Rate the Flames 2020 Trade Deadline

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

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

I said it appears this way to me, and I base that on the fact that after he had been traded to TO he added TO to his no-trade list. This suggests that he is possibly not so interested in being moved in-season.

[Buff]

8.

Picked up defensemen to give depth in the times of injuries. Didn't give up valuable picks or prospects to slap a bandage on a problem that is best fixed during the off season. This year's team just isn't going to compete or make it far so why give up valuable assets to do something that this core just can't do?

[Enoch Root]

speaking of Frolik... Here is a net summary of the last 4 trades (excluding the big one):

1) Frolik
2) Neal
3) 3rd
4) 4th
$10.8M out

for

1) 4th
2) Lucic and a 3rd
3) Gustafsson
4) Forbort
$8.3M in

So, Frolik and Neal for Lucic, Gustafsson and Forbort, and we save $2.5M this year, and $750k for the remaining 3 years.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

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.

I think that is an insulting and incorrect view of a guy who was a consummate pro, and who was consistently productive in every role given to him for many years.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

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?

With his contract there are two factors.

The first is that he's owed a bonus of half his salary next year. I'm not sure when that pays out, but say it's July 1.

The second factor is his limited final year ntc. I think any ntc can be a harsh factor in value, I think it played a huge part in Brodie not moving over the last year, and that was a 10 team list iirc.

So for the flames, to do a deal for Gaudreau this summer, the return will depend a lot on who is paying that bonus. A 1st round pick is worth about 3.5 on the trade market, and the flames are definitely cheap, so they will be incentivized to take a lesser return if it means not having to pay that lump sum bonus. That's a factor in the return yesterday vs this summer.

2 full years makes it more difficult for an acquiring team to forecast their budgets to take on a near 7 million dollar salary. A lot can happen two years out in terms of your prospects. Say Philly is an interested team, they have to weigh gaudreaus 2 full years against any prospect that made their team this year or who breaks out next year.

A trade yesterday gives them 3 full potential playoff runs with gaudreau whereas this summer gives them 2. 3 runs is maybe enough to entice them to make the necessary space/disrupt their salary model, but 2 years maybe not worth it.

3 runs and NOT having to disrupt their salary structure because gaudreau is at say 3.5 instead of 6.75 is worth a hell of a lot more.

The other part of the equation for me is if you're already approaching this summer under the belief.youre going to move gaudreau then I think it's really irresponsible to not capitalize on the value of your pending ufas.

If you're going to be remaking the team, and make no mistake, moving gaudreau from the flames means remaking the team, then the prudent managerial direction would be building out that runway for a summer deal that gives you more trade flexibility because of an abundance of picks.

Otherwise you're in a situation where you're making decisions about Gaudreau that need to account for the asset deficit you already face vs. having the flexibility of your own picks to either square a blockbuster valuation such as sending back a 3rd if getting a 1st like what Tampa did with Goodrow, and/or being able to poach other top talent if the goal is to try to run with the horses you've got aside from Gaudreau.

Does that make sense?

It's about positioning yourself for maximum flexibility so a variety of options are good instead of taking something from limited options available to you. Because we know the flames will try to get out of that bonus if at all possible and maybe taking less for gaudreau to not pay that bonus doesn't hurt as bad if you're sitting on a pair of second round picks already from havingoved Brodie.

For a team like the bruins or the leafs, paying out the bonus is inconsequential, and I'd bet in the case of Boston, they would have traded more than double what they sent to Anaheim for Kase as for Gaudreau at the same rough AAV for a year longer. Like maybe a major piece, PLUS the same value in picks. That return is worth disrupting their system if it basically guarantees them 3 deep playoff runs.

It's about building or buying and if the plan is to build in 4 months then it's a bad decision to keep the structure standing now.

[Itse]

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...

I don't agree. Selling someone like Gaudreau or Brodie would have been throwing in the towel. There's games left to be played, and people going to see the games will want to see a team competing for a playoff spot. Throwing in the towel too easy and too soon is a terrible signal to give to the team, one that could have serious motivational repercussions looking forward.

I also think people keep looking too far ahead here. The Flames can absolutely win a playoff round, and that's something to play for, even if winning a cup is extremely unlikely. Being in the playoffs creates excitement around the team, and I believe that matters for everything. Signing UFA's for example, and just the general atmosphere around the team.

Just from a team building perspective, I feel that this specific roster could really use some more playoff games, and the adversity and pressure that comes with it. The margins in the NHL are razor thin. Basically this same roster was a powerhouse last season, they're IMO way better than they've been playing recently. Sure every team could use reinforcements, but I still think mostly what they need is making it through some adversity and winning something despite low expectations. Getting through this somewhat crappy regular season and making the playoffs, finding it in themselves to forget that regular seasons, and seeing themselves putting up a real fight... Basically the opposite of the implosion that happened last season. That would have serious value, and since the margins are so thin, I think it's worth not being a seller at this point.

They can win a round. That's not nothing.

...I still hope they sign an actual head coach.

It would be an extremely un-Flames-like move to sign a new head coach this late in the season, but I really wish they'd do it.

Get a big name coach, ride The New Coach Boost into the playoffs, see what happens.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I think that is an insulting and incorrect view of a guy who was a consummate pro, and who was consistently productive in every role given to him for many years.

I always liked Frolik, but getting a 4th for him was smart

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I always liked Frolik, but getting a 4th for him was smart

Agreed, if a guy doesn’t factor in to your plans, it is best for him and the team

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Agreed, if a guy doesn’t factor in to your plans, it is best for him and the team

Especially when you're trading a guy who's 32 and getting a guy who's 27 instead

[Always Earned Never Given]

I gave it a 7.

Redemption time now as players that were there last year now know that management is giving them another shot at it with basically the same group.

They always talk about how they are a close-knit group.

Now is the time to show us fans!

[Flash Walken]

Itse, I have to disagree. Winning a round is nothing. This core group won a round 3 years ago and it has meant basically nothing to the team. In fact, it is probably the single biggest contributing factor to the team now bottoming out as it provided them with the false belief that they were close to contention. Winning a round or two this year likely has the same effect, pushing off hard decisions because of a mistaken belief that luck = preparation.

I'm not blind that this is a business and that playoff revenue matters, but if playoff revenue really mattered to the owners, and i mean really mattered, the organization wouldn't be run like an expensive toy by an owner who wants daily briefings more than he wants to maximize his ROI.

Generational or multiple elite players allows organizations to spend draft capital on a yearly basis without consequence. Everyone else that wants to compete needs to take a methodical approach to how they manage their assets. If you want to be a buyer one year, you have to be a seller the next. If you want to be a multi year buyer, you need to be a multi year seller or you need to cut bait on extremely valuable assets.

If you want Ryan oReilly when he comes available, you have to already have the assets in place. When you're at the peak of your build and need to add a top forward making little cash, you need to have already drafted Nolan Foote.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Itse

...
They can win a round. That's not nothing...

You have a point here. It's worthy of consideration. Plus, it gives the owners $1M of net extra revenue per each playoff game. Plus, there is a small possibility of playing Oilers this time, which cannot be discounted and/or passed by.

[Macho0978]

I voted 8. Lots of talk of poor asset management not selling brodie or hamonic. Just can't see how treliving could sell to not only flames owners but his players that we should dump players for picks when you are in playoffs. Cant see that kind of move sitting well with Gio or tkachuk or gaudreau come contract time. Especially if the picks are a flop. Future asset management never gets considered. Reminds me of when Sutter traded ference after promising him he wouldn't need a ntc. Every flame had one shortly after that. Hard to know the backlash of selling in playoffs but too many are nieve to think core players wouldn't be pissed if he did

For me the Flames are not good enough to trade first or 2nds for average players with term. Treliving did well to buy but not over pay imo

[Enoch Root]

Winning a round means nothing?

For the fans, every playoff win is a huge party - winning a round is awesome.

For the team, winning a round means - at a minimum - 4 home playoff dates, and as many as 7 or 8. At about $2M per game (guessing), that is far from nothing.

What if that win was against the Oilers or Nucks?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I said it appears this way to me, and I base that on the fact that after he had been traded to TO he added TO to his no-trade list. This suggests that he is possibly not so interested in being moved in-season.

It has been totally quiet on the contract front with Brodie. Maybe he does want to stay here, or maybe he does not want to be traded in season (I'd suggest few players do unless they are end of career chasing a ring or simply unhappy with their role). But I'm guessing if the Flames wanted to move him, they would have.

[Jiggy_12]

These poll results are interesting and kind of show that there was a huge vocal minority yesterday.

After reading all the comments throughout the day I would have guessed the average would fall between 3-4, and not 6-7.

Reading this board sometimes does not give the most accurate pulse of our community.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

These poll results are interesting and kind of show that there was a huge vocal minority yesterday.

After reading all the comments throughout the day I would have guessed the average would fall between 3-4, and not 6-7.

Reading this board sometimes does not give the most accurate pulse of our community.

To be honest, I would have given it a 2-3 at a certain point yesterday. I ended up giving it a 5 and I'm leaning closer to a 6 than a 4.

Having a day to sleep on something and do some additional research is a heck of a thing.

[Strange Brew]

Winning a round every few years doesn't mean much. But I'd say being in the mix every year, and winning a round or two as often as you don't would mean alot to me at least.

I'm surprised at some of the high grades, but I guess i understand if you look at a moment in time. To expand on my earlier point, if you look at Treliving's moves since last year you have:

Out: Neal, Frolik (UFA), 3rd round pick

In: Lucic, $500K cap savings. Gustafsson (UFA), Forbort (UFA)

I've given up on the extar 3rd round pick for Neal.

From a winner/loser perspective, Treliving received good value there, I'd give him a solid 6 or 7.

It's when you consider whether he was able to improve the team's shortcomings and position the team for future success that the grade gets lowered. There is no real improvement here and we have 5 pending UFA's on the back end.

For an offseason that figures to be monumental, that's not a great position to start from.

Here's hoping a bit of a playoff run buys some goodwill and momentum.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Completely average deadline for a completely average franchise. For the last 15 years this team has given its fans very little to get excited about, and that doesn't look like it's going to change anytime soon

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Winning a round means nothing?...

Also, the team that is presently occupying a playoff spot has apparently "now bottomed out," and last year was the product of nothing more than "the mistaken belief that luck=preparation."