2015/2016 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by FBI

I'd probably do Raymond-Shore for B-prospect just to get Raymond off the team. But maybe Treliving can do better wizardry than that.

That in itself is wizardry..

We aquired Shore for a C-prospect AHL player. Shore has shown himself to be a fringe NHLer at best and is worth as much as he was worth when we got him.

Raymond has negative value.

How do you expect to turn this into a B-prospect?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I think you're underselling Shore a bit, but yeah, Raymond will not likely be traded.
Send him to Stockton and hope he revitalizes his game. Bad for the cap, but otherwise out of sight, out of mind.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I think you're underselling Shore a bit, but yeah, Raymond will not likely be traded.
Send him to Stockton and hope he revitalizes his game. Bad for the cap, but otherwise out of sight, out of mind.

I don't think I'm underselling Shore at all. You think he's more than a fringe NHLer? He hasn't been able to push his way into the lineup for more than a couple games at a time. 3 points and a -5 in 11 games played is quite underwhelming. He has decent puck possession, but I really don't see him doing much on the ice.

I think he's overrated by some on these boards if anything (these trade proposals kind of prove that). I'm all for being a homer, but this guy doesn't deserve much love for what he's done in a Flames uniform.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I don't think I'm underselling Shore at all. You think he's more than a fringe NHLer? He hasn't been able to push his way into the lineup for more than a couple games at a time. 3 points and a -5 in 11 games played is quite underwhelming. He has decent puck possession, but I really don't see him doing much on the ice.

I think he's overrated by some on these boards if anything (these trade proposals kind of prove that). I'm all for being a homer, but this guy doesn't deserve much love for what he's done in a Flames uniform.

I agree, I think Shore gets a lot of love because Treliving told the media he's a sought after player and is getting a lot of calls about him. When a GM says something like that there's usually an angle to it.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I don't think I'm underselling Shore at all. You think he's more than a fringe NHLer? He hasn't been able to push his way into the lineup for more than a couple games at a time. 3 points and a -5 in 11 games played is quite underwhelming. He has decent puck possession, but I really don't see him doing much on the ice.

I think he's overrated by some on these boards if anything (these trade proposals kind of prove that). I'm all for being a homer, but this guy doesn't deserve much love for what he's done in a Flames uniform.

Yes, I think he will be more than a fringe NHL player. At this moment, he might be only a fringe NHLer, but clearly his value needs to be determined on more than his first 11 games.
Very much in the same boat as Colborne a couple of years ago. You think Toronto regrets dumping him for a 4th? Maybe Shore doesn't pan out in the end, but he does have value.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by saillias

I agree, I think Shore gets a lot of love because Treliving told the media he's a sought after player and is getting a lot of calls about him. When a GM says something like that there's usually an angle to it.

...or he is giving his honest opinion.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by saillias

I agree, I think Shore gets a lot of love because Treliving told the media he's a sought after player and is getting a lot of calls about him. When a GM says something like that there's usually an angle to it.

I give Shore a lot of love because he's an intelligent hockey player with the blend of tools that our team is sorely missing (size, cycling skills, right-handed shot). No one else on the roster has this tri-fecta. Jones doesn't really play a cycle game, Colborne shoots left and is actually pretty bad at the cycle game even though it looks like his forte, I'm not familiar enough with Hathaway to know what he brings offensively. Etc.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Yes, I think he will be more than a fringe NHL player. At this moment, he might be only a fringe NHLer, but clearly his value needs to be determined on more than his first 11 games.
Very much in the same boat as Colborne a couple of years ago. You think Toronto regrets dumping him for a 4th? Maybe Shore doesn't pan out in the end, but he does have value.

Colborne didn't play 70 NHL games prior to joining the Flames and he's progressed immensely since game 1 in Calgary.

I'm not judging Shore only on his 11 underwhelming Flames games, but also his 70 even more underwhelming games with the Panthers. He put up abysmal numbers in Florida and they deemed his worth to be Greg Nemisz.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Colborne didn't play 70 NHL games prior to joining the Flames and he's progressed immensely since game 1 in Calgary.

I'm not judging Shore only on his 11 underwhelming Flames games, but also his 70 even more underwhelming games with the Panthers. He put up abysmal numbers in Florida and they deemed his worth to be Greg Nemisz.

So a first rounder?

It isn't as if I think he should be in our top 6. I have no idea how he'll end up, but clearly I see more upside than you. Either way, it would be poor asset management, in my opinion, if he is traded for a 5th or 6th or whatever you think he is worth, and terrible asset management if he is lost on waivers.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I'm not judging Shore only on his 11 underwhelming Flames games, but also his 70 even more underwhelming games with the Panthers. He put up abysmal numbers in Florida and they deemed his worth to be Greg Nemisz.

Was Shore not traded for Corban Knight? I'm positive we traded Nemisz to Carolina.

[JiriHrdina]

Yeah he was traded for Knight. And Florida needed to deal him because of his waiver status

[SuperMatt18]

Shore is in that weird point.

Too good for the AHL, not quite good enough for a team to give up assets for, and teams aren't quite sure if he can stay on their roster full time.

[DoubleF]

If I were looking long term, I wouldn't move Shore and Colborne and would move Stajan and Jones for picks and hope that Colborne and Shore could figure things out and replace them. We are still rebuilding after all.

Are they a perfect replacement? No. But I'd rather swing for the fences rather than try and keep a spot for players we knew wouldn't' finish the rebuild with us.

I'd rather plop Colborne and Shore in a trial by fire scenario this season and build up a good sample size for decision making regarding trading, waiving or stealing a spot.

[Flash Walken]

Is Shore too good for the AHL?

I have to say, I've been less than impressed with him since he became a Flame last year.

[IgiTang]

People talking about Shore being a fringe NHL'er at the moment. Sure. Most 22 year olds are fringe NHL'ers at this point in their career.

We have been spoiled with our prospects as of late and I think people are losing sight of that. Gaudreau, Bennett, Monahan and to a lesser extent Ferland and Granlund are really exceptions to the rule.

Most guys are not NHL ready until they are 25 or so unless they have elite ceilings.

Meat and Potato guys like shore are the "long term" commitment type players that when they stay in the system and develope with the organization, they tend to be quite servicable bottom 6 guys or sometimes jump out to be exceptional talents.

It scares me to think of how people will view guys like Porier and potentially Klimchuk in a year or two. If they arent ready by 22 and 23, they are busts?!..

Not every player that comes through the pipeline are going to be fulltime NHL'ers by 23 and if they arent, they shouldnt be considered a bust.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

People talking about Shore being a fringe NHL'er at the moment. Sure. Most 22 year olds are fringe NHL'ers at this point in their career.

We have been spoiled with our prospects as of late and I think people are losing sight of that. Gaudreau, Bennett, Monahan and to a lesser extent Ferland and Granlund are really exceptions to the rule.

Most guys are not NHL ready until they are 25 or so unless they have elite ceilings.

Meat and Potato guys like shore are the "long term" commitment type players that when they stay in the system and develope with the organization, they tend to be quite servicable bottom 6 guys or sometimes jump out to be exceptional talents.

It scares me to think of how people will view guys like Porier and potentially Klimchuk in a year or two. If they arent ready by 22 and 23, they are busts?!..

Not every player that comes through the pipeline are going to be fulltime NHL'ers by 23 and if they arent, they shouldnt be considered a bust.

Well it sounds like a lot of fans have already turned on Porier.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

People talking about Shore being a fringe NHL'er at the moment. Sure. Most 22 year olds are fringe NHL'ers at this point in their career.

We have been spoiled with our prospects as of late and I think people are losing sight of that. Gaudreau, Bennett, Monahan and to a lesser extent Ferland and Granlund are really exceptions to the rule.

Most guys are not NHL ready until they are 25 or so unless they have elite ceilings.

Meat and Potato guys like shore are the "long term" commitment type players that when they stay in the system and develope with the organization, they tend to be quite servicable bottom 6 guys or sometimes jump out to be exceptional talents.

It scares me to think of how people will view guys like Porier and potentially Klimchuk in a year or two. If they arent ready by 22 and 23, they are busts?!..

Not every player that comes through the pipeline are going to be fulltime NHL'ers by 23 and if they arent, they shouldnt be considered a bust.

22? He's 24 years old. He's older then Hathaway to put things in perspective. He's played a full season worth of NHL games and hasn't shown enough to stick around full time.

And that is a flat out lie that most non-elite NHLers aren't established until 25. If they aren't established by 24-25 then they will more than likely never become regular NHLers. Do you consider Ferland, Bouma, Byron, Colborne, Jooris, Backlund to be elite talent?

He is the definition of fringe NHLer. I cannot believe the level of homerism I'm being subjected to right now.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well it sounds like a lot of fans have already turned on Porier.

What? He had a sub par performance in camp. I think the hype train slowed down a bit since he didn't make the final round of cuts. Turning on him is hyperbole.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

22? He's 24 years old. He's older then Hathaway to put things in perspective. He's played a full season worth of NHL games and hasn't shown enough to stick around full time.

And that is a flat out lie that most non-elite NHLers aren't established until 25. If they aren't established by 24-25 then they will more than likely never become regular NHLers. Do you consider Ferland, Bouma, Byron, Colborne, Jooris, Backlund to be elite talent?

He is the definition of fringe NHLer. I cannot believe the level of homerism I'm being subjected to right now.

I can't believe that any opinion counter to yours must be attributable to "homerism".

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

People talking about Shore being a fringe NHL'er at the moment. Sure. Most 22 year olds are fringe NHL'ers at this point in their career.

We have been spoiled with our prospects as of late and I think people are losing sight of that. Gaudreau, Bennett, Monahan and to a lesser extent Ferland and Granlund are really exceptions to the rule.

Most guys are not NHL ready until they are 25 or so unless they have elite ceilings.

Meat and Potato guys like shore are the "long term" commitment type players that when they stay in the system and develope with the organization, they tend to be quite servicable bottom 6 guys or sometimes jump out to be exceptional talents.

It scares me to think of how people will view guys like Porier and potentially Klimchuk in a year or two. If they arent ready by 22 and 23, they are busts?!..

Not every player that comes through the pipeline are going to be fulltime NHL'ers by 23 and if they arent, they shouldnt be considered a bust.

I do not agree with this statement but have no quantifiable data to back that up, much like yourself. But say we did live in a world where the majority of NHL players didn't become legit until their mid 20s, what are teams supposed to do? Their ELCs are long gone by then unless they're 4 year NCAA players. So they just keep them on the roster? Well that sucks for your roster because they're not NHL players yet. Expose them to waivers? That would be 'terrible' asset management? Trade them under the gun?

My point is, guys like Shore... If they don't stick right away, can't make noise in camp, have trouble making any impact at all... They are transient. Trade him? Expose him? Who cares? Frankly, I think he would pass through waivers at this point. GMs aren't clambering for camp cuts from other teams that they would need to stick on their roster and designate a contract to.

If coach thinks he's on the roster, sweet! I've watched him in one preseason game and have seen zero practices, so I have no idea. But if he's not top 14, cya! People who think he's tradable with Raymond or even tradable at all after a mediocre camp are lost in a dream world.

And not every single player that comes through your system needs to be upgraded on asset wise. Terrible asset management? These guys come and go for free.