2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

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

Cap space is only valuable in the current year.

Prospects are only valuable in the future.

If you don't need the cap space in the current year, it's foolish to trade any futures away for it.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Buff

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.

Dube was good enough to make the team last year but going back to play a significant role in the WJC was deemed more valuable to his development. It proved to be the right move but this year is different as he's playing pro no matter what. I think he's too good for the AHL already.

Foo is at an age now where he needs to take that next step so he should be pushing hard for a spot.

Mangiapane is coming off a significant injury so I wouldn't be surprised if he started in the AHL again as he probably lost significant training time rehabbing.

Lazar and Brouwer are not overly valuable to the organization anymore. They were brought in due to a lack of RH forward depth and have proved in 2 years they aren't an overly great fit. Lazar was a reasonable gamble at the time and may still be worth developing but Brouwer was a disaster waiting to happen, in my eyes, right from the start.

Brouwer is the most useless contract we have and is just hindering the teams flexibility.

I feel like the team wants to be gritty and hard to play against so Hathaway might not be sent back to the AHL. He played above Lazar and Brouwer on the depthchart last year, was told to find a home in Calgary and was recently qualified so it's not crazy to think he starts in Calgary.

If that's the case there will be no room for youth, barring injury, with Brouwer and Lazar also in the fold.

I think moving players like Brouwer, Stone or potentially Lazar (to minors after clearing waivers) will happen. It might not happen until Foo, Dube, Mangiapane, Andersson, Kylington or Valamiki push their way onto the team but I think it will happen nonetheless.

It's too crowded and we have all of these young guys pushing - it's a good problem to have but it's something I think Treliving will fix in order to attain some of the roster/cap flexibility we are lacking at the moment.

[saXon]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Cap space is only valuable in the current year.

Prospects are only valuable in the future.

If you don't need the cap space in the current year, it's foolish to trade any futures away for it.

Unless you use that freed up cap to acquire more futures.

[activeStick]

It's a numbers game and it's pretty clear that the only spot for Brouwer after all the moves is the 4th line. He isn't going to play over Neal or Frolik. If the Flames stick to Monahan, Backlund and Ryan as their top 3 centers, there's zero chance they shovel Lindholm down to the 4th line center role, which means he moves to RW.

I wonder if Treliving can work something out with Arizona to offload Brouwer given his relationships with that organization and the Coyotes' willingness to take on heavy contracts?

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Makarov

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.

I look at it a different way.

Not having the cap space to make mid-season adjustments is terrible asset management.

So is not having a spot for young players who out perform the acing veteran because you can't move the veteran's contract

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by activeStick

I wonder if Treliving can work something out with Arizona to offload Brouwer given his relationships with that organization and the Coyotes' willingness to take on heavy contracts?

Coyotes only take on big contracts when there is very little real money owing. If Brouwer's contract had been front loaded that might have been a possibility.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I look at it a different way.

Not having the cap space to make mid-season adjustments is terrible asset management.

So is not having a spot for young players who out perform the acing veteran because you can't move the veteran's contract

It would make more sense to trade Stone than to trade Brouwer and Kylington in order to get some cap flexibility.

Plan A must be to trade Brouwer with retained salary. Plan B trade Stone. We've already lost Hickey and Fox recently so I don't think losing Kylington just to dump Brouwer makes a lot of sense.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Cap space is only valuable in the current year.

Prospects are only valuable in the future.

If you don't need the cap space in the current year, it's foolish to trade any futures away for it.

I agree that cap space is valuable in the current year however moving bad contract frees up space in the future.

Buying a contract out only limits the contract space for longer periods of time. I think paying someone to take the contract is preferable to buying it out.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

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.

I think that may be the key difference: I do believe Brouwer to be a negative. His production is poor. He is paid for intangibles he didn't deliver as it pertained to physical presence.

Move him along

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't get the push for getting rid of Brouwer when the argument is a roster spot. Brouwer had two years - half of his contract - to prove himself worthy of a roster spot. I would argue that for the last 2 years, he mostly was worthy of a roster spot, though not at that contract.


I see the argument in two ways:


1) Getting rid of Brouwer JUST to free-up a roster spot is irrelevant. Brouwer still is NHL capable, just as a depth forward. If he is displaced on the roster, it is going to be from a younger player, in which case I will happily rather have Brouwer as the 13th forward, and not worry about making sure a young player is getting enough development time.


2) Cap space is where it makes sense to me. If the Flames NEED the space this year to make a further move, or get Hanifin signed for a higher dollar long-term contract, then it is important to find a way to unload that contract as best as possible - trade, waive, trade with retention or (most likely) through a buy-out.



I do think that - contracts aside - that Brouwer is probably the better player between him and Hathaway. I thought Hathaway was good only for a short burst, and then was largely invisible game in and game out. Brouwer I thought was better defensively, and as long as he remains a fixture on the 4th line, probably helps the team win more than a guy like Hathaway. If Hathaway had a bit more consistency to his game, I would probably feel differently.


I think the buyout happens this year only if the Flames are going to re-sign Hanifin to a longer term deal.

[GioforPM]

^^ I agree with all of this. Brouwer's poor play is a bit overblown based on expectations. Player v. player, he was better than Hathaway, Lazar, and Stewart. I also think he was plenty physical up until his face got broken by a puck. I was fairly happy with him on the PP unless he was paired with Stajan (and vice versa).

Upcoming, if he's down to 4th line/13th forward duties, is he better than Lazar? Maybe. Is he better than Hathaway? I think so. Is he better than a prospect? We shall see, but prospects or desperate PTO guys often outperform lots of vets in camp, for obvious reasons. Look at Glass last year - he was very good in camp but signing him was a mistake.

[SeanCharles]

I don't think any of Brouwer, Lazar or Hathaway are good enough to be in the lineup regularly.

We have 11 forwards that will in all likelihood play pretty much every game when healthy. I do believe Dube, Foo or Mangiapane will prove a better option to round out the regular 12 forward group. This would leave the 2 extra spots for players like Lazar, Hathaway and Brouwer.

Brouwer is probably the best player of those 3 but does it really matter if he isn't going to dress most nights anyways?

The whole point is we should sign Hanafin to a long-term deal as he is a key piece to the future of our blueline. 4 of the other top 6 guys are at least 27 years old and the rest, including a 24 year old Kulak, are still trying to establish themselves.

It would seem wise to lock him up for longer at 21 years old and already having 3 successful seasons under his belt. He's only going to get better and the price goes up.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I think that may be the key difference: I do believe Brouwer to be a negative. His production is poor. He is paid for intangibles he didn't deliver as it pertained to physical presence.

Move him along

Sure but is he addition by subtraction? If not then why pay an asset to off load him?
I agree he didn't deliver, but I don't believe his performance is a negative force such that an asset poor franchise should pay someone to take him off their hands.

[Toonage]

But if Brouwer doesn't go, its likely Stone does.

To keep all of these guys, and get Hanifin even as low as $3.5M doesn't leave a whole lot for in season adjustments cap wise.

Doesn't have to be an imminent trade, prior to the start of the season, but I'd be pretty surprised if one of them isn't gone before October 3.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Hanifin at 3.5M, Jankowski at sub 2M, and Kulak at a league minimum one-way contract to round out the 23 man roster would provide enough breathing room.

That would leave roughly a million in cap space entering the season. While not ideal, isn't too restrictive. Getting Hanifin at 3.5M is the more obvious concern as they probably want a long-term deal.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Signing Hanifin to a 2 year deal would be ideal so that we can evaluate who should stay and go. Brodie, Stone, Hamonic, and Brouwer all are UFA's.

[Toonage]

For what its worth, Boomer mentioned yesterday morning that Hanifin & the team were
interested in a longer deal. If someone recalls the conversation please chime in.

It sounded like a bridge deal may not be in the offing but something a little longer. That would put the cost up, probably past $4M

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Toonage

For what its worth, Boomer mentioned yesterday morning that Hanifin & the team were
interested in a longer deal. If someone recalls the conversation please chime in.

It sounded like a bridge deal may not be in the offing but something a little longer. That would put the cost up, probably past $4M

Definitely beyond $4M, how much though? I guess we'll see.

I feel like we're undervaluing Hanifin in conversation on CP here.

Hanifin may not be a direct comparable to Dougie at the time we acquired Dougie, but he's very close to being a direct comparable.

3 Years ago we signed Dougie to a 6 year, 5.75M per contract with the final two years carrying a modified NTC. Look at that deal, and add in cap-inflation and see what a player of Dougie's value would be signed to today.

Dougie at 5.75M in a 71.4M Cap tied up 8.05% of the cap.

8.05% of today's cap (79.5M) is 6.4M.

Hanifin isn't worth exactly what Dougie was worth in 15/16 because he hasn't proven quite as much, but I don't think we're talking about Hanifin being worth 35% less than Hamilton was in my eyes. If we're going long-term with Hanifin, you have to think it's somewhere between 4.75M and 5.5M per, and it'd be totally reasonable to see those numbers in my opinion.

[Dan403]

I bet Lazar gets sent down after camp.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Signing Hanifin to a 2 year deal would be ideal so that we can evaluate who should stay and go. Brodie, Stone, Hamonic, and Brouwer all are UFA's.

So we sign Hanifin to a bridge deal so that we can evaluate where we're at and then....re-sign Hanifin to a potentially massive contract in two years?

Young players with star potential are rarely bridged anymore for good reason.