2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[VilleN]

If Bennett truly did turn a corner these playoffs, I wouldn't be opposed to dealing Backlund and going with:
Tkachuk - Lindholm - Mangiapane
Gaudreau - Monahan - Simon
Lucic - Bennett - Dube
Nordstrom - Ryan - Robinson/Gawdin/Rinaldo

I don't want to split up Dube and Bennett, but maybe this looks better if you swap Simon and Dube. Or perhaps we could get a capable top 6 RW in a Backlund trade to slot in on the second line... Or we have a surprise at camp (Pelletier, Zary?).

[Monahammer]

Lindholm has not proven that he is a competent 1c in the NHL. In fact he looked pretty poor in that role while in Carolina. We played worse when he was shifted to that role for a small bit last season. He's a great winger, and a great player, but let's let him succeed where he's seen the most success in the show, on the Right Wing.

Trading Monahan would set our franchise back at least 4 years. Zary might be able to get to monahan level by then, but outside of that there are no centres even close to this capability in our system. If we trade Monahan and don't immediately acquire a centre with higher potential or equal skill, we lose. There are no trades out there to be made like this, unless Barkov demands a trade from Florida or something similar.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by VilleN

If Bennett truly did turn a corner these playoffs, I wouldn't be opposed to dealing Backlund and going with:
Tkachuk - Lindholm - Mangiapane
Gaudreau - Monahan - Simon
Lucic - Bennett - Dube
Nordstrom - Ryan - Robinson/Gawdin/Rinaldo

I don't want to split up Dube and Bennett, but maybe this looks better if you swap Simon and Dube. Or perhaps we could get a capable top 6 RW in a Backlund trade to slot in on the second line... Or we have a surprise at camp (Pelletier, Zary?).

Did you trade Backlund for nothing? And you're ok playing a 700k replacement level player in our top 6? This is lunacy, i am sorry dude lol.

Trading Backlund or Monahan and hoping Bennett will magically be a better reg season player is also a very poor bet. If Bennett continues his play and is looking like a 50-60 point player by the trade deadline then you could consider it. Until then it's all just smoke and mirrors and could make Tre look incredibly stupid.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Lindholm has not proven that he is a competent 1c in the NHL. In fact he looked pretty poor in that role while in Carolina. We played worse when he was shifted to that role for a small bit last season. He's a great winger, and a great player, but let's let him succeed where he's seen the most success in the show, on the Right Wing.

Trading Monahan would set our franchise back at least 4 years. Zary might be able to get to monahan level by then, but outside of that there are no centres even close to this capability in our system. If we trade Monahan and don't immediately acquire a centre with higher potential or equal skill, we lose. There are no trades out there to be made like this, unless Barkov demands a trade from Florida or something similar.

Vegas has shattered the idea that a #1 C is a prerequisite to ice a winning hockey team.

If we trade Monahan for a top 6 winger, we move lindholm to C and run with him and Backlund as our top 2. I don’t think it sets the team back provided we get a top 6 winger in return.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by The Original FFIV

Vegas has shattered the idea that a #1 C is a prerequisite to ice a winning hockey team.

If we trade Monahan for a top 6 winger, we move lindholm to C and run with him and Backlund as our top 2. I don’t think it sets the team back provided we get a top 6 winger in return.

Lindholm at 1C is a ~40 point player. He has even said he enjoys playing wing more now.
VGK may have proven that a top end 1C isnt needed, but they did prove that you need two Cs capable of over 50 points and at least one has to be very good defensively. That is exactly what we currently have with Backlund and Monahan.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Did you trade Backlund for nothing? And you're ok playing a 700k replacement level player in our top 6? This is lunacy, i am sorry dude lol.

Trading Backlund or Monahan and hoping Bennett will magically be a better reg season player is also a very poor bet. If Bennett continues his play and is looking like a 50-60 point player by the trade deadline then you could consider it. Until then it's all just smoke and mirrors and could make Tre look incredibly stupid.

I literally clarified all of that in the original post. No I am not trading Backlund for nothing. See post. No I am not assuming Bennett will magically be better, I said if. See post. Playing a 700K player in our top 6 was a suggestion, that I also said may not be great. See post. However, Pittsburgh did play him on their top line. I also did not suggest trading Monahan. See - you get the idea.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Lindholm has not proven that he is a competent 1c in the NHL. In fact he looked pretty poor in that role while in Carolina. We played worse when he was shifted to that role for a small bit last season. He's a great winger, and a great player, but let's let him succeed where he's seen the most success in the show, on the Right Wing.

Trading Monahan would set our franchise back at least 4 years. Zary might be able to get to monahan level by then, but outside of that there are no centres even close to this capability in our system. If we trade Monahan and don't immediately acquire a centre with higher potential or equal skill, we lose. There are no trades out there to be made like this, unless Barkov demands a trade from Florida or something similar.

What do you say to the just over two month stint he spent at centre last season? He scored 20 points in 26 games and had strong underlying metrics.

I should state my bias. I believe Lindholm should be moved to center and that Monahan should be moved to the wing because I believe those positions suit each players' strengths best. Lindholm is a two-way, playmaking player who helps to drive play. Monahan is an amazing goal scorer.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by VilleN

If Bennett truly did turn a corner these playoffs, I wouldn't be opposed to dealing Backlund and going with:
Tkachuk - Lindholm - Mangiapane
Gaudreau - Monahan - Simon
Lucic - Bennett - Dube
Nordstrom - Ryan - Robinson/Gawdin/Rinaldo

I don't want to split up Dube and Bennett, but maybe this looks better if you swap Simon and Dube. Or perhaps we could get a capable top 6 RW in a Backlund trade to slot in on the second line... Or we have a surprise at camp (Pelletier, Zary?).

If Bennett can play at the same intensity and pace as the playoffs he is your first line C.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Nelson

What do you say to the just over two month stint he spent at centre last season? He scored 20 points in 26 games and had strong underlying metrics.

How much of that was on special teams? I do remember him potting some points but it didn't really feel like he was driving the bus for his line during that period.

I should state my bias. I believe Lindholm should be moved to center and that Monahan should be moved to the wing because I believe those positions suit each players' strengths best. Lindholm is a two-way, playmaking player who helps to drive play. Monahan is an amazing goal scorer.

I don't see either guy as a strong centre. Lindholm isn't much of a play driver and IMO was feeding heavily off Mangiapane and Tkachuk (and when replaced by Backlund, that line really took off). Monahan is what he is, no need to review that after all these years of hoping he takes a step forward.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If Bennett can play at the same intensity and pace as the playoffs he is your first line C.

Maybe. I doubt he can manage that, but I'm hoping he has turned a corner and can now be an elite 3C (I am fully expecting to be let down). I'm sure a lot of people here disagree, but I think Lindholm should be our 1C. I think he is far more suited to the role than Monahan.

[PepsiFree]

Lindholm is a worthy 1C. He puts up points and plays well at both ends of the ice. There’s a reason he’s the defacto center on the PK.

If we’re talking Lindholm vs Monahan, I don’t see a drop off at all by going with Lindholm, I see it as an improvement.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Lindholm is a worthy 1C. He puts up points and plays well at both ends of the ice. There’s a reason he’s the defacto center on the PK.

If we’re talking Lindholm vs Monahan, I don’t see a drop off at all by going with Lindholm, I see it as an improvement.

I agree. I think having Lindholm as your 1C and Monahan as a 2C gives us much better depth. If Bennett looks capable of taking 3C duties, you could potentially create a package around Backlund for a top 6 RW. Big If though.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Lindholm is a worthy 1C. He puts up points and plays well at both ends of the ice. There’s a reason he’s the defacto center on the PK.

If we’re talking Lindholm vs Monahan, I don’t see a drop off at all by going with Lindholm, I see it as an improvement.

I don't think his offensive skills are high end enough to be a 1C on a contender. To me he seems like a slightly more skilled Backlund. I really like Lindholm but ideally he would be a 2nd line center on a cup contender.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Maybe. I doubt he can manage that, but I'm hoping he has turned a corner and can now be an elite 3C (I am fully expecting to be let down). I'm sure a lot of people here disagree, but I think Lindholm should be our 1C. I think he is far more suited to the role than Monahan.

I think Lindholm and Monahan are fairly evenly matched as top-notch 2Cs, Monahan with better scoring ability and a PP specialist, and Lindholm with a better 200 foot game and PK skills. But putting Lindholm in a centre role will leave the team with no top 6 RWs unless Tre can trade Backlund for a top 6 RW (including getting him to waive his NTC).

Edit: Ville and Erick beat me to it.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't think his offensive skills are high end enough to be a 1C on a contender. To me he seems like a slightly more skilled Backlund. I really like Lindholm but ideally he would be a 2nd line center on a cup contender.

No, he's definitely not that 1C you imagine on a cup winning team like a Crosby or a Kopitar. But I think you're selling him a little bit short, as I think he's a pretty notable improvement on Backlund offensively, and a small improvement defensively.

In the absence of an elite 1C, having Monahan/Lindholm center the top six, with two "top lines" (continue to split Gaudreau or whoever and Tkachuk, put a guy like Mangiapane on one and another RW on the other) and give one more of the gifted offensive responsibilities while giving the other more defensive responsibilities, then I think you have something there.

In this scenario, of course, you trade Backlund for a RW that belongs on the top two lines, and you only do that if Bennett shows he can own the 3C spot.

So a lot of ifs and buts, but there is a viable solution without needing that elite 1C. Could work, maybe.

[blender]

Its wierder than normal around here this morning.
If the Flames are trading either Monahan or Backlund and not upgrading in either case, might as well tank. Both of these players are value for their contracts and consistent performers.

If you are adding another center that is better than either one, then you are really cooking. That's why I advocated for signing Tavares when he was UFA. Not that he would have, obviously.

Also, Vegas hasn't won anything yet other than a few playoff rounds. One could argue that they have actually regressed since their inaugural season. We will see how they fare this season minus Stastny before we start anointing them as some kind of great team. I'd say they are a top 10 team in the league right now. Big deal.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blender

Its wierder than normal around here this morning.
If the Flames are trading either Monahan or Backlund and not upgrading in either case, might as well tank. Both of these players are value for their contracts and consistent performers.

If you are adding another center that is better than either one, then you are really cooking. That's why I advocated for signing Tavares when he was UFA. Not that he would have, obviously.

Also, Vegas hasn't won anything yet other than a few playoff rounds. One could argue that they have actually regressed since their inaugural season. We will see how they fare this season minus Stastny before we start anointing them as some kind of great team. I'd say they are a top 10 team in the league right now. Big deal.

Of course you trade one of them for an upgrade, but the upgrade doesn't necessarily have to be at center for this to work, due to the fact that we have options internally to replace either one.

And if either Bennett or Dube can establish themselves as middle six centres, you can move a center for a true RW.

[Nelson]

Regardless what your opinion about moving Lindholm to center is, I think we can agree one of the biggest issues with the Flames is the top-end of their center-ice depth. The Flames have difficult matching up against really good centers on other teams, particularly in the playoffs. Something needs to change, and I think it would be worthwhile to move Lindholm to center for a long period of time to see if that improves the team's upside. We've already seen the upside of the team with Monahan - Backlund - Bennett - Ryan. Maybe let's see what the upside is with a different centre-ice depth chart? If the Flames cannot make a trade to change things up, maybe we can change things up by utilizing players differently.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Which is precisely why I expect it is not true. More than likely, the Flames were working on a deal with CBJ at the same time as Montreal, and as soon as they knew Domi was involved, probably opted out for the prohibitive cost. I could see CBJ countering a return from Calgary built around Monahan, but it is nearly impossible to believe that this is something the Flames would have had any interest in.

The rumour is Monahan was part of a proposed bigger deal involving Anderson. We don’t know who else on the Flames or Jackets was involved, so there’s no way to asses the merit of the proposal.

[flamesfan55]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The rumour is Monahan was part of a proposed bigger deal involving Anderson. We don’t know who else on the Flames or Jackets was involved, so there’s no way to asses the merit of the proposal.

Where has it been posted that he was rumored in the deal?