2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Tbull8]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

That is exactly the type of return we will get for Lindholm. Lets see who is right here.

Promising. I hope you’re right

[trackercowe]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Oesterle to Edmonton

I was going to say Dube, but that would be a joke in bad taste.

[dammage79]

Daliwal saying 10+ teams all in on Tanev. His services might be the biggest payday for the Flames out of all the potential trades. No limited market there.

[SuperMatt18]

Honestly...and I eat a lot of crow in saying this because I wasn't a fan of his signing initially...but if there is a guy I'd prioritize to add as a GM trying to make a run this offseason it's Tanev.

His season hasn't been as strong as usual but he's still the type of d-man that you need in the playoffs when things tighten up at 5v5 and on the PK.

In terms of sign and trades or long term acquisitions I would go Hanifin > Lindholm > Tanev ... but for a single season only then I think Tanev could be the actual most impactful piece.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Tiger

So... you mentioned on hitting on 2 in 17 years. What's the percentage there then?

Two divided by 17, and then take the decimal value to three places.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Oh, I was very, very right.

Were you? One of these numbers would indicate he's just on a heater...

Shooting %: 19.2
CF%: 47.52
SF%: 49.51
GF%: 37.88
xGF%: 46.61
SCF%: 45.97
HDCF%: 47.03
HDGF%: 32.26

Originally Posted by genetic_phreek

Dallas all day for me.

All day. Bourque would be awesome to get.

Most of those proposed trades would result in me saying "good work by Connie".

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Daliwal saying 10+ teams all in on Tanev. His services might be the biggest payday for the Flames out of all the potential trades. No limited market there.

...if this is true, I can't be the only one thinking the Flames should considering protecting their asset and scratching him until a trade has been finalized.

[Tiger]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Two divided by 17, and then take the decimal value to three places.

Thanks... it was rhetorical

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Honestly...and I eat a lot of crow in saying this because I wasn't a fan of his signing initially...but if there is a guy I'd prioritize to add as a GM trying to make a run this offseason it's Tanev.

His season hasn't been as strong as usual but he's still the type of d-man that you need in the playoffs when things tighten up at 5v5 and on the PK.

In terms of sign and trades or long term acquisitions I would go Hanifin > Lindholm > Tanev ... but for a single season only then I think Tanev could be the actual most impactful piece.

I actually think Tanev has been better than last year. I have not seen a lot of mistakes and I was concerned he'd lost a step last year.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Tiger

So... you mentioned on hitting on 2 in 17 years. What's the percentage there then?

Pelletier looks fine at 26OA.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Tiger

So... you mentioned on hitting on 2 in 17 years. What's the percentage there then?

You're assuming they made a pick in that range every year - you have to look at how many picks they made in that range.

Since the lockout here are the picks the Flames made from 20-30:

2006: Irving
2007: Backlund
2008: Nemisz
2009: Erixon
2012: Jankowski
2013: Poirier, Klimchuk
2019: Pelletier
2020: Zary

So they made 9 picks from 20-30 and I would argue that 4 were successful so far (Backlund, Jankowski, Pelletier, Zary)

Will be interesting to see too...but I think in the last 5 year or so we are seeing more players taken in that range have an impact than in the prior years.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by cral12

well played, Blaster lol


Still hopeful Connie has Quark-like negotiation abilities.

Forget Quark, he was a petty crook. Now, Nog, on the other hand, had real lobes for profitable deals...

[Naitix]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

That is exactly the type of return we will get for Lindholm. Lets see who is right here.

I hope the other GMs are desperate enough to offer a 1st, A prospect and a roster player for couple months of Lindholm. All I know is that I would not trade that for Lindholm if it was the other way

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Daliwal saying 10+ teams all in on Tanev. His services might be the biggest payday for the Flames out of all the potential trades. No limited market there.

I don't think we should equate number of teams interested with highest return. Part of the reason there are so many teams is that he is in a more attainable price range, and a good defensive defenseman is a universal commodity. Not as straight-forward for a guy like Lindholm - either he is someone you have a hole in your lineup to fill, or he is not. Fewer suiters, but still higher value.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Naitix

I hope the other GMs are desperate enough to offer a 1st, A prospect and a roster player for couple months of Lindholm. All I know is that I would not trade that for Lindholm if it was the other way

I don't think anyone will trade for Lindholm without the intention on trying to sign him to an extension.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

You're assuming they made a pick in that range every year - you have to look at how many picks they made in that range.

Since the lockout here are the picks the Flames made from 20-30:

2006: Irving
2007: Backlund
2008: Nemisz
2009: Erixon
2012: Jankowski
2013: Poirier, Klimchuk
2019: Pelletier
2020: Zary

So they made 9 picks from 20-30 and I would argue that 4 were successful so far (Backlund, Jankowski, Pelletier, Zary)

Will be interesting to see too...but I think in the last 5 year or so we are seeing more players taken in that range have an impact than in the prior years.

Flames drafting also got significantly better over the years. I’m a little worried Conroy is moving back towards big = good though.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Explain it to me. If finishing place in the standings year-to-year is not the absolute measure of mediocrity, then what is? It is not like all teams are going to regress to the mean, which is what you seem to be suggesting, as there are well run teams that perform well year-to-year, and poorly run teams which are going to draft early year-to-year and continue to fail. All will experience outliers, good and bad, but well run organizations will finish higher more regularly than poorly run organizations.

The problem with your post was that most teams will average very near to 15, and it tells us virtually nothing. Yes, Boston is the outlier, and their ability to remain competitive over that entire period is impressive. But most teams are going to be close to the mean.

The first team I looked at, because they have won 3 cups and are nothing like the Flames, is the Blackhawks: their average, over the same 22 seasons?

15

If we do all the teams (which would be a pointless waste of time), they would undoubtedly create a bell curve centering at 15/16, with a very tight distribution. Without running the numbers, I would bet that the STDEV would probably only be 2 or 3. Maybe even less. BOS at one end, BUF and EDM at the other. And just about everyone else between 13-18.

Anyway, that's more stats than readers want.

[Bubba17]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No one said asking would hurt. I think pressuring would though. Especially if they knew the NMC was a big deal to the player.

OK, what about the scenario where the player says no I won't agree to a trade, then next season he says he is unhappy and wants a trade. Is that fair to the team and what would your response be at that time?

I would honor his request to stay now and refuse to trade him next season. He can sit as the backup or better yet play every game no matter how ####ty he is playing, but that's just me.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bubba17

OK, what about the scenario where the player says no I won't agree to a trade, then next season he says he is unhappy and wants a trade. Is that fair to the team and what would your response be at that time?

I would honor his request to stay now and refuse to trade him next season. He can sit as the backup or better yet play every game no matter how ####ty he is playing, but that's just me.

I get what you're saying, but managing the player out of spite probably isn't going to get you optimal asset management.

[Bubba17]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I get what you're saying, but managing the player out of spite probably isn't going to get you optimal asset management.

But it does get me a better pick the following season where the Flames are tanking. If the team trades all the UFA's the fans should expect 3-4 years of bad hockey, so a goalie that doesn't want to play or try only gets a higher pick.

The only one in that scenario getting screwed over is the guy who refused to work with the team. I am not saying force him to accept a trade now but he shouldn't be upset with the discussion, but should expect the same treatment when he comes back next year and asks the team to help him out.