2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I would rather the Flames retain on a trade. Brouwer at 50% retention MIGHT get some bites, and then the contract is off the books completely in two years.

Sure, but then you need to find someone that...

A: Wants Brouwer,
B: Is willing to pay his freight at half-price,
C: Brouwer is willing to go to

Frankly, I think if such a deal existed it would have been done by now.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Can be bought out though.

Having him count against the cap for 4 more years is really painful.

Buyouts don't make the problem go away.

[neo45]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Why?

4.5+1.5+1.5 = 7.5M vs 1.5+1.5+1.5+1.5 = 6M

What pressing need will we have three years hence that will require that 1.5M in cap space? It's not like the penalty is significantly longer... it's having Brouwer on the books for three years rather then four (and buying him out this year saves them 1.5M real dollars). YMMV but I think it makes more sense to buy him out now.

Well the most obvious upside to option A is you actually get to use the player. If he performs well that could also open up the possibility of a retention trade where you end up saving on the money, cap, and term. Could also maybe get a late pick.

Option B is a drag on your cap for longer, you lose a depth player, and the decision is absolutely final. Also there isn’t anything urgent you immediately need the cap space for.


*i know it’s sort of disingenuous to use the term “upside” when discussing anything to do with Brouwer’s contract. It’s more like the best of two bad options.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Why?

4.5+1.5+1.5 = 7.5M vs 1.5+1.5+1.5+1.5 = 6M

What pressing need will we have three years hence that will require that 1.5M in cap space? It's not like the penalty is significantly longer... it's having Brouwer on the books for three years rather then four (and buying him out this year saves them 1.5M real dollars). YMMV but I think it makes more sense to buy him out now.

He's still a warm body, so I don't think you can conclude it saves them 1.5M unless you're assuming he would be waived and placed in the minors, which I don't think would be the case. So they'd need a replacement, and a replacement (for example) like Foo comes in at ~0.9M extra making the net difference of buying out Brouwer at around 0.6M. Of course can change depending on who replaces him.

An NHL veteran with playoff experience, and a letter for his leadership. Easy to see why they would rather keep him around then save 0.6M in salary at the end of the year. That's assuming they don't need to move him to sign Hanifin long term.

And honestly, if you look just at him as a player and not his cap-hit, a big veteran NHL player who had past success and a strong playoff a couple years ago is absolutely fine as a 12th or extra forward. Slight chance of bouncing back to 15-15, but even 5-15-20 statline on the fourth line would be fine.

[chubeyr1]

I dont think you can put him in the minors. If he has a no move clause.

Even if you could the cap savings is 1 million max. So calling up Foo at $900,000 only saves you a net $100,000.

I think we are stuck with Brouwer for one more season.

Flames need some cap space though. Are they willing to pay the man 66 percent of his salary for the next two years not too play, while taking on a cap hit of 1.5 million for four seasons?

To me the team gives him one more season and prays he plays better.

I see the victim being Stone. Much easier to move contract to free up cap space.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by chubeyr1

I dont think you can put him in the minors. If he has a no move clause.

Since Treliving arrived, no Flame has been given a No Move Clause, only No Trades. Wideman was the last NMC the Flames had under contract.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by chubeyr1

I dont think you can put him in the minors. If he has a no move clause.

Modified NTC according to Capfriendly. He can choose 15 teams that he can't go to, can be traded to the other 15 teams without consent. I'm sure he'd waive the clause anyway if his alternative was the bus in Stockton.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Sure, but then you need to find someone that...

A: Wants Brouwer,
B: Is willing to pay his freight at half-price,
C: Brouwer is willing to go to

Frankly, I think if such a deal existed it would have been done by now.

Then include a prospect or draft pick to get it done.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Then include a prospect or draft pick to get it done.

I’d rather not waste player assets to get rid of Brouwer. If he’s so bad you can’t even keep him around, buy him out. If we can afford having him on the team (both financially and in terms of room dynamic) then keep him until a trade rolls around.

[SeanCharles]

I think something needs to give. The cap will be too tight once everyone is signed and I don't think it's typical of the organization/Treliving to maintain a lack of flexibility for very long.

There are 10 forwards that are guaranteed NHL roster spots on top of essentially being in the lineup whenever healthy in Gaudreau, Monahan, Neal, Tkachuk, Backlund, Lindholm, Ryan, Frolik, Bennett and Jankowski. On top of that there is Czarnik who will likely be given every opportunity to thrive considering how sought after he was.

That leaves 3 forward spots, and essentially only one regular lineup spot, for the likes of Brouwer, Lazar, Hathaway, Quine, Mangiapane, Foo and Dube to fight for with Brouwer holding an expensive 1way contract.

On defence there are 6 established NHL defencemen in Gio, Brodie, Hanafin, Hamonic, Kulak and Stone. Many believe Andersson has dominated the AHL and has nothing left to prove there so it seems natural to pen him into the lineup leaving no room. Others in Prout, Hogstrom, Kylington and Valimaki will have to wait for injuries to get an opportunity on top of one of Kulak, Stone or Andersson will have to sit each night when fully healthy. Kulak and Andersson are developing and Stone has a bigger contract so sitting any of them isn't overly ideal.

Given that we will be right up against the cap it seems difficult to imagine that we won't move out someone that has a higher cap hit in which a younger guy can fill his role.

The players that this most applies to is Brouwer and Stone as I doubt others in Frolik, Bennett or Jankowski would be made available for trade this year. The rest are part of the core, newly aquired or will have lower caps hits so it seems reasonable to narrow it down to these 2 players in particular.

I wouldn't care if we kept Stone as I still think Andersson will get significant icetime to develop but unless Brouwer can be moved somehow I think he will be gone because a little over 7 million to fit in Hanafin, Kulak and Jankowski is doable but will be very tight and minimize roster flexibility.

I do agree however we shouldn't part with additional assets just to get rid of Brouwer.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by getbak

Since Treliving arrived, no Flame has been given a No Move Clause, only No Trades. Wideman was the last NMC the Flames had under contract.

I love this. Unless it's a star player, no move clauses are the worst. I'm actually surprised Giordano didn't get one though.

[saXon]

Originally Posted by codynw

I love this. Unless it's a star player, no move clauses are the worst. I'm actually surprised Giordano didn't get one though.

I'm glad he didn't. A NMC/NTC a the twilight of a top player's career can render the club they're leaving empty handed.

Treliving solidified any possibility of a decent return when that day comes.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I’d rather not waste player assets to get rid of Brouwer. If he’s so bad you can’t even keep him around, buy him out. If we can afford having him on the team (both financially and in terms of room dynamic) then keep him until a trade rolls around.

I disagree

The cap space is as valuable as some prospects in my opinion.

I should clarify that I don't mean Valimaki, Parsons, Dube or a First Round pick.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I disagree

The cap space is as valuable as some prospects in my opinion.

I should clarify that I don't mean Valimaki, Parsons, Dube or a First Round pick.

It is just hard to figure out what it could be. The team doesn't have a lot of picks going forward, no would I want to give up a top 90 pick to dump him.
And then you have a very clear shelf with the prospects. Does adding a guy like Shink make it worth the other team to pick up Brouwer.
So it is very hard to imagine what they could add that would both motivate a team to take him on, while not being a significant asset for the organization.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

I think something needs to give. The cap will be too tight once everyone is signed and I don't think it's typical of the organization/Treliving to maintain a lack of flexibility for very long.

There are 10 forwards that are guaranteed NHL roster spots on top of essentially being in the lineup whenever healthy in Gaudreau, Monahan, Neal, Tkachuk, Backlund, Lindholm, Ryan, Frolik, Bennett and Jankowski. On top of that there is Czarnik who will likely be given every opportunity to thrive considering how sought after he was.

That leaves 3 forward spots, and essentially only one regular lineup spot, for the likes of Brouwer, Lazar, Hathaway, Quine, Mangiapane, Foo and Dube to fight for with Brouwer holding an expensive 1way contract.

On defence there are 6 established NHL defencemen in Gio, Brodie, Hanafin, Hamonic, Kulak and Stone. Many believe Andersson has dominated the AHL and has nothing left to prove there so it seems natural to pen him into the lineup leaving no room. Others in Prout, Hogstrom, Kylington and Valimaki will have to wait for injuries to get an opportunity on top of one of Kulak, Stone or Andersson will have to sit each night when fully healthy. Kulak and Andersson are developing and Stone has a bigger contract so sitting any of them isn't overly ideal.

Given that we will be right up against the cap it seems difficult to imagine that we won't move out someone that has a higher cap hit in which a younger guy can fill his role.

The players that this most applies to is Brouwer and Stone as I doubt others in Frolik, Bennett or Jankowski would be made available for trade this year. The rest are part of the core, newly aquired or will have lower caps hits so it seems reasonable to narrow it down to these 2 players in particular.

I wouldn't care if we kept Stone as I still think Andersson will get significant icetime to develop but unless Brouwer can be moved somehow I think he will be gone because a little over 7 million to fit in Hanafin, Kulak and Jankowski is doable but will be very tight and minimize roster flexibility.

I do agree however we shouldn't part with additional assets just to get rid of Brouwer.

Hathaway, Quine, Mangiapane, Foo and Dube will be in the AHL unless we can trade away Brouwer. Maybe there is a surprise push and Czarnik spends time in the A and Foo or Dube make the squad, but I really don't see that happneing.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Neal
Tkachuk-Backlund-Lindholm
Bennett-Jankowski-Frolik
Lazar-Ryan-Czarnik
Brouwer
Giordano-Brodie
Hamonic-Hanifin
Stone-Kulak
Andersson
Smith
Gillies

That's my guess as to who makes the roster. Ignore the lines because they'll change lots. That leaves one more roster spot and if they don't fill it, then they have flexibility to bring somebody up when there aren't injuries and somebody earns a chance to break into the squad... OR... Valimaki starts the year and Stone-Kulak-Andersson and Valimaki fight for the final two spots... which doesn't make sense for Andersson and Valimaki to spend much time in the pressbox. Maybe Hathaway does stay the team as the 14th forward.

I think there has to be a move at some point before the rosters need to be set. Trelving is in position to wait and see if somebody can push for a spot. Neither Valimaki or Andersson are guaranteed to start in the NHL. Prout is there to either play in the A or take the the 7th spot if the two youn'uns don't earn the spot out of camp.

[killer_carlson]

In order of what i'd be prepared to give up to move Brouwer's contract. As you go down the items above are removed from the offer:

Retain salary
3rd round pick
Shinkaruk/Klimchuk/Kulak
Kylington if we also obtained value in return
2nd round pick if we also obtained value in return (say a 3rd round pick).

Aside from Kulak there is very little in that list which is likely to play meaningful games for the Flames in the next 3 years. Brouwer's contract and negative on ice influence on his linemmates need to be removed from the team as soon as possible.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

In order of what i'd be prepared to give up to move Brouwer's contract. As you go down the items above are removed from the offer:

Retain salary
3rd round pick
Shinkaruk/Klimchuk/Kulak
Kylington if we also obtained value in return
2nd round pick if we also obtained value in return (say a 3rd round pick).

Aside from Kulak there is very little in that list which is likely to play meaningful games for the Flames in the next 3 years. Brouwer's contract and negative on ice influence on his linemmates need to be removed from the team as soon as possible.

I would not be willing to trade Kylington. The rest I am okay with.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Buff

Gaudreau-Monahan-Neal
Tkachuk-Backlund-Lindholm
Bennett-Jankowski-Frolik
Lazar-Ryan-Czarnik
Brouwer
Giordano-Brodie
Hamonic-Hanifin
Stone-Kulak
Andersson
Smith
Gillies

I think you're pretty close.

If Andersson (or another) makes the team outright, Prout or Kulak is waived and of no consequence. If not, Prout and Kulak fight for the 6th spot.

Similarly, I think if one of Mangiapane, Foo, Dube, Klimchuk make the team, Lazar and Brouwer are the spare forwards, with some obvious juggling potential. If two of them somehow surprise and make the team, again waiving Lazar is of little consequence in my opinion. Otherwise Hathaway gets to remain on the team as a spare forward.

But the team has been relatively injury lucky, that's usually not the case. So even if Andersson and friends don't outright make the team, there's a good chance they will see a lot of time as injury callups.

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

In order of what i'd be prepared to give up to move Brouwer's contract. As you go down the items above are removed from the offer:

Retain salary
3rd round pick
Shinkaruk/Klimchuk/Kulak
Kylington if we also obtained value in return
2nd round pick if we also obtained value in return (say a 3rd round pick).

Brouwer would not be traded for a third round pick. $9,000,000 left on his contract is just too big. Teams with the cap space, both this year and next, don't want to spend actual money (see Hossa-Phoenix), and teams that do spend the money, aren't handicapping themselves with that contract. In my opinion, it would take a lot more than a 3rd round pick to get rid of him. Same with Shinkaruk, Klimchuk and Kulak. Why take on a depth/AHL players for 4.5Mx2 years?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

In order of what i'd be prepared to give up to move Brouwer's contract. As you go down the items above are removed from the offer:

Retain salary
3rd round pick
Shinkaruk/Klimchuk/Kulak
Kylington if we also obtained value in return
2nd round pick if we also obtained value in return (say a 3rd round pick).

Aside from Kulak there is very little in that list which is likely to play meaningful games for the Flames in the next 3 years. Brouwer's contract and negative on ice influence on his linemmates need to be removed from the team as soon as possible.

I think that there is a better than 2/3 chance that Kylington plays meaningful games for the Flames in the next 3 years. Maybe a lot of meaningful games (and meaningful contributions). Trading him to get rid of Brouwer would be terrible asset management IMO.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

In order of what i'd be prepared to give up to move Brouwer's contract. As you go down the items above are removed from the offer:

Retain salary
3rd round pick
Shinkaruk/Klimchuk/Kulak
Kylington if we also obtained value in return
2nd round pick if we also obtained value in return (say a 3rd round pick).

Aside from Kulak there is very little in that list which is likely to play meaningful games for the Flames in the next 3 years. Brouwer's contract and negative on ice influence on his linemmates need to be removed from the team as soon as possible.

So they have no 2nd rounder next year so they'd be giving up the 2020 2nd. you can't go that long with so few picks. This is an asset weak franchise overall which is why I just don't think it makes sense to give up yet another asset for a bad contract. Particularly if that bad contract really isn't in the way right now.
One has to believe that Brouwer just isn't ineffective but actually a negative force on the team. I don't know that I believe that and thus wouldn't want to pay for someone else to take him.