears uninterested in moving on, and that disinterest makes it exceedingly difficult to trade him, even if that is what the team wants. It's easy for us to criticize the team for things it did not do, but this is really hallow criticism without a clear read on the entire situation. The same goes for the Trocheck trade: without knowing what the Flames offered or what Florida wanted it is a meaningless admonishment.

Not sure what you mean by statement that Brodie is disinterested in moving on. Where is this coming from? Did I miss something?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The only reason to move a core piece out like Johnny at the deadline is if you believe you could get more for him then that during the off-season.
Which I don't believe to be likely.

Well, that's not the only reason.

The main reason would be because you think this is a playoff team and trading Gaudreau would gut that. That's why they traded picks for players.

In my opinion, in a planned sell off of a core player, you'd get no better return than dealing him at a deadline with 1 year remaining on his deal.

Of any kind of circumstance, deadline with 1 year remaining with Salary retention is the absolute peak of a players value to a contending team.

But then, you'd have to be willing to settle for none of that return being able to play for you for the remainder of the season and we know the flames aren't willing to do that.

It gives the acquiring team the opportunity to assess how the player fits and performs in crunch time as well as giving them first crack at re-signing the player and making appropriate salary cap adjustments during the off-season before his final contract year.

If the flames decide to trade gaudreau this summer they will get less for him than they could have had they let teams know he was available in the weeks leading up to deadline day at 25-50% retained.

All the biggest deals on deadline day involved getting more than 82 games worth of play potential.

[Domoic]

Why did Tre trade Frolik again?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Domoic

Why did Tre trade Frolik again?

For Forbort basically.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Domoic

Why did Tre trade Frolik again?

Because he was a whiny bag of suck?

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Domoic

Why did Tre trade Frolik again?

because he sucked, seemingly scored all his points on empty-netters, never showed up in the playoffs, took the laziest penalties, and sulked about his role while being overpaid... and someone was still willing to give us something for him.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Well, that's not the only reason.

The main reason would be because you think this is a playoff team and trading Gaudreau would gut that. That's why they traded picks for players.

In my opinion, in a planned sell off of a core player, you'd get no better return than dealing him at a deadline with 1 year remaining on his deal.

Of any kind of circumstance, deadline with 1 year remaining with Salary retention is the absolute peak of a players value to a contending team.

But then, you'd have to be willing to settle for none of that return being able to play for you for the remainder of the season and we know the flames aren't willing to do that.

It gives the acquiring team the opportunity to assess how the player fits and performs in crunch time as well as giving them first crack at re-signing the player and making appropriate salary cap adjustments during the off-season before his final contract year.

If the flames decide to trade gaudreau this summer they will get less for him than they could have had they let teams know he was available in the weeks leading up to deadline day at 25-50% retained.

All the biggest deals on deadline day involved getting more than 82 games worth of play potential.

Sorry to be clear, my point was that you can get more from Johnny, or at least the same value, in the off-season than at the deadline. So therefore why not keep him for the playoffs.
I would argue a guy like Johnny will have maximum value this summer when he has two full years remaining on a good contract, and the teams capable of trading for him expands.
Are you suggesting the Flames get more from him at next year's deadline than this summer?

[Enoch Root]

8

I didn't want to see them leverage the future, because this has been a down year. However, we are in a 5-way race for the division lead in a weak division. So throwing in the towel is foolish.

Those factors suggest a low-key trade deadline, which is what we got. Despite that, they managed to shore up a couple problems: a dangerous shot for the PP, and a solid net-front presence. Without spending significant assets.

Here's the thing: if things come together, the doors are wide open for a surprise run. And they now have a deep defense, which is what a run needs. If things don't come together, at least they didn't spend much.

Seems like a solid, low risk, potentially high reward, scenario.