2018/2019 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Toonage]

His numbers looked decent under Bill Peters though. Might be a good fit.

[Sandman]

If we trade our #1 center, we will spend years looking for a #1 center. Unless there's some kind of plan in place, such as a trade or signing which is pretty unlikely.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Not sure I buy that. He hasn't been that great for two seasons now.

Think we are stuck with Neal though.

It's not just who has a better chance of turning it around next season. You also have to factor in their contracts:

Rask - 3 years @ 4M
Neal - 4 years @ $5.75M

The gap of an extra $1.75M and an extra year is significant and no one will take on that extra commitment if it's a toss-up who might be better next year. Most likely scenario is both have another down season next year...and Rask is much cheaper to buy-out.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Cost was higher at the deadline, there's no way Zucker is worth Frolik at a first this time around. I wouldn't give that up for a 20g Zucker, I'd prefer we flip Frolik for picks if that's the case.

Maybe, but he's worth a whole lot more than Frolik. Frolik was a salary dump at the deadline to make the cap work for Calgary. He has little value.

Minny has no reason to move Zucker unless they are getting a first back.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Maybe, but he's worth a whole lot more than Frolik. Frolik was a salary dump at the deadline to make the cap work for Calgary. He has little value.

Minny has no reason to move Zucker unless they are getting a first back.

Frolik straight across wont get you Zucker, there's no denying that.

I think Frolik + 2nd or 3rd probably does though. Especially with the previous connection around the deadline.

I don't remember where I read it, but it there was rumblings around Minny wanting Zucker out so I think he goes somewhere for sure this off season, if there's a team willing to give up a 1st then by all means I'm sure they'd prefer that.

I hope we dont.

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by neo45

I’ll take that $20 bet all day that Brodie brings back a first.

Kris Russel brought back a second, a prospect and a player. And that second was close to becoming a first. Defensemen are expensive.

Although it’s more likely there are other pieces involved in a trade or Brodie gets traded for a forward

Treliving won’t trade Brodie for a low pick.

Done. If the trade is Brodie-for-pick (No other parts involved), and the pick is a 1st, I will pay $20. If it is LESS than a 1st, you pay me $20.

/me shakes on deal.

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by Pickle Juice

How about William Karlsson? Lots of rumours out there he might become available?

What’s it going to take to get him?

Love Karlsson's game...not just a nose for the net, but also EXCELLENT defensively.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That is exactly where a 2nd line player would be on average.

F's 94-186 ( 3 2nd liners from each club) spanned 51 pts down to 33 pts. He was on a 44 pt pace if playing all 82 and that was without ANY PP time to speak of. Of course we will get the "yeah but he scored points on an empty net" crap.... which ignores that all the good players do.

He is a solid 2nd line winger, and there really is no way around it.

Now, should he be dealt for an upgrade? Sure, why not? Everyone should be if an upgrade is available.

I dont think you deal him just because though. The team is short on RW's who can play top 2 lines...in fact going off last year they have no one else. Lindholm is a C and im sure they want to see him there this season if possible. Bennett was certainly not the answer there and Neal was a complete tire fire. This is where the Zucker thing made sense.

So IMO, they look at dealing Frolik for sure but only if they can get a RW to play on the top unit, upgrade and add some sandpaper on the 3rd line C, which moves Jankowski to wing and Ryan plays where ever else there is a hole in lines 2/3/4....which is all going to depend on Neal getting back to what he was signed to do.

Its really a bit of a mess for a team that had tremendous success offensively.

I don't question Bill Peters coaching last year except when it came to how Frolik was used...it just didnt make sense to me that he was the guy to be sat and demoted to 4th line duty etc. Its why Walsh was tweeting what he did. However ive been around enough to know that when new guys come in there is inevitably someone who is affected more than others and it was Frolik this time.

It's such an interesting debate, and one we've seen on and on forever on this site.

Frolik is a good fit with Backlund and Tkachuk and that may warrant bringing him back in itself. And a guy that produces at a 2nd line rate when he plays with 2nd line players certainly is getting done what he's supposed to get done.

What worries me the most about Frolik though is that when he wasn't with those two his numbers were non existent. That speaks to the bottom half of the Flames roster for sure, but only to an extent as the other option, Bennett, didn't fall off a cliff nearly as substantially.

So does that make Frolik the better 2nd line player because he produces with good players, the better 2nd line player for the Flames given who he's playing with, or a player that needs better players more than other players in similar situations?

Frolik

Line	TOI	Goals60	Assists60	1stA60	2ndA60	Pts60
2nd	551	1.20	1.42	0.87	0.54	2.62
All	813	0.89	1.11	0.66	0.44	1.99
Other	262	0.23	0.46	0.23	0.23	0.69
% WO	48%	19%	32%	26%	42%	26%

Bennett

Line	TOI Goals60	Assists60	1stA60	2ndA60	Pts60
2nd	270	0.67	1.11	0.67	0.44	1.78
All	804	0.67	0.90	0.75	0.15	1.57
Other	534	0.67	0.79	0.79	0.00	1.46
% WO	198%	101%	71%	118%	0%	82%

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Not sure I buy that. He hasn't been that great for two seasons now.

Think we are stuck with Neal though.

Rask is 5.5 years younger, that likely gives him a better chance to rebound.

Rask's last year was pretty lost and he wasn't getting much ice time nor PP time. Neal got way more ice time and PP time yet still produced little.

But you are correct, they both stunk.

And Rask's 2017-2018 season wasn't nearly as bad as either player's last season.

[RedHawk12]

If the deal was on the table, I would take Rask for Neal. Rask's age, salary and term left make it worthwhile. I'm not sure if Minnesota takes it though.

The other trade I would be interested in exploring is Neal + for Turris. Word is Nashville has soured on Turris and Nashville has a good history with Neal. Monahan/Turris/Backlund/Ryan would be great depth at center and I don't think we would need to add too much to get a deal done.

[Demetric]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Think again.

Rask is a better bet than Neal to rebound and his contract is better..

Rumoured trade before was Zucker for Frolik and a first.

So, you added the Neal/Rask downgrade and left off the first round pick LOL.

I am not sure Rask has more value than Neal to be honest. 9 points in 47 games this year. His year was way worse that Neal's. To me it is less, as been stated been a couple years since Rask had a decent season and his best season is no where near as good as Neal's average.

Yes, I left off the first, it is not the deadline anymore, the first should be off the table, maybe add 3rd or 4th or retain. Though, in an Athletic article it was indicated Min might be looking to move on from Rask already as well in exchange for another bad contract and are looking for scoring.

They may bet on Neal's shooting % rebounding closer to his career norm or around 10% vs the 5% it was this year. I would not be surprised if there are people out there that would bet on this as well.

Also with Frolik's contract expiring, there is the potential to flip him at the deadline as well if needed.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Demetric

I am not sure Rask has more value than Neal to be honest.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. To me, it's not even close.

5.5 years younger, contract is shorter and cheaper. Neal simply presents way more risk, and at his age is unlikely to rebound.

[JTech780]

Originally Posted by Sandman

If we trade our #1 center, we will spend years looking for a #1 center. Unless there's some kind of plan in place, such as a trade or signing which is pretty unlikely.

My point is that we are still looking for a number 1 center, because Monahan really isn't a number 1 center he is just being propped up by Gaudreau.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by JTech780

My point is that we are still looking for a number 1 center, because Monahan really isn't a number 1 center he is just being propped up by Gaudreau.

Correct. If Calgary wants a true #1 centre who is a big body (and they believe that Nolan Patrick is that guy, a big "if"), it's the type of gamble they may be prepared to take. Patrick's production would likely spike heavily playing with Johnny. Presumably Calgary would get more than just Patrick too.

But for all we know, Treliving may think Patrick is not that type of player.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

If the deal was on the table, I would take Rask for Neal. Rask's age, salary and term left make it worthwhile. I'm not sure if Minnesota takes it though.

The other trade I would be interested in exploring is Neal + for Turris. Word is Nashville has soured on Turris and Nashville has a good history with Neal. Monahan/Turris/Backlund/Ryan would be great depth at center and I don't think we would need to add too much to get a deal done.

Why is Calgary adding here?



Both players have very similar numbers over the past two seasons, but the underlying numbers suggest that Neal arguably has a greater chance of bouncing back. Turris also has the additional year on his contract.

Turris played 15:42 a night, and managed just 78 shots in 55 games, while starting in the offensive zone 68% of the time. He shot 1.8% lower than his career average last season. His most common linemates were Craig Smith and Kevin Fiala.

Neal played 14:57 a night, and managed 141 shots on net in 63 games, while starting in the offensive zone 53.5% of the time. He shot 7.6% lower than his career average. His most common linemates were Mark Jankowski and Sam Bennett.

Turris has 21 goals in 140 games as a Predator and is making 6M a year for another five seasons. He is just as big, if not more so of a risk to take on than Neal.

[Knut]

https://flamesnation.ca/2019/05/23/r...-jason-zucker/

According to Michael Russo of The Athletic, the Wild are actively shopping Zucker and have talked to Calgary about Sam Bennett and Michael Frolik; to Arizona about Christian Dvorak and Christian Fischer; and to Vegas about Jonathan Marchessault.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Hes

https://flamesnation.ca/2019/05/23/r...-jason-zucker/

Interesting - given the near Frolik + 1st deal at the deadline, this essentially equates Bennett's value to a 1st round pick. Not bad value. Just hard losing two solid, top 9 forwards for one...

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

Interesting - given the near Frolik + 1st deal at the deadline, this essentially equates Bennett's value to a 1st round pick. Not bad value. Just hard losing two solid, top 9 forwards for one...

The original article is here:
https://theathletic.com/987908/2019/...possible-fits/

The wording doesn't suggest it is Forlik + Bennett for Zucker. Just that Bennett could be a target for the Wild.

[Mass_nerder]

I'd be pretty reluctant to send Bennett out the door for Zucker.
Bennett is ~.37 ppg, and Zucker is ~.52; however Zucker had that one year where he put up 64 points. This past season he dropped back down to a ~45 point player.
Is he a ~60 point player, or a ~45 point player?
If you think he can put up ~60 points for a few more seasons, it might be worth it, but if he's closer to a ~45 point guy, I don't think it seems like a prettt bad deal.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

The original article is here:
https://theathletic.com/987908/2019/...possible-fits/

The wording doesn't suggest it is Forlik + Bennett for Zucker. Just that Bennett could be a target for the Wild.

Russo mentions at the deadline Zucker was almost dealt for Frolik + 'high pick'. We know from other sources around deadline time that the rumoured deal was Frolik + 1st round pick for Zucker.

Later in Russo's article he suggests Minnesota would be interested in James Neal, Bennett or Frolik if you consider them top 6 players (the implication here being that he doesn't think that's what they are).

If Kessel is wiling to go to Minnesota, Kessel + JMFJ for Rask + Zucker, a Calgary offer of Bennett/Neal/Frolik + 26th OA doesn't cut it.

If Kessel doesn't want to go to the Wild though, I could see the Flames dangling RFA Bennett + 26th overall if they think they are looking at a contentious negotiation with Bennett's camp (which I think is likely).

I don't really understand why the Wild want to do this, but I'm not going to stop them if they want to light themselves on fire.