Trade Proposal Values from the Calgary perspective

[Ullr]

Ferland is basically a Native Wayne Simmonds right now

[SebC]

Originally Posted by timbit

Just my opinion, but it is amazing to me how some fans underrate Ferland. He provides so much to the Flames and he is a “5.5” or “6”?

Ferland is on pace for 19 assists. He's an excellent finisher, but he's clearly not driving the play. He's also got a 19% shooting percentage, which might be unsustainable. If that goes back to last year's 14%, for instance, he's a 25/20 guy, when on a line with Gaudreau and Monahan.

(... and we really don't want the rest of the league to start thinking about him the way you do.)

[SeanCharles]

I feel like the trade values range but in general are within 5-6 tiers with groups of players holding similar value. I see the tiers as:

Johnny Gaudreau
Sean Monahan
Matthew Tkachuk
Dougie Hamilton

Mark Giordano
T.J. Brodie
Mikael Backlund
Travis Hamonic
Micheal Ferland

Sam Bennett
Mark Jankowski

Michael Stone
Michael Frolik
Mike Smith
Rasmus Andersson
David Rittich
Andrew Mangiapane
Brett Kulak
Jon Gillies

Garnet Hathaway
Curtis Lazar
Marek Hrivik

Matt Stajan
Troy Brouwer
Jaromir Jagr
Matt Bartkowski
Tanner Glass
Kris Versteeg

Injuries, salaries, term remaining, age and potential all factor into the logic behind the perceived values of each player.

The hardest players to place were Bennett and Janko as I know they aren't quite in the 2nd group but I feel their potential puts them above the 4th group.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think Tkachuk has more trade value than Monahan, but not as much as Gaudreau, who has the most. So he gets a 9.

I think it would be close but yeah Tkachuk should be slightly more desirable.

[Lanny_McDonald]

I think it more prudent to consider where players would fit on other teams that would have interest in making a deal with the Flames. A team will give up only so much to fill a particular hole in their roster, and it is dependent on that hole they are trying to fill. If they are looking for a top line or top pair position, they are going to give a similar player back in return (see Hall for Larsson). A numeric value doesn't represent much, as it is abstract and non-representative of the opposition's needs. I feel the more productive exercise would be to define how our players would fit on other teams and consider that the base line for what they would return (equivalent value).

First Line - Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan
Second Line - Matthew Tkachuk, Micheal Ferland
Third Line - Mikael Backlund*, Sam Bennett**, Mark Jankowski**, Michael Frolik, Troy Brouwer,
Fourth Line - Garnet Hathaway,
Depth - Kris Versteeg, Jaromir Jagr, Curtis Lazar, Matt Stajan, Tanner Glass, Marek Hrivik

1st Pair - Dougie Hamilton, Mark Giordano
2nd Pair - T.J. Brodie, Travis Hamonic
3rd Pair - Brett Kulak*, Michael Stone
Depth - Matt Bartkowski

Starter -
Backup - Mike Smith
Depth - David Rittich

Prospect - Rasmus Andersson, Jon Gillies, Andrew Mangiapane

* - Decreased value because of UFA status
** - Increased value because of age/unattained potential

A team will give assets based on where a player will fit on their roster, and give what they think is an equitable player in trade. A prospect, or player with untapped potential may return an extra asset in the form of another player at lesser position, or a draft pick, as equalization, but the opposition will based the valuation of where that player is going to fit. If a team is willing to go all in, they may be inclined to over-pay and throw around some ridiculous valuation (see Kris Russell) but those deals don't come along too often. If a player from the Flames is traded, I would expect the return to be no different than the matrix above. We aren't going to be getting a top line player without giving back top line talent, and that applies to other teams as well.