2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[oldschoolcalgary]

I always wonder whether its good to mess with a team's chemistry if they are playing well...i remember trading for Brad Stuart one year, and to be honest, i thought the flames looked worse after that... certainly didn't help them in a playoff run...

i understand some of the debate around a goalie, but typically their value is higher during the season...

sometimes doing nothing is a better strategy

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by MrMike

Oh man do I hope we somehow get Quick. Conditional first making the conference finals, kylington and another b prospect.

I would hate to see the Flames give up dynamic, cost-controlled Kylington for injury-plagued, over-priced Quick. That would be a step backwards (from my perspective).

[Ozy_Flame]

No thanks on Quick, too injury-prone for my liking. Would rather attempt to go for Talbot in the off-season, see what he can do without the Oilers stink, and not give up Kylington at the same time.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I would hate to see the Flames give up dynamic, cost-controlled Kylington for injury-plagued, over-priced Quick. That would be a step backwards (from my perspective).

They have to look forward and determine which, if any, of Kylington/Andersson/Valimaki they can stand to lose IMO.

It looks very likely that one of them would be exposed in the expansion draft if they want to protect Hanifin....which is a lock at this point.

So now do you use one of those guys and get a (hopefully) answer in net for 3 years or just lose one for truly...nothing?

And how is Quick over priced?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by transplant99

They have to look forward and determine which, if any, of Kylington/Andersson/Valimaki they can stand to lose IMO.

It looks very likely that one of them would be exposed in the expansion draft if they want to protect Hanifin....which is a lock at this point.

So now do you use one of those guys and get a (hopefully) answer in net for 3 years or just lose one for truly...nothing?

And how is Quick over priced?

Could be wrong but I think he's talking about the trade price, not his contract.

[PepsiFree]

Looking at his deeper stats (5v5 isolates, High Danger, etc) Quick would be a huge get. At first glance he’s not a lot better than Smith, but most of the more detailed stats suggest otherwise. He could potentially be a solution for the next 2-3 years, while Smith is gone after this season.

I’d say make the plunge if you can get him.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Could be wrong but I think he's talking about the trade price, not his contract.

I think $5.8 million per season for four season after this one (until age 36) is not likely to be good value for a player showing signs of declining. It would be a significant risk.

[neo45]

I don’t know all that much about goalies, but I think Crawford is actually better than Quick and would be cheaper to acquire since they aren’t in our division.

Biggest issue with him is health

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I think $5.8 million per season for four season after this one (until age 36) is not likely to be good value for a player showing signs of declining. It would be a significant risk.

He’s also Parsons hero....

[Toonage]

Why get Quick when we have Quick Jr.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

No thanks on Quick, too injury-prone for my liking

This isn’t a thing. Someone could get injured 15 times in 2 years and then never again. The game is rough, guys get injured. Sometimes they happen in close succession, sometimes guys avoid them for their whole career.

It’s more luck than anything. (Excluding players with known conditioning issues).

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

This isn’t a thing. Someone could get injured 15 times in 2 years and then never again. The game is rough, guys get injured. Sometimes they happen in close succession, sometimes guys avoid them for their whole career.

It’s more luck than anything. (Excluding players with known conditioning issues).

Being injury-prone is a thing.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Bennett a 2nd and Kylington for Quick?

Likely a no from the Kings but would certainly address one area for the Flames.

Also depends on what the Kings want or can do with Carter. Sounds like the Bruins are pretty interested

I really dont think bennett is the center piece of any trades at this point

Hes had 2 straight seasons of 26 points, and this year hes on the same pace. 3 years in a row seems to be a case of you are what you are

At this point hes a throw in, or a swap of underperforming high prospects who maybe need a change of scenery

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Being injury-prone is a thing.

Depends on the injury. Concussions, joints, back, sure. Weird stuff like Backlund has had in the past, not so much.

[colbym72]

I am curious what Jeff Carter would be worth. That retirement thing is scary, but the contract is great and he would give the Flames that second great offensive centre that could really take them over the top. Jankowski would be the odd man out probably forcing him to move to wing, but something to think about. What do you think his price would be? Probably tough to acquire a player within the division

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by colbym72

I am curious what Jeff Carter would be worth. That retirement thing is scary, but the contract is great and he would give the Flames that second great offensive centre that could really take them over the top. Jankowski would be the odd man out probably forcing him to move to wing, but something to think about. What do you think his price would be? Probably tough to acquire a player within the division

I saw an Athletic article where a NHL exec suggested the price will probably be a 1st, prospect, and roster player.


What would concern me more is if he really wants to be in Calgary for the rest of his contract. He really screwed over the Blue Jackets with how unhappy he was to be there. Don't want a repeat of that situation happening here.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I would hate to see the Flames give up dynamic, cost-controlled Kylington for injury-plagued, over-priced Quick. That would be a step backwards (from my perspective).

You do realize we are going to lose Kylington for nothing come expansion right?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

You do realize we are going to lose Kylington for nothing come expansion right?

Yeah, it may not be Kylington, but people resistant to trade a young defenceman should be well aware that the odds are not in favour of us having all of them in 2 years anyway.

[Flash Walken]

If the equivalent pick for Kylington is a 2nd or 3rd round pick, I'd rather move the pick than the player this year.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

You do realize we are going to lose Kylington for nothing come expansion right?

Not necessarily. Lots can happen between now and 2021. In any event, even if you were to convince me that losing Kylington in the expansion draft is inevitable (which, as a long-time self-professed Kylington fanboy, would make me ), then I would still want to see Kyington moved () for a more long-term asset (perhaps a young, expansion-draft-exempt forward or something).