2022 Offseason

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Unfortunately, you can't trade picks with conditions based on a player signing anymore.

 

It was introduced when they did the CBA before the bubble. PA worried that it discouraged teams from signing players.

u serious ?

[Thebrewcrew]

3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

u serious ?

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2020/07/examining-some-major-cba-changes.html

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2020/07/examining-some-major-cba-changes.html

wow ok .. did know that .. and because technically he still has a contract until FA period opens this part would mean he still has a contract , i think ?:

 

 This is only applicable if the traded player has an NHL contract at the time of the trade.

[Thebrewcrew]

3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

wow ok .. did know that .. and because technically he still has a contract until FA period opens this part would mean he still has a contract , i think ?:

 

 This is only applicable if the traded player has an NHL contract at the time of the trade.

When the Flames traded for Derek Fobort, he was actually a pretty decent fit. However, if the Flames re-signed him, they'd have sent a better pick to LA. As good a fit as he was, instead of surrendering a 3rd round pick, the Flames decided to look elsewhere

 

That's the spirit of the rule, to prevent teams from not signing players because of the additional draft capital it would cost. Pretty much anything that hurts the chances of a player getting a contract, is opposed by the PA and rightfully so.

[phoenix66]

40 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

When the Flames traded for Derek Fobort, he was actually a pretty decent fit. However, if the Flames re-signed him, they'd have sent a better pick to LA. As good a fit as he was, instead of surrendering a 3rd round pick, the Flames decided to look elsewhere

 

That's the spirit of the rule, to prevent teams from not signing players because of the additional draft capital it would cost. Pretty much anything that hurts the chances of a player getting a contract, is opposed by the PA and rightfully so.

makes sense .. probably would have resigned him too, he was actually pretty good for that role 

[MP5029]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes, or this.

 

NJ fans are suggesting 2OA + Zacha + Stillman + Mukhamadullin for Tkachuk.

 

I would like 2OA + either Luke Hughes or Dawson Mercer 

well either of those would be a reasonable return…though I’d rather sign hime

too….however, I would hope GH would get a mid to high 1st round + top

prospect for his rights if we can’t get him locked up either…I’m of the thought process trade both and rebuild with NHL ready prospects and a couple of high end 1st round picks…those two would

fetch a lot even just their tights would

and this team would be reset in just a year…maybe two for another 5-10 years!

 

the other thought process is we re-up make due with the cap and do whatever we can to build A legit 2nd line threat + 3rd and 4th line depth 

[Thebrewcrew]

Decided to mess around and see what a Tkachuk-2nd overall deal could look like

 

To NJ              

Tkachuk

Monahan

 

To CGY

-2nd overall- I would be selecting Logan Cooley, I don't think the gap between him and Wright is all that big. Seen -Brayden Point comparisons. I would value a player that can play C more than a wing like Slafkovsky.

-Zacha- Sutter would like him, big body, can score you 15.

-Mukhamadullin- I've only watched him in the WJ's, he seems like a big body and good skater. Flames could always use a young D

-Stillman- RHS, Flames ties. Hasn't been a big producer in the OHL. I'm probably the lowest on Stillman of any piece in this deal.

 

Also need to make a Lucic deal for all of this works.

 

This is all contingent on Gaudreau signing, but this trade provides a ton of depth and flexibility. 

 

In this scenario, I would actively pursue Trocheck and Nichushkin in UFA. My offer would be 6yrs and between 5-6 on the AAV. There will be a ton of competition for these players, they are still young enough that the term isn't as concerning.

 

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Mangiapane

Nichushkin-Backlund-Coleman

Zacha-Trocheck-Toffoli

Pelletier-Ruzicka-Dube

 

This gives you an incredibly deep group of forwards. That Backlund line could be an absolute force in their two way game and ability to drive play. 

[MP5029]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

For this reason alone, we might as well full rebuild if we lose one of Gaudreau or Tkachuk because,

1. There is no equivalent or better upgrade via UFA.

2. If it's picks and prospects, then we're talking "years" before that player(s) can make an impact.

 

Which goes back to this past TDL.  If the plan all along was to rebuild then BT needs to get fired for not moving Gaudreau at the deadline for picks and now watching him walk away for nothing.

I’m kinda of the same mindset…the picks and prospect we would get back would have this team re-built in just a year or two and maybe even a franchise player or two which (yes both JH and Chucky are trending into) but also there would be additional high end players with that, given the high octane output so many guys had this year, there are a bunch of 1st round + returns 

 

Manji would be a high 1st rounder + high prospect 

 

lindholm, high 1st rounder + top prospect and probably a NHL ready prospect 

 

Gaudreau (rights) mid to high 1st + high prospect 

 

Tachuck High 1st + top prospect + high NHL ready prospect 

 

that’s probably gonna turn into a really good team within a year or two that has at least a solid top 2 lines and a decent 3rd line at worst…

 

IMO you could also move Hanifin for a 1st, Anderson could probably fetch a high First + prospect…maybe Markstrom would be open to a move if we rebuild…he’s a 1st + 

 

again, totally pending on who we loose…I’d be on board with a total overhaul in some ways cause the players and team had such an amazing year, you could get one heck of a return that you could rebuild in no time flat! 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

wow ok .. did know that .. and because technically he still has a contract until FA period opens this part would mean he still has a contract , i think ?:

 

 This is only applicable if the traded player has an NHL contract at the time of the trade.

 

Yes, an RFA is still under contract (control).

If NJ traded Hughes they might be able to make it conditional, as he doesn;t have a contract.

Buffalo and Minny made a deal like that IIRC.

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Another factor to consider .. is Chucky is a ripe offer sheet candidate .

Boston is missing their top line and has the room and picks , NJ and islanders have as well.. St Louis could easily clear a bit of room and they have the picks ..

Somebody offers him anything over 10.5 x7 there is no way we shouid match that.. I could see an offer of 12 over a shorter term , knowing we'd be silly to match it 

 

imagine they offer sheet Tkachuk and sign Gaudreau free agent lol

[phoenix66]

14 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

For this reason alone, we might as well full rebuild if we lose one of Gaudreau or Tkachuk because,

1. There is no equivalent or better upgrade via UFA.

2. If it's picks and prospects, then we're talking "years" before that player(s) can make an impact.

 

Which goes back to this past TDL.  If the plan all along was to rebuild then BT needs to get fired for not moving Gaudreau at the deadline for picks and now watching him walk away for nothing.

Not picking on you , just using your example ..

But can we stop with the "lose one and it's a rebuild " notion?

A year ago most including me were trading both these guys .. 

 

We have a gm and coach both on last year of their deals neither are here for a rebuild ..at least one of them wants to be here after that ..

 

We allowed the 2nd lowest goals in the league 

 

We have a top center that is on a steal of a contract 

 

We have one of the best goaltenders and young d core in the league , and a pipeline of nearly ready replacements 

 

We have an owner that wants a new building..winning seems to make more people willing to make that happen  

 

God forbid we lose both(not gonna happen) that's over $20M we can spend elsewhere 

 

 

A rebuild is NOT happening.. even if we lose both (again not gonna happen) we have a gm that will go scorched earth to fill the holes. 

We have a coach that took a goalie , a defenseman and a winger with a bunch of other players most can't even name now , to the finals ..

Last year Montreal did it with a goalie and a dman and not much else ..

No matter what happens ..this team is "win now" next year 

 

 

Small window there are viable options .. Forsberg, Kadri, for starters wouid both fit a scoring role quite nicely .. 

 

I agree losing Johnny would hurt.. but if that happens we throw the money at Tkachuk. Only reason I'd explore a tkachuk is the options it opens up..and the precarious situation he has us in.. he's a star in the making but he's replaceable 

[rocketdoctor]

Agree that we be unlikely to win a cup if we sign both Tkchuck and Gaudreau on big deals.

 

Never been a massive fan of Tkachuk but he is a very good player and has some intangibles.  He'll never be a beautiful skater to watch but my concern is that he has disappeared twice in the playoffs now. 

 

I would look to sell high on Tkachuk I think we can replace within.

 

[phoenix66]

8 minutes ago, rocketdoctor said:

Agree that we be unlikely to win a cup if we sign both Tkchuck and Gaudreau on big deals.

 

Never been a massive fan of Tkachuk but he is a very good player and has some intangibles.  He'll never be a beautiful skater to watch but my concern is that he has disappeared twice in the playoffs now. 

 

I would look to sell high on Tkachuk I think we can replace within.

 

I'm not sure about within , but his money can certainly fill the hole and maybe a few more 

Tho I think Mang on the top line wouid definitely impress..and he plays like a rabid weasel so toughness isn't an issue 

I'd rather see him with a Toffoli and a playmaker center with some grit 

[travel_dude]

28 minutes ago, rocketdoctor said:

Agree that we be unlikely to win a cup if we sign both Tkchuck and Gaudreau on big deals.

 

Never been a massive fan of Tkachuk but he is a very good player and has some intangibles.  He'll never be a beautiful skater to watch but my concern is that he has disappeared twice in the playoffs now. 

 

I would look to sell high on Tkachuk I think we can replace within.

 

 

Tkachuk has to take his playoffs to a new level.  How much we pay really doesn't enter into it.

We had Monahan and Lucic taking up $12M and providing little help.

 

Let's face it, we have so few stars.

Giving up Tkachuk when we otherwise might struggle to score?

Not sure I like that.

Trade for a superstar on the rise?  Okay as long as it's near a sure thing.

[cross16]

I think a rebuild may be more likely for the Bruins than them being interested in Tkachuck.

 

 

[phoenix66]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I think a rebuild may be more likely for the Bruins than them being interested in Tkachuck.

 

 

wouldn't adding a Young stud like Tkachuk facilitate that ?

Marchand not getting any younger 

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

wouldn't adding a Young stud like Tkachuk facilitate that ?

Marchand not getting any younger 

 

It hinges on Bergeron. if he is done or wants to move on the Bruins are screwed and adding Tkachuk would make zero sense. in the 2023 offseason they have 15 players under contract or RFA, only 1 of which is under 25 and the best center they have is Charlies Coyle. It's a dark future for them right now so moving 4 first round picks would make no sense. 

 

If they can hold onto Bergeron for another year or 2 sure but that's not rebuilding. In both circumstances giving up 4 first round picks makes no sense. 

 

Stranger things have happened but the logic isn't there for me. They could maybe trade for him but there also isn't much to like for the Flames in that deal. 

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I think a rebuild may be more likely for the Bruins than them being interested in Tkachuck.

 

 

 

Wow, I didn't realize that BOS cap was pooched.

$32M spent on defense.

Pasta is an interesting target.

Not sure that we have anything that to trade though.

You take Pasta, you have to also take an overpaid D.

[phoenix66]

13 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

It hinges on Bergeron. if he is done or wants to move on the Bruins are screwed and adding Tkachuk would make zero sense. in the 2023 offseason they have 15 players under contract or RFA, only 1 of which is under 25 and the best center they have is Charlies Coyle. It's a dark future for them right now so moving 4 first round picks would make no sense. 

 

If they can hold onto Bergeron for another year or 2 sure but that's not rebuilding. In both circumstances giving up 4 first round picks makes no sense. 

 

Stranger things have happened but the logic isn't there for me. They could maybe trade for him but there also isn't much to like for the Flames in that deal. 

true on the picks.. but they could faciliate a trade.. they wanna talk a trade with Pastrnak I'm all ears 

[cross16]

Would really depend on why Pasta isn't an extension target for the Bruins. i don't think he comes cheaper than Tkachuk so it begs the question of why is he on the market?

 

Might be something there for a Tkachuk - Pasta swap but agian Flames won't save any $ i don't think. 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Not picking on you , just using your example ..

But can we stop with the "lose one and it's a rebuild " notion?

A year ago most including me were trading both these guys .. 

 

We have a gm and coach both on last year of their deals neither are here for a rebuild ..at least one of them wants to be here after that ..

 

We allowed the 2nd lowest goals in the league 

 

We have a top center that is on a steal of a contract 

 

We have one of the best goaltenders and young d core in the league , and a pipeline of nearly ready replacements 

 

We have an owner that wants a new building..winning seems to make more people willing to make that happen  

 

God forbid we lose both(not gonna happen) that's over $20M we can spend elsewhere 

 

 

A rebuild is NOT happening.. even if we lose both (again not gonna happen) we have a gm that will go scorched earth to fill the holes. 

We have a coach that took a goalie , a defenseman and a winger with a bunch of other players most can't even name now , to the finals ..

Last year Montreal did it with a goalie and a dman and not much else ..

No matter what happens ..this team is "win now" next year 

 

 

Small window there are viable options .. Forsberg, Kadri, for starters wouid both fit a scoring role quite nicely .. 

 

I agree losing Johnny would hurt.. but if that happens we throw the money at Tkachuk. Only reason I'd explore a tkachuk is the options it opens up..and the precarious situation he has us in.. he's a star in the making but he's replaceable 

 

Oh no, I am merely suggesting it's the better path to take.  Of course we won't rebuild.  Sutter is not here for a rebuild and Gaudreau is not signing long term for a rebuild.  I'm just saying.  As we stand, we are missing pieces even with Gaudreau and Tkachuk.  So therefore if one of them leaves, then we are neither here nor there.  It's easy to say we sign someone like Forsberg and replace all of Tkachuk's numbers but reality is, Forsberg has 12+ other options before he chooses the Flames.  Rebuild is the best path to take at that point.

 

I know we won't do it though.

 

Most likely outcome is we extend both Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Mangiapane while we lose Monahan, Zadorov, and Gudbranson and then BT will sell us the idea that we're improving due to experience and maturity of our group.  There will be no splashy trades or acquisitions.  We will in all likelihood, come back with the same team more or less.

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Oh no, I am merely suggesting it's the better path to take.  Of course we won't rebuild.  Sutter is not here for a rebuild and Gaudreau is not signing long term for a rebuild.  I'm just saying.  As we stand, we are missing pieces even with Gaudreau and Tkachuk.  So therefore if one of them leaves, then we are neither here nor there.  It's easy to say we sign someone like Forsberg and replace all of Tkachuk's numbers but reality is, Forsberg has 12+ other options before he chooses the Flames.  Rebuild is the best path to take at that point.

 

I know we won't do it though.

 

Most likely outcome is we extend both Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Mangiapane while we lose Monahan, Zadorov, and Gudbranson and then BT will sell us the idea that we're improving due to experience and maturity of our group.  There will be no splashy trades or acquisitions.  We will in all likelihood, come back with the same team more or less.

I still expect a couple "Holy %$#$%"  "WTF" Moves we did not see coming lol

[The_People1]

35 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I think a rebuild may be more likely for the Bruins than them being interested in Tkachuck.

 

 

 

That would tell me the Bruins have had preliminary talks with Pastrnak on a contract extension and the ask from Pastrnak is too high that they have no choice but to explore the option of trading him.  They could possibly get back a young Center to build around.  Pastrnak is RHS RW point-per-game 40-goal scorer so that is a ton of trade value.

[sak22]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

Would really depend on why Pasta isn't an extension target for the Bruins. i don't think he comes cheaper than Tkachuk so it begs the question of why is he on the market?

 

Might be something there for a Tkachuk - Pasta swap but agian Flames won't save any $ i don't think. 

I think Boston had really got lucky with contracts in the past, Marchand signed right before he broke out into an offensive star and Bergeron aged better than you could hope for.  Pasta probably comes in around McAvoy money next year.  Ullmark right now is looking like he could be trouble, 3 more years with pretty significant trade protection and possibly losing the net to Swayman going forward.  I think Boston has enough on D that if they went rebuild it would keep them from bottoming out.

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I still expect a couple "Holy %$#$%"  "WTF" Moves we did not see coming lol

 

BT is certainly not shy when making big moves.  I just feel with his two core forwards, he's going the safe route because losing one of them is no different than BOS losing Bergeron to retirement.  Might as well trade the other and rebuild.  BT most likely signs both to whatever it takes and then deal with the cap casualties afterwards.  We will come back with the same team minus Monahan, Zadorov, and Gudbranson and will have to rely on the kids from the farm to save the day.

 

And it's honestly the safest path for BT to take.  We were a division winning team.  Good idea to keep it together as much as possible with as little changes.