Trade - Zadorov to VAN

[medatswhoP]

1 hour ago, taz89 said:

From what Conroy said what I get out of this is they needed to make room cap wise to bring up Corronato to try and get this atrocious PP going.  The draft picks where probably the best deal available and not eat salary.

True, True, Im not happy the biggest player and bone cruncher is gone but do think we are and will see more "growing pains" to build this team into a bigger future.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Trying to do the math on the Horvat trade:

 

Van trades:

Horvat

'23 2nd to Detroit

'26 3rd to Calgary

 

Van receives:

Hronek

Zadorov

A. Raty

Is that correct?

Beauvillier (5th rd pick) is a wash. NYI 1st is a wash (I think?).

Decent return?

*Connected via Beauvillier and the 5th...

 

 

I like Raty, so I am biased.  VAN gave up the 2nd rounder and got a 4th with Hronek.  

The trade tree for these deals is sometimes hard to follow.

ASP for Hronek.  

 

I know it's not the same value, but should Lindholm get you a subset of what Horvat brought back?

[travel_dude]

31 minutes ago, LouCifer said:

Good take. If true, I’d be on board with that. 
 

Also, I’d be on board with weaponizing the cap space if that is truly the intention. 

 

I first thought this may be a Kylington thing as well, which would make this a zero sum game IMHO.  Maybe even a big positive.  If we activated Kylington, I would pair him with Tanev and figure out the fit for Hanifin.  A lot of time off, but Kylington could replace the need to keep Hanifin.  Or at least give us some time to make the right decision.  I feel right now we have only 3D that are NHL top 4 regulars.  Trading Z only fixes a player issue not the need for the D.

 

I'm getting a bit lost in the cap calculations.  According to actual players active, we have $77,925,833.00.  But our cap shows $83,161,321.00  Go figure.

[sak22]

40 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I like Raty, so I am biased.  VAN gave up the 2nd rounder and got a 4th with Hronek.  

The trade tree for these deals is sometimes hard to follow.

ASP for Hronek.  

 

I know it's not the same value, but should Lindholm get you a subset of what Horvat brought back?

Thats a tough one.  Judging their entire body of work Lindholm should get more because career to date has been better.  The problem is at the time Horvat was traded he was on pace for over 50 goals, and over a P/pg.  Lindholm will have to do his part to up his value, the past is the past, and I don't know if you can sell him as someone who will be fine as long as his wingers are great considering he has never worked with Huberdeau, who accomplished more with lesser linemates.

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, sak22 said:

Thats a tough one.  Judging their entire body of work Lindholm should get more because career to date has been better.  The problem is at the time Horvat was traded he was on pace for over 50 goals, and over a P/pg.  Lindholm will have to do his part to up his value, the past is the past, and I don't know if you can sell him as someone who will be fine as long as his wingers are great considering he has never worked with Huberdeau, who accomplished more with lesser linemates.

 

The top line is a bit of a mess right now.  In no way is Mangiapane a top LW.  He has one good year and the rest were good from a g/60 perspective, well at least earlier on.  Govich is fine, but again we are asking a bit much for him to be a top RW today.

 

LW - Huberdeau, Mangiapane, Zary, Pelletier, Dube (LW/C/RW), Ruzicka (LW/C), Pospisil (LW/RW), Greer

C - Lindholm, Kadri, Backlund, Ruzicka, Dube

RW - Govich, Pospisil, Coleman, Dube, Duehr

 

Mangiapane should be 2LW or 3LW.

Huberdeau should be 1LW or 2LW.

Zary should be 2LW or 3LW.

Govich should be 2RW or 3RW.

Pospisil should be 3W or 4W.

 

The reason why we have players playing above or below their skill level is lack of depth or poor performance with the line they should play on.  I have no issue with Hubey playing with Backlund or the kids with Kadri, as they are playing alright.  The top line continues to be the big issue.  Might see them have a good game, but overall it's a weak top line.  Govich and Mange are fine in the right circumstances.  I would almost think the best use for Govich is with Kadri and Zary.  But the hain reaction messes it up.

 

Since we are talking about trades, we have to consider the cost of getting a top 3 winger.  At least one to replace Mange.  Maybe a trade of Mange and Dube for one makes sense.  Then you only have to worry about fitting in the other top winger.  And Pelletier into the mix.  $8M out allows us to bring in a hefty priced winger.

[robrob74]

I hope that Conroy is able to use some of the flexibility to give some youth some NHL time. One thing he's doing is keeping to his word about giving the kids a shot if they take it. I wonder what that is doing for their development and keeping them hungry.

 

So many years the Flames would say those things but not really give them a shot. They have yes, with Monahan, Bennett and others. It's tough to gage whether they actually did. I get those that could have taken the ball and rolled with it didn't do their part. It's just an interesting discussion... I might be wavering on both ends of the arguments here.

 

But I am glad to see that things are changing. I hope we continue to see growth in the organization.

[sak22]

4 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I hope that Conroy is able to use some of the flexibility to give some youth some NHL time. One thing he's doing is keeping to his word about giving the kids a shot if they take it. I wonder what that is doing for their development and keeping them hungry.

 

So many years the Flames would say those things but not really give them a shot. They have yes, with Monahan, Bennett and others. It's tough to gage whether they actually did. I get those that could have taken the ball and rolled with it didn't do their part. It's just an interesting discussion... I might be wavering on both ends of the arguments here.

 

But I am glad to see that things are changing. I hope we continue to see growth in the organization.

Solo was recalled today, so there is that.  But as far as Defense goes he is it for youth until Poirier gets back, I haven't seen enough of the Wranglers this year to know if there has been any growth in Kuznetsov this year but my outlook on him was pretty bleak last year.  

[The_People1]

13 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I hope that Conroy is able to use some of the flexibility to give some youth some NHL time. One thing he's doing is keeping to his word about giving the kids a shot if they take it. I wonder what that is doing for their development and keeping them hungry.

 

So many years the Flames would say those things but not really give them a shot. They have yes, with Monahan, Bennett and others. It's tough to gage whether they actually did. I get those that could have taken the ball and rolled with it didn't do their part. It's just an interesting discussion... I might be wavering on both ends of the arguments here.

 

But I am glad to see that things are changing. I hope we continue to see growth in the organization.

 

I wonder if Conroy still has a mandate to make the playoffs because technically speaking, the Flames are on the cusp of making the playoffs.  Would Conroy get the greenlight to keep trading pending UFAs for picks?

[travel_dude]

#Flames' Kylington back practicing for the first time since leaving training camp

 

 

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/flames-kylington-practicing-first-time-training-camp

[cross16]

48 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I hope that Conroy is able to use some of the flexibility to give some youth some NHL time. One thing he's doing is keeping to his word about giving the kids a shot if they take it. I wonder what that is doing for their development and keeping them hungry.

 

So many years the Flames would say those things but not really give them a shot. They have yes, with Monahan, Bennett and others. It's tough to gage whether they actually did. I get those that could have taken the ball and rolled with it didn't do their part. It's just an interesting discussion... I might be wavering on both ends of the arguments here.

 

But I am glad to see that things are changing. I hope we continue to see growth in the organization.

 

This was absolutely an issue under Sutter but IMO it left when he did. Starting with Feaster I think the Flames have been very good at giving young players a shot. 

 

Hasn't always been perfect. Feaster was probably too quick to give chances (see Baertschi) and sure there was some PTOs that the Flames would probably want back (see Grossman) but I do think the Flames have done a good job for a while of dangling the carrot and specifically they've shown they'll clear space for kids that earn it. 

 

This is iMO the piece that many miss when Sutter comes up. I believe the primary driver behind his firing was not the results or play on the ice, it was the organization saw the potential damage his philosophy was having across the org. From players/org members being unhappy, to young players feeling they weren't going to get a shot or wanting out. They pulled the trigger because they saw those risks were not worth it not because they thought they were going to win more games without him this year. I think a good culture has been built here in terms of how you make a team and how you help the team win, he was unravelling that. 

[cross16]

35 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I wonder if Conroy still has a mandate to make the playoffs because technically speaking, the Flames are on the cusp of making the playoffs.  Would Conroy get the greenlight to keep trading pending UFAs for picks?

 

This isn't based on insider knowledge, but all the buzz is that he will. While I do think the playoff mandate is still in place the team also understands that this year is different. They have assets that can generate a return and are not in a position to hand out so many retirement style contracts. 

 

This is a different season and TDL that the Flames have not been through really in the more modern NHL era. Much different variable in play. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

This isn't based on insider knowledge, but all the buzz is that he will. While I do think the playoff mandate is still in place the team also understands that this year is different. They have assets that can generate a return and are not in a position to hand out so many retirement style contracts. 

 

This is a different season and TDL that the Flames have not been through really in the more modern NHL era. Much different variable in play. 

 

Not only that, the team did offer them all (to my knowledge) an option to re-sign with competitive contracts, or ones the organization was willing to spend. Being that, like you said, they weren't in a position to offer retirement contracts due to needing to shift on-ice philosophies. They tried to retain at least 4 of 7 last year players in the summer after last season. 

 

Backlund got a contract.

I heard:

 

Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev were tendered offers

Zadorov, I am not sure if they did offer, and if they did, he declined. He was willing to stay, but at what cost? And did they negotiate and didn't like the offer so demanded a deal. 

Tofolli was traded because he wasn't prioritized or had higher demands than willing to pay and an age group that wasn't going to work. 

Kylington is an enigma. 

 

So, it could very well be a time we see the team recouping some asset values through trading at the deadline. 

 

[MP5029]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

This isn't based on insider knowledge, but all the buzz is that he will. While I do think the playoff mandate is still in place the team also understands that this year is different. They have assets that can generate a return and are not in a position to hand out so many retirement style contracts. 

 

This is a different season and TDL that the Flames have not been through really in the more modern NHL era. Much different variable in play. 

As long as the younger guys keep proving and pulling up wins ownership will let him trade how he likes…it’s all $$$ for the ownership I don’t think they will care especially if the team it’s the most season with younger players on lower salaries it’s an even bigger win for then owners.

 

there is absolutely nothing saying that trading thenUFA’s for younger prospects and players and picks that the team won’t make the playoffs…heck given the past few years, the current core couldn’t…can’t see how the younger players have any worse shot than the past aged or current aged core 

[travel_dude]

31 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Not only that, the team did offer them all (to my knowledge) an option to re-sign with competitive contracts, or ones the organization was willing to spend. Being that, like you said, they weren't in a position to offer retirement contracts due to needing to shift on-ice philosophies. They tried to retain at least 4 of 7 last year players in the summer after last season. 

 

Backlund got a contract.

I heard:

 

Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev were tendered offers

Zadorov, I am not sure if they did offer, and if they did, he declined. He was willing to stay, but at what cost? And did they negotiate and didn't like the offer so demanded a deal. 

Tofolli was traded because he wasn't prioritized or had higher demands than willing to pay and an age group that wasn't going to work. 

Kylington is an enigma. 

 

So, it could very well be a time we see the team recouping some asset values through trading at the deadline. 

 

 

So the big rush was to solidify the team and not leave us with pending UFA's.  

In some ways, they may have given us a hand in making the right decisions.

They could all still be re-signed.  Kylington has the chance to solidify his spot again.

 

Lindholm - I think he is waiting it out to see if we run a putrid 1st line....again.  We haven't had a really competitive 1st line in 2 years.  Last year was passable at times.  Why would he commit to a middling team?  So, it's up to Connie to add.

 

Hanifin - I think this comes down to what we can do with him.  I don't think it was the offer keeping him from signing.  I think it comes down to wanting to play further south.  

 

Tanev - I think he likes it just fine.  I think we have to decide what he is worth (truly) and how long a deal we can agree to.  Whatever he signs for in term will be a retirement deal, like Backlund.  If he only wants a longer term deal, then it has to be structure with no trade protection near the end and a buy out friendly salary.  The extra year does allow us to lower the overall cap and still pay him.

 

[LouCifer]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

#Flames' Kylington back practicing for the first time since leaving training camp

 

 

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/flames-kylington-practicing-first-time-training-camp

[conundrumed]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Lindholm - I think he is waiting it out to see if we run a putrid 1st line....again.  We haven't had a really competitive 1st line in 2 years. 

He needs to be the driver. See: Dylan Larkin

He's had that opportunity. If your wingers need to be extremely specific, you aren't a 1C so not worth $8.5-9, kill that offer hard.

16 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Hanifin - I think this comes down to what we can do with him.

He's going to regret balking at $7.5 per. I can't see him getting a better offer.

 

17 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Tanev - I think he likes it just fine.  I think we have to decide what he is worth (truly) and how long a deal we can agree to.

Term is going to be an issue. I'm sure he wants 3-4. He is seriously worth a year or 2, but it's sketchy beyond that. Likely a buyout/LTIR after 2 imo. The Leafs should REALLY make a play for him more than almost everyone.

BT will be in on everyone and walk away with nothing, isn't that the schtick we all know and love?

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

#Flames' Kylington back practicing for the first time since leaving training camp

 

 

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/flames-kylington-practicing-first-time-training-camp

Wowy, the puzzled takes re: Z are fading.

[sak22]

5 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

 

He's going to regret balking at $7.5 per. I can't see him getting a better offer.

 

We say that, but yet we often find ourselves puzzled by what is handed out on July 1.  I feel he is either dealt and extended for the same deal he was about to sign here, or he signs for more as a UFA.  Shouldn't underestimate NHL GM's with a bigger cap increase.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

Not only that, the team did offer them all (to my knowledge) an option to re-sign with competitive contracts, or ones the organization was willing to spend. Being that, like you said, they weren't in a position to offer retirement contracts due to needing to shift on-ice philosophies. They tried to retain at least 4 of 7 last year players in the summer after last season. 

 

Backlund got a contract.

I heard:

 

Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev were tendered offers

Zadorov, I am not sure if they did offer, and if they did, he declined. He was willing to stay, but at what cost? And did they negotiate and didn't like the offer so demanded a deal. 

Tofolli was traded because he wasn't prioritized or had higher demands than willing to pay and an age group that wasn't going to work. 

Kylington is an enigma. 

 

So, it could very well be a time we see the team recouping some asset values through trading at the deadline. 

 

 

This is a very important piece to this to and I share much of what you said here.  Another key variable is I'm not sure Lindholm/Hanifin want to be here. Combine that with the recency bias of Gaudreau, I think you have an organization that for sure wants to make the playoffs but isn't willing to do so at the cost of watching those guys leave for nothing. Bigger things at play here. 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, MP5029 said:

As long as the younger guys keep proving and pulling up wins ownership will let him trade how he likes…it’s all $$$ for the ownership I don’t think they will care especially if the team it’s the most season with younger players on lower salaries it’s an even bigger win for then owners.

 

there is absolutely nothing saying that trading thenUFA’s for younger prospects and players and picks that the team won’t make the playoffs…heck given the past few years, the current core couldn’t…can’t see how the younger players have any worse shot than the past aged or current aged core 

 

I have my qualms with Edwards and the owners but I think this is categorically false. I think the Flames owners are very committed to winning here and do value winning more than money. 

 

They just have a different opinion on how to build a win than you, and others, but that doesn't' mean they are all about the money. They could play things very differently if they were (like not having a 4 mill coach sit at home)

[travel_dude]

45 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

He needs to be the driver. See: Dylan Larkin

He's had that opportunity. If your wingers need to be extremely specific, you aren't a 1C so not worth $8.5-9, kill that offer hard.

He's going to regret balking at $7.5 per. I can't see him getting a better offer.

 

Term is going to be an issue. I'm sure he wants 3-4. He is seriously worth a year or 2, but it's sketchy beyond that. Likely a buyout/LTIR after 2 imo. The Leafs should REALLY make a play for him more than almost everyone.

BT will be in on everyone and walk away with nothing, isn't that the schtick we all know and love?

 

He's had what, 5 years to be the driver?  He's done well with Tkachuk and Gaudreau for exactly one season.  Was a winger with a healthy Monahan.  Again, I was looking at what makes him want to hold off.  At present production, he ain't gonna get $9M from any team.  The best he can hope for (if not here) is to sign a decent 2 year deal and get better offers in his contract year or as a UFA, when cap had driven up the prices of a complementary C.  

 

Whether we keep or trade him, we still need a 1C.  If we keep him we need to replace the top LW.  If we trade him, it needs to include a capable top 6 C.  Maybe that's impossible, but it's a challenge we must face.

[kehatch]

This was not a good return for Zadorov. It would have been fine if not for the 2026 date on the 3rd. Teams simply didn't have the cap space this early in the season.

 

I don't blame Conroy on this one. Clearly they felt they had to move Zadorov now. Either they needed the cap (Kylington, trade flexibility) or Zadorov was becoming an issue. 

 

But I would like to see Conroy execute a transaction that doesn't need a lot of explanation and justification. Between inactivity, lack of direction, and marginal returns it hasn't been a strong start as GM. The one exception being the Backlund extension, which was a clear win. 

[MP5029]

11 minutes ago, kehatch said:

This was not a good return for Zadorov. It would have been fine if not for the 2026 date on the 3rd. Teams simply didn't have the cap space this early in the season.

 

I don't blame Conroy on this one. Clearly they felt they had to move Zadorov now. Either they needed the cap (Kylington, trade flexibility) or Zadorov was becoming an issue. 

 

But I would like to see Conroy execute a transaction that doesn't need a lot of explanation and justification. Between inactivity, lack of direction, and marginal returns it hasn't been a strong start as GM. The one exception being the Backlund extension, which was a clear win. 

The Backlund extension is even questionable, not in terms of Backlund’s play at the moment but his start was horrendous, but he’s picked it up since the extension…it gives some proof to Backlund being a bit of a cry baby not producing when he doesn’t get his own way…and as a “leader” that’s not great…

 

having said that, he is playing well now so I guess all can be forgiven, it’s not a horrible $$$ hit nor is it horrible in length on 2 more years…I can’t help but wonder if that may have been better served near TDL as a tradable rental but that’s not a consideration now, but it is what makes the signing a bit questionable.

 

otherwise I tend to agree fully, it would be nice to see a trade where we can say definitely a good move, definitely a good return 

[kehatch]

17 hours ago, MP5029 said:

As long as the younger guys keep proving and pulling up wins ownership will let him trade how he likes…

 

This is what is saving the Flames this season, and hopefully into the future. Zary, Pelletier, Coronato, Wolf, Pospisil, Solovyov, Oesterle, maybe Kylington, etc make it a lot easier to swallow trading guys like Lindholm and Hanafin. Especially when the alternative is losing them for nothing or a 60 million dollar contract that may go to waste if the Flames have to rebuild. 

 

I still won't be shocked to see an extension. Hanafin has played well, and the Flames don't have any big name D prospects. I think Lindholm is traded as he hasn't shown chemistry with anyone, but he is still a top 6 C so who knows. 

 

But I don't think the Flames will risk losing these guys for nothing. 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, MP5029 said:

The Backlund extension is even questionable, not in terms of Backlund’s play at the moment but his start was horrendous, but he’s picked it up since the extension…it gives some proof to Backlund being a bit of a cry baby not producing when he doesn’t get his own way…and as a “leader” that’s not great…

 

having said that, he is playing well now so I guess all can be forgiven, it’s not a horrible $$$ hit nor is it horrible in length on 2 more years…I can’t help but wonder if that may have been better served near TDL as a tradable rental but that’s not a consideration now, but it is what makes the signing a bit questionable.

 

otherwise I tend to agree fully, it would be nice to see a trade where we can say definitely a good move, definitely a good return 

 

Backs is a notorious slow starter. Every year we have the same conversations in November and then we get to Dec/January and everyone is thankful we have him.  Looking for "proof" outside of that is silly. 

 

I personally think he's done an excellent job as captain. Team looks like it's having fun this year and that's not easy given what happened last year and what happened to start the year. 

 

I agree the Backlund extension was a big win for Conroy because he avoided a long term deal but still landed himself a good player and a good captain.