2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Teroy]

Originally Posted by Rifraf

By trading Johnny if Hall signs, what does that say to Hall and the Team? I think it says were not serious about winning. Hall scares me. Will want big money is often injured. If it happens, I think they are better to keep Johnny and Hall on LW, move Chucky to RW. Cut some cap (Ryan/Rittich) and get one of the available goalies. The thing about trading Dave is the condensed schedule goalies will need a break if they pay 5-6 m for one you need a cheap back up which puts us back to the days of not trusting the backups.

Dadonov???

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Rifraf

By trading Johnny if Hall signs, what does that say to Hall and the Team? I think it says were not serious about winning. Hall scares me. Will want big money is often injured. If it happens, I think they are better to keep Johnny and Hall on LW, move Chucky to RW. Cut some cap (Ryan/Rittich) and get one of the available goalies. The thing about trading Dave is the condensed schedule goalies will need a break if they pay 5-6 m for one you need a cheap back up which puts us back to the days of not trusting the backups.

It means we want Hall and Tkachuk as the go-to guys, and that it seems like Gaudreau does not have a future here.

[Eric Vail]

It would be a big mistake to sign Hall to a 7 year $8-9 million dollar contract.

The Flames would be regretting that contract by probably the third season - maybe earlier.

If they are going to sign a big name, Pietroangelo looks like a far better risk to take. As a defenseman, I think he'd be able to maintain his high level play for longer. He also has a clean injury history.

[the_only_turek_fan]

I still think the Flames should target Markstrom but up front go after potential bargains like Galchenyuk.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

It would be a big mistake to sign Hall to a 7 year $8-9 million dollar contract.

The Flames would be regretting that contract by probably the third season - maybe earlier.

If they are going to sign a big name, Pietroangelo looks like a far better risk to take. As a defenseman, I think he'd be able to maintain his high level play for longer. He also has a clean injury history.

You're one of these posters that seemingly only signs in to drive-by hall, so I am going to pick on you a bit (there was another just like you last page, and the page before that...)

WHY

Why do you believe this? Is there any statistic, relevant history, comparable player, or other demonstrable fact that you can point to that will elucidate the reasoning behind Hall=bad for the rest of us?

What i am about to say is 100% as valid as what you did because I will also offer no proof.

Hall >> Johnny Gaudreau, probably even moreso in 3 years time.

[Vinny01]

https://www.thefourthperiod.com/pagn...to-free-agency

Mentions the Flames, Canucks, Avs seem to be circling Holtby and Markstrom as their main targets for number 1 goalie. Only 2 goalies for 3 teams. Who misses out?

[bax]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

I still think the Flames should target Markstrom but up front go after potential bargains like Galchenyuk.

What exactly makes someone like Galchenyuk a potential bargain? He’s not young. He is turning 27 this season and just bounces around from team to team, from doghouse to doghouse.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by bax

What exactly makes someone like Galchenyuk a potential bargain? He’s not young. He is turning 27 this season and just bounces around from team to team, from doghouse to doghouse.

IMO it's peeps blotting out the last 5 years in their mind. Same reason Hall "sucks". People are living in 2015.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

https://www.thefourthperiod.com/pagn...to-free-agency

Mentions the Flames, Canucks, Avs seem to be circling Holtby and Markstrom as their main targets for number 1 goalie. Only 2 goalies for 3 teams. Who misses out?

Well first of all the Avs can piss off.

[TheScorpion]

Galchenyuk was good in Phoenix, but they had to give him up to get Kessel.

I'm a fan. Would have to be cheap though. Could probably rebound and put up 20/20.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

https://www.thefourthperiod.com/pagn...to-free-agency

Mentions the Flames, Canucks, Avs seem to be circling Holtby and Markstrom as their main targets for number 1 goalie. Only 2 goalies for 3 teams. Who misses out?

I think Vancouver, if only because they will refuse to guarantee expansion protection in the deal for a new goalie.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I don't really understand the content of this tweet.

1. Monahan is vastly superior to Dumba, so the Wild would be patently stupid to turn down that trade if it were to be proposed
2. We aren't even divisional rivals with Minny? Are they seriously concerned about playing Dumba ~3 times a year? Do they actually think that Dumba's impact on the flames would outweight the boost they would receive from having an actual top-6 centre?
3. Is this spite against the flames organization? Or is this spite against Dumba, who is from the region and probably would like to play here?

Many questions, no answers forthcoming. Seems like a stupid position to take for the wild.

The simple explanation would be that they are tanking...a sensible choice for them IMO, especially given the current environment.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

You're one of these posters that seemingly only signs in to drive-by hall, so I am going to pick on you a bit (there was another just like you last page, and the page before that...)

WHY

Why do you believe this? Is there any statistic, relevant history, comparable player, or other demonstrable fact that you can point to that will elucidate the reasoning behind Hall=bad for the rest of us?

What i am about to say is 100% as valid as what you did because I will also offer no proof.

Hall >> Johnny Gaudreau, probably even moreso in 3 years time.

1. Hall has been the so called leader of teams that lose and miss the playoffs for the majority of his 10 years in the league

2. His formative years were spent with E=NG

3. His style of play is prone to injuries and he has a history of them.

4. He is looking to cash in on his UFA status and is thus overpriced.

5. The flames have shown a reluctance to spend 9M annual on ANY player, let alone someone with the above history.

Not sure what more you need?

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think Vancouver, if only because they will refuse to guarantee expansion protection in the deal for a new goalie.

And nor should we, if just because expansion protection is also trade protection and which ever goalies we go with next year are in competition.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

The simple explanation would be that they are tanking...a sensible choice for them IMO, especially given the current environment.

I could accept that, but the wording of the tweet made it sound like something else. If the wild were looking for more future oriented pieces, it wouldn't have been phrased that they are unwilling to "deal Dumba to Calgary, even if Monahan is on the table." This implies that Monahan would be suitably over the top offer, and even still they are not willing to deal Dumba here, not because of offer quality but because of unknown factors. If they wanted other pieces it could have been phrased "but aren't looking to take on additional salary" etc. Same result, if that was the intention, without creating a weird situation where the player potentially thinks you're taking the trade personally.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I am not sure I follow here?

One goalie comes in with 2 years cost certainty, the other goalie would sign for 5-6 years at a cost certainty. The goalie being signed likely needs 1-2M more on the AAV for 2 years. If Kuemper performs to his value he would be looking for a contract similar to the one the Flames would give Markstrom in 10 days. Now the Flames are signing a 32 year old goalie to a 5-6 year deal at the 5.5-6.5Mbso potentially more overall money long term. That or they are once again looking for another starting goalie in 2 years which is about average for this team and needs to stop.

Get a guy now for 5-6 years and ride that player moving forward. This team needs a long term number 1 and I think they can get that without giving up their first round pick.

I agree that it would be silly to give Kuemper a contract like that. That's why I wouldn't extend Kuemper unless the Flames have absolutely no one in the system. Even then, I wouldn't overpay him.
So basically, I'm against having old goalies in the system.
If they come, they should be on cheap and short contracts (like Talbot if they keep him for one more year).

The only way to get a long term number 1 is to get someone on the right side of 30. None of these guys are elite long term goalies of the future. So lets not make huge commitments to any of them.

[Harry Lime]

I like this Rittich character, and think that we can get him for our first.

Luckily there are a plethora of good veteran backups(1B) available this offseason, for no (or little) acquisition cost. Two year deals for a few ducats.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think Vancouver, if only because they will refuse to guarantee expansion protection in the deal for a new goalie.

I see Holtby accepting a 3 year term from Colorado (coincides with Mackinnon’s contract).

My prediction for goalies:

CGY -> Markstrom
COL -> Holtby
VAN -> Talbot
EDM -> Mrazek
CAR -> Fleury (Vegas gives them a pick to take the full contract)

[Mass_nerder]

I'm very curious where Hall ends up, salary-wise.
I would love to have him at $7.5 or under, I could live with $8.5 or under, but think whoever signs him would end up regretting the final few years, and anything over that would really be a disaster. I look at that Seguin deal and cringe (although I like it for Dallas because I hope it really weighs them down).

I think he ends up around $8.75, which I would be unhappy with.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Corral

1. Hall has been the so called leader of teams that lose and miss the playoffs for the majority of his 10 years in the league

2. His formative years were spent with E=NG

3. His style of play is prone to injuries and he has a history of them.

4. He is looking to cash in on his UFA status and is thus overpriced.

5. The flames have shown a reluctance to spend 9M annual on ANY player, let alone someone with the above history.

Not sure what more you need?

1. Yes, this is a shortcoming of Hall's, and one i am sure he would like to correct. Looking at the supporting cast that Hall has been offered in all of these situations can help to clarify that he was often lugging that cart all on his own. A similar reflection could have been made of Jarome Iginla during his career. Hall did lead his team to the memorial cup pre-oilers.
2. Agreed that this is a problem, but we have the benefit of Hall completely changing his NHL game and his approach to the league after season 1 in NJ. This is not the same player that was on the Oil.
3. His style of play has changed since he entered the league. I concede that he is more injury prone than I would like, but in the last 5 seasons if you sub out the freak knee injury/ surgery that was complicated by multiple doctors he's averaging 95% of games played (295/311). Compared to johnny at 92% (383/398). I think it is an open question how Hall's durability will continue.
4. By all accounts he is looking for a relatively tame offer and long term stability. Is $8.5/ year too much for Hall? IMO not at all when you look at some comparable contracts that have recently been handed out. Skinner is an example (abhorrent contract though!)
5. I am hoping we see Hall come in for less than 9 per. I think 8.5 at 7 years (~60 million) will be sufficient.