2015/2016 Trade Speculation and Rumors v2

[cznTiburon]

Originally Posted by playmaker

I was thinking about creating a new thread about this, but decided to post it here - well, I admit it's pure speculation. The thing is that according to the Flames website some players "grew up" an inch right before the deadline, notably:

- Backlund was 6'0 all the time, now he's listed at 6'1 200
(there's no way he's that big in my opinion)
- Bouma was 6'1 for a few years, now listed at 6'2
- Smid was 6'3 for his entire career yet suddenly he is 6'4
- Jones: 6'2 before, 6'3 now
- Monahan: 6'2 before, 6'3 now

The only player where the change is not suspicious is Monahan as it's very common to grow one inch as 18/19 year old. On the other hand Johnny is still listed at 157lbs which is basically his pre-draft weight.

Could this be a part of showcasing ? Source:

http://flames.nhl.com/club/roster.htm

I always take website listing with a grain of salt. I am 6 foot on a good day and I played university football. They consistently listed me 6'3-6'4 on their site which I found funny. Obviously not a professional team but I never knew why they did that when they did record our heights accurately in testing

[getbak]

General Fanager shows the amount of AAV (full-season cap hit) that every team is projected to be able to add at the deadline: http://www.generalfanager.com/teams

The only teams who don't have enough space to take on Hiller's full contract at the deadline are: Vancouver, St Louis, Tampa, Pittsburgh, LA, Minnesota, and Chicago. These are also the only teams that don't have the room for Hudler or Jones; of those, Chicago and Minnesota would have enough room for Russell.

The Flames could retain up to half the value of up to three contracts. Also, if they take any contracts back in a trade, that reduces the amount the other team is adding.


For example, if San Jose was interested in Hiller, Stalock would likely be part of the package coming back. In that case, San Jose would only be increasing their cap by $2.9 million, which they have room for.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Unsure because of their spot in the standings? Or unsure because of the life cycle of their franchise (not a contender, still retooling, etc)? The thing is a lot of GM's know that if you make the playoffs anything can happen.

I feel like a lot of GM's are optimists not realists. We saw this with Feaster here who blabbed on about intellectual honesty and that we should be sellers if the team didn't show him enough and then he still doesn't sell after they lose some key games and didn't look like they had a realistic shot.

Any team that is like 4 points out that has some reasonable excuse as to why they are that low (injuries, bad luck, w/e) and feels they can make the playoffs probably won't hesitate to add depending on cost. I mean the fringe teams may not be the ones adding the highest profile UFAss but they may still shop for depth at a lower price and picks up lesser UFAs for mid round draft picks. Obviously the fringe teams are unlikely to mortgage the future completely for just a chance at the playoffs but that doesn't mean they won't be "buyers" and won't affect the market. Just the fact that they aren't sellers will help the sellers as well.

Guess we'll see, we can speculate all we want. But based on how tight the standings are and the history of trade deadline action I see a lot of deals happening and I see UFAs going for decent amounts.

The Flames had no prospects other than Brodie and Backlund. If Feaster would've sold everything off in 2008, the Flames would've iced a WHL team. Feaster was the reason the Flames developed any legit prospects

I would argue he displayed intellectual honesty, but he couldn't very well tell the fans that the cupboard is dry and has to ride mediocrity until the cupboards get filled

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

The Flames had no prospects other than Brodie and Backlund. If Feaster would've sold everything off in 2008, the Flames would've iced a WHL team. Feaster was the reason the Flames developed any legit prospects

I would argue he displayed intellectual honesty, but he couldn't very well tell the Flames that the cupboard is dry and has to ride mediocrity until the cupboards get filled

You're all over the place.

1. Feaster wasn't in charge in 2008, that was Darryl Sutter
2. Feaster was exposed for not being intellectually honest the year he coined that phrase (2011-12 I think)
3. Feaster only sold off when basically forced to because of Iginla's UFA status

I mean I don't hate Feaster but the guy stuck his foot in his mouth several times in Calgary. He coined the phrase intellectual honesty and he went on record saying he wouldn't be the GM of a rebuild and then he was forced into rebuilding but wasn't intellectually honest enough to start it when it should have been started. I mean you can't call him intellectually honest if you followed his time here closely, I don't see how you could.

[Illuminaughty]

I think there's more then one way to approach a rebuild and each approach has its merits. For the Flames in 2008, the writing was on the wall that they needed to rebuild, Feaster new, but ownership gave him the marching orders to try to make the playoffs. It's an eerily similar situation to what the Nucks find themselves in at the moment.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Nill and Holland on the trade deadline:

http://www.mysask.com/portal/site/ma...tte.cachetoken

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Meh, maybe they are inflated. But Monahan is probably inflated as well. He doesn't look more then a couple inches taller then Backs in the best side by sides I've seen.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

You're all over the place.

1. Feaster wasn't in charge in 2008, that was Darryl Sutter
2. Feaster was exposed for not being intellectually honest the year he coined that phrase (2011-12 I think)
3. Feaster only sold off when basically forced to because of Iginla's UFA status

I mean I don't hate Feaster but the guy stuck his foot in his mouth several times in Calgary. He coined the phrase intellectual honesty and he went on record saying he wouldn't be the GM of a rebuild and then he was forced into rebuilding but wasn't intellectually honest enough to start it when it should have been started. I mean you can't call him intellectually honest if you followed his time here closely, I don't see how you could.

Yeah I got my year wrong. But even 2011-12 there wasn't any prospects in the system to justify a rebuild.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Nill and Holland on the trade deadline:

http://www.mysask.com/portal/site/ma...tte.cachetoken

That's identical to the cbc article I posted that you replied towards (In disagreement) lol.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Yeah I got my year wrong. But even 2011-12 there wasn't any prospects in the system to justify a rebuild.

Huh? A rebuild isn't justified by prospects. A rebuild is called for when you are intellectually honest and realize that your best players are declining and/or close to retiring (Kiprusoff) and that you need to trade them now to acquire good prospects to jumpstart the rebuild so it doesn't take 7-10 years. Doing this helps you by acquiring the prospects and picks from trading your best players while also making your team worse which makes your own 1st rounder more valuable and more likely to land your next franchise player. Feaster arguably did this a year too late and arguably failed to get good value for Iginla. It's unclear how much he had his hands tied by ownership but then he shouldn't be spouting off about intellectual honesty and selling off players if it was an empty threat.

It's like you have it backwards. You don't start a rebuild when you have good prospects. You rebuild when your team can't contend anymore and now you need to acquire good prospects.

Somehow I get the feeling we aren't going to agree on much lol.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

That's identical to the cbc article I posted that your replied towards (I disagreement) lol.

whoops! bad memory I guess

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Huh? A rebuild isn't justified by prospects. A rebuild is called for when you are intellectually honest and realize that your best players are declining and/or close to retiring (Kiprusoff) and that you need to trade them now to acquire good prospects to jumpstart the rebuild so it doesn't take 7-10 years. Doing this helps you by acquiring the prospects and picks from trading your best players while also making your team worse which makes your own 1st rounder more valuable and more likely to land your next franchise player. Feaster arguably did this a year too late and arguably failed to get good value for Iginla. It's unclear how much he had his hands tied by ownership but then he shouldn't be spouting off about intellectual honesty and selling off players if it was an empty threat.

It's like you have it backwards. You don't start a rebuild when you have good prospects. You rebuild when your team can't contend anymore and now you need to acquire good prospects.

Somehow I get the feeling we aren't going to agree on much lol.

I think that's one way to doing it. Look at Vancouver, they have Baertschi, Virtanen and Horvat developing at the NHL level while having "over-the-hill" Sedins and Vrbrata hold the fans over who desire a competitive hockey club. It's rebuild on the fly vs. scorched earth. I think a rebuild is very much justified on what parts you have to build from.

I think to say there's only one way to rebuild a franchises core assets is naïve or arrogant.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

I think that's one way to doing it. Look at Vancouver, they have Baertschi, Virtanen and Horvat developing at the NHL level while having "over-the-hill" Sedins and Vrbrata hold the fans over who desire a competitive hockey club. It's rebuild on the fly vs. scorched earth. I think a rebuild is very much justified on what parts you have to build from.

I think to say there's only one way to rebuild a franchises core assets is naïve or arrogant.

That's a very narrow way of describing the different rebuilds going on when there's a spectrum between the two choices. For example Buffalo would be a great recent example of scorched earth, and the Flames closer to the middle where top players were traded away but veterans used to tie the team over until the drafted prospects had more experience under their belt.

Right now Vancouver's on the fly attempt is merely attempting to accelerate and eliminate the in-between of waiting for prospects to be nhl regulars by trading off 2nd round picks in return for young incomplete projects. The margin for high end returns becomes much less.

There's definitely no right way to rebuild but you can certainly go about it in a poor way. Edmonton's scorching and salting the earth with poor culture, management and supporting cast is one. With Vancouver using middling 1st rounders and 2nds for last chance potentials aren't likely to give you career NHL players.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Anduril

That's a very narrow way of describing the different rebuilds going on when there's a spectrum between the two choices. For example Buffalo would be a great recent example of scorched earth, and the Flames closer to the middle where top players were traded away but veterans used to tie the team over until the drafted prospects had more experience under their belt.

Right now Vancouver's on the fly attempt is merely attempting to accelerate and eliminate the in-between of waiting for prospects to be nhl regulars by trading off 2nd round picks in return for young incomplete projects. The margin for high end returns becomes much less.

There's definitely no right way to rebuild but you can certainly go about it in a poor way. Edmonton's scorching and salting the earth with poor culture, management and supporting cast is one. With Vancouver using middling 1st rounders and 2nds for last chance potentials aren't likely to give you career NHL players.

I never implied there was only 2 ways to rebuild; I don't what I said was narrow minded at all. One could argue that Chicago moving from Sharp and Saad as two core assets to Panarin and Amisimov was a form of rebuilding

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

I never implied there was only 2 ways to rebuild; I don't what I said was narrow minded at all. One could argue that Chicago moving from Sharp and Saad as two core assets to Panarin and Amisimov was a form of rebuilding

And then one could argue any and all trades are a form of rebuilding as long as older player moves out and a younger player takes a spot.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Anduril

And then one could argue any and all trades are a form of rebuilding as long as older player moves out and a younger player takes a spot.

Now you are being philosophical. I don't mean that in a derogatory way either

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Now you are being philosophical. I don't mean that in a derogatory way either

Yeah, I'd say that most people would look at the Sharo/Saad departure as strictly cap victims instead of rebuilding since the rebuilding term indicates a change in the foundation IMO.

[Roof-Daddy]

Yeah the Sharp/Saad/Oduya moves were restructuring the cap structure of the team. Basically just retooling around the core of Kane/Toews/Hossa/Keith/Seabrook/Hjalmersson.

[Hackey]

Of all the types of rebuilds I think the one Vancouver is attempting is by far the worst. I think you'd have to be extremely fortunate to make that work.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Of all the types of rebuilds I think the one Vancouver is attempting is by far the worst. I think you'd have to be extremely fortunate to make that work.

It's really hard to let go of iconic players. We all saw that with Iginla, but the Canucks are going through that with 2 marquee players. Hopefully they make the same mistake we did and it hurts twice as bad.

[Samonadreau]

The only team in the league that seems to be able to retool on the fly time and time and time again is Detroit. Its amazing. They never liquidate their Core Veterans or get top ten picks and yet are always competitive.