I think a lot of people would have rather seen Dougie dealt in a 1 for 1 deal is what a lot of this comes down to. The deal that happened has a lot of moving peices and some feel it muddied Dougie's value.
If you say, dealt Hamilton for a true 1st line FWD like a ROR or a Marner, you would still have Fox and Ferland to deal in a seperate trade, perhaps bundled with something else for a top 4 Dman. But maybe Dougie ultimately just didn't have that kind of value.
It takes two to make a deal. Treliving can't just compel another team to trade their top-line RW, even if it's a fair deal. The other team has to want Hamilton, and be okay with moving a cornerstone player. And of course the contract ramifications have to work. Hockey trades are really tough to make in today's NHL, and Treliving is better than most at getting them done.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
Why are you automatically deeming Lindholm to be a core asset for the Flames? From Canes fans perspective, it doesn't seem like any of them saw him as a core asset being shipped out, and they've watched him play for years.
IMO, he's a guy that could be a core asset is he finally reaches the potential he had in his draft year, but he's not there yet.
I think Lindholm will be signed to a contract that makes him part of the core. He fills a huge need as a right shot forward in the top 6. He has been strong better as an all around player each year and the Flames are hoping he takes the next step offensively.
His age, position, skill, and price it took to acquire him and Hanifin make them core players of the team going forward
Apparently Elias Lindholm's middle name is "Zebulon", which is, uh, awesome.
__________________
"This has been TheScorpion's shtick for years. All these hot takes, clickbait nonsense just to feed his social media algorithms." –Tuco
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to TheScorpion For This Useful Post:
The original proposal we talked about where Hamilton was traded for Hanifin + Lindholm would have been an absolute fleecing of CAR IMO. Basically we'd be getting Lindholm almost for free because I view Hanifin's value and Hamilton's value as very close.
Yep. The more I think about this trade, the more I can’t help but think that it was:
Hamilton/Fox
for
Hanifin/Lindholm
...with pending UFA Ferland as the “throw-in” to “sweeten the deal”. From this perspective, I can see why the Flames had to add, because Fox isn’t a guarantee to sign, and Ferland isn’t a guarantee to stay. If those two things don’t happen for Carolina, it’s exactly what you say would be a fleecing in our favour. Therefore, I tend to think Carolina believes they can sign Fox, but are willing to let Ferland walk at the end of the season.
Well I don't see Canes fans as some of authority. Imagine fans of another team looked at our Bennett discussions. They'd think he was a worthless piece of crap based on what half this site says about him.
Fans in general have a problem with running out of patience for young players to develop. We saw it with Backlund. We saw it with Jankowski. We see it with Bennett. Same is likely the case for Canes fans and Lindholm.
Scouts and GMs don't have that same issue. They realize some young kids take until 24-26 to hit their peak. They watch the players and see more upside, more development to go.
Lindholm is very likely to be a core player for us because he's very likely to continue to improve in the next two years. Same goes for Hanifin.
Judging by this thread, saying that half the site thinks Bennett is a worthless piece of crap is a wild exaggeration. If anything, I would say that Flames fans have a much higher opinion of Bennett than any outsiders, who commonly slap the "bust" label on him. And I disagree with your other assessments too. As a prime example, Where Are You Chris O'Sullivan was basically run off the site by writing off Backlund early, as most fans were always seeing his potential. And much of the board was irate at the organization had the gall to send Jankowski to the minors to start last season.
That being said, I don't think you and I are too far apart on Lindholm. I think he has a decent chance to be a core player, and you think the chances are very likely, but it seems that neither of us are handing him that status immediately, as others are.
Same narrative as the Phaneuf trade. First reaction, everybody pukes. Then comes the justification, problem in the room, X is a great player, we need depth etc.
Maybe BT did get value, but most importantly, he didn't add to the team's major need - scoring up front.
When the rumour came up people were 50/50 on Hamilton for Lindholm & Hanifin,
now it's awesome that we added Ferland AND Fox on top of that? Added to NOT improve the scoring?
What's left know, pray that Bennett, Lindholm and Jankowski explodes offensively? Or sign overrrated FA like Neal/JVR/Perron for too long and for too much money.
BT shanked it like Brouwer, big time - there should have been an ROR, Stone and so on attached in this deal, not a 40p two way forward who according to most sources has trouble shooting the puck. Will he improve? BT is betting on it and I hope so.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dajazz For This Useful Post:
Same narrative as the Phaneuf trade. First reaction, everybody pukes. Then comes the justification, problem in the room, X is a great player, we need depth etc.
Maybe BT did get value, but most importantly, he didn't add to the team's major need - scoring up front.
When the rumour came up people were 50/50 on Hamilton for Lindholm & Hanifin,
now it's awesome that we added Ferland AND Fox on top of that? Added to NOT improve the scoring?
What's left know, pray that Bennett, Lindholm and Jankowski explodes offensively? Or sign overrrated FA like Neal/JVR/Perron for too long and for too much money.
BT shanked it like Brouwer, big time - there should have been an ROR, Stone and so on attached in this deal, not a 40p two way forward who according to most sources has trouble shooting the puck. Will he improve? BT is betting on it and I hope so.
Ya this happened after the hamonic trade last year as well. While hamilton for stone would have been preferred for me, i think tre was trying to not create a large hole on defense when trading hamilton. In this deal he was able to get a dman that could be as good (or slightly better) plus a 2nd line winger. Its a big risk to take though. Getting a guy like stone or ror back for hamilton would have at least made this trade somewhat safe. Obviously i hope everything works out but the hamonic trade has left a bad taste in my mouth
I am shaking my head every time someone mentions the Phaneuf trade in this thread. The Hamilton trade is so much better and it is not even close.
A trade like this is what Sutter should have made for Phanuef. The Flames would have been much better off long term acquiring a younger center and defenceman, even if they had to add, than settling for a handful of upcoming UFA depth.
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
The Following 24 Users Say Thank You to FireGilbert For This Useful Post:
I am shaking my head every time someone mentions the Phaneuf trade in this thread. The Hamilton trade is so much better and it is not even close.
A trade like this is what Sutter should have made for Phanuef. The Flames would have been much better off long term acquiring a younger center and defenceman, even if they had to add, than settling for a handful of upcoming UFA depth.
Agreed it’s like getting pitrangelo and let’s say berglund back for phaneuf in 2010, I think most people would have been ecstatic
If someone told CP that BT would trade for a middle six forward and a defenseman a week ago - would you say that sounds logical? Especially if it's Hamilton?
No, you send Hamilton and whatever is needed to get a top line forward.
Lindholm is only two years younger than Ferland who might cost you 4-5 million on his next contract. Lindholm is probably coming in at 5+.
That's why I hate the trade. The Calgary Flames are not a better team after the trade. We might be, so again, we traded on of our most valuable pieces for two good players with potential.
So now we are left with pretty much 0 pieces to trade for scoring help. Brodie is needed, Gio is Gio, Hamonic well... yea so hey who wants some D prospects and a 1st? Hold on, we didn't have one.
I love to have Hanifin & Lindholm on the team. Great players. But we didn't need Hanifin, we didn't need to replace Ferland with Lindholm. We needed someone who could step in and score 30 goals.
Last edited by Dajazz; 06-25-2018 at 01:49 AM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Dajazz For This Useful Post:
I'm pretty sure that the name Zebulon in this case derives from the american western tv-series "How the west was won". That show was a huge hit in Sweden for a long time during the 80s and 90s, and one of the main characters is named Zebulon.
If someone told CP that BT would trade for a middle six forward and a defenseman a week ago - would you say that sounds logical? Especially if it's Hamilton?
No, you send Hamilton and whatever is needed to get a top line forward.
Lindholm is only two years younger than Ferland who might cost you 4-5 million on his next contract. Lindholm is probably coming in at 5+.
That's why I hate the trade. The Calgary Flames are not a better team after the trade. We might be, so again, we traded on of our most valuable pieces for two good players with potential.
So now we are left with pretty much 0 pieces to trade for scoring help. Brodie is needed, Gio is Gio, Hamonic well... yea so hey who wants some D prospects and a 1st? Hold on, we didn't have one.
I love to have Hanifin & Lindholm on the team. Great players. But we didn't need Hanifin, we didn't need to replace Ferland with Lindholm. We needed someone who could step in and score 30 goals.
Well if you trade Hamilton for a winger you do severely weaken the defense until Valimaki or Andersson is ready to play top 4. Kind of doubtful either of them is ready for that immediately. I know some people would have preferred that but you know Treliving thinks depth on defense is overall more important than wing depth. Which makes some sense as defensemen are more valuable than wingers. I’m not sure our management was ever going to trade Hamilton for a winger. We got two great young players who play the most important positions in the game (C and D). We got a young top two line forward who has a right shot, that was a huge need. We got rid of a guy whose commitment in his own zone was lacking.
Did people really wanna trade Hamilton for a winger and then roll with a top 4 of Gio, Brodie, Hamonic and Stone? Neither Hamonic nor Stone really looks good playing their off side. That looks a bit weak to me. It solving one problem but then opening up another. You’d have to roll with Gio-Hamonic, Brodie-Stone and we’d lose a lot of offense and puck moving ability. Thinking about it more I think Hamilton is too big of a loss defensively at the moment unless you got a top 4 dman back.
Probably best for us to wait a week and see what happens in early July before we proclaim that Treliving has failed to address depth scoring.
Last edited by Flames Draft Watcher; 06-25-2018 at 04:25 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
